The Sun. — London, England, 1855-06-23 00:00:00

he intended to address that evening to the Under Secretary for War. Those questions had been handed by him to the clerk at the table ; but on looking at the " paper " that evening he found the most important portions of those questions had been left out. The question had reference to the conduct of the superior officers and others concerned in the late " practical jokes" and " sham duel," between officers of the cavalry depot at Canterbury. He wished to know if the clerks had power to omit portions of notices placed in their hands by hon. members ? (Hear, hear.) The SPEAKER replied that the clerks were justified in omitting whatever appeared to them to be irregular. It was irregular that anything in the shape of argument should be inserted in the notices ; and it was most de sirable that those notices should be as brief as possible. (Hear, hear.) He (the Speaker) had not seen this no tice ; but he had no doubt the portion omitted was ir gular. (Hear, hear.) Mr. F. PEEL said he only saw the notice in the form in which it appeared on the paper. (A laugh.) The subject then dropped. Lord H. VANE, reverting to the topic of education, said some more definite answer should be given to the question of the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Pakington) than had been given. (Cries of " order.") SECRETARY OF STATE FOR SCOTLAND. Mr. MACGREGOR rose to move that "it is expe dient that the office of Secretary of State for Scotland be re-instituted," but was met with loud cries of " question" and " order." Sir J. PAKINGTON rose to order. The question before hon. members was the adjournment of the house, and no other motion could be regular until that was dis posed of. Mr. MACGREGOR — I am going to speak on the motion for adjournment. (Oh, oh.) The SPEAKER —The hon. gentleman is quite in order in speaking to the motion of adjournment. How ever, should he conclude with any amendment it will be irregular, and it will be my duty to call him to order. Mr. MACGREGOR—I will speak on the question of adjournment. (Cries of " agreed.") Now, with respect to the administration of public affairs in Scotland. (Cries of "oh, oh-') He contended the question was as regu lar as that of education just introduced by the right hon. baronet (Sir J. Pakington). (Oh, ob,, and interrup tion.) He objected as much as any person to delaying the time of the house. (Oh, oh, and laughter, and pro longed interruption, amid which the hon. gentleman threatened to move the immediate adjournment of the house.) At the union of the two kingdoms, continued the hon. gentleman. (Oh, oh, and laughter.) Now, if these interruptions were persevered in, he should go into the most minute details. (Great laughter and confusion, amid which the hon. gentleman proceeded to sketch the history of the union of Scotland and England, by which act Scotland was entitled to a Secretary and Under Se cretary.) The secretaryship had fallen into disuse, but the office had not been abolished. He would be con tent to accept an Under Secretary, acting in conjunc tion with the Home Secretary; for he insisted it was impossible the Lord Advocate could attend to the admi nistrative affairs of Scotland without utterly neglecting his professional duties. The LORD ADVOCATE said, if the present were a fitting time and season he should be glad to discuss the question with his hon. friend ; but, as it was not, he thought it better the regular business of the house should be proceeded with. (Hear, hear.) ~° THE SICK AND WOUNDED FROM THE CRIMEA. Mr. STAFFORD rose to call the attention of the house to the arrangements made for payment of the arrears due to those sick or wounded soldiers who had returned from the Crimea. It was said that the reason why these unfortunate men had not been paid was that certain documents necessary before-hand were not forth coming. Surely, this was not the fault of the men ; and be hoped that some member of the Government would give him some assurance that this state of things should not again occur ; for nothing could he a better stimulus to recruiting than the certainty by men that they would be properly looked after by the Government on their return to this country. (Hear, hear.) Mr. F. PEEL said he was sorry that any soldier should be kept out of his pay, but the reply to the ques tion of the honourable gentleman opposite was the same that he (Mr. Peel) had given several times before to similar inquiries. The only answer was that Government did not know what the amount payable to these men really was until they had obtained proper returns ; and it would not do, in the absence of these returns, to trust to the word of mouth of the men themselves. (Haar.) PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.—MR. LINDSAY. Mr. LINDSAY—I rise to address the house on this oc casion with considerable reluctance. No man is more de sirous than I am tosee the business of this house carried on with greater rapidity than it now is ; and I must apolo gise for engaging its attention for a short time in reference to a matter wholly personal to myself. But it is a question which I have been forced to bring under the notice of the house, affecting, as it does, my personal honour. My veracity has been called in question in reference to a statement made by me, not in this house, but elsewhere. That statement has been noticed in a particular manner in this house, and I was prepared to be called to account for that statement. I am certainly somewhat ignorant of the forms of this house, but during the short time I have been a member of it I have noticed that hon. members have been called to account for statements which they have made elsewhere. The noble lord at the head of the Government only the other day called the hon. member for Aylesbury to ac count for a statement made by him out of this house; therefore, I thought that some member of the Government would take the opportunity of calling me to an account for what I had stated, and which would have enabled me to rise in my place and give proof of the truth of the state ment I had made. I believe, according to the rules cf the house, Lam not at liberty to refer to what may have oc curred in any previous debate, but must' confine myself strictly to the question of which I have given notice. But the house will, I trust, allow me in passing just to advert to those personal remarks which were made by an hon. mem ber in the course of the recent debate. I allude to the re marks which fell from the hon. member for West Surrey (Mr. Drummond). It is not my intention, in adverting to those remarks, or to any other personal observations that may have been made in reference to myself, to indulge in any harsh language. I merely wish to put myself right with the house and the country. (Hear, hear.) I have not the honour and pleasure of the personal ac quaintance of the honourable member for West Surrey, but I respect him too much, as an old member of this house, as a scholar, and as a gentleman, to say anything harsh in reply to the remarks he thought proper to make in regard to myself. He, on the occasion in question, said— " Among those gentlemen was the hon. member for Tyne mouth (Mr. W. S. Lindsay), a very good man, no doubt, who desired to be First Lord of the Admiralty or some small mat ter of that kind. He (Mr. Drummond) remembered about two years ago that hon. gentleman was what was called at Bow street ' had up' by some unfortunate people who had trusted him to take them out to Australia, but whom he did not send out, and they, being in great distress, applied to the magis trate for protection. He did not say the hon. gentleman had defrauded those people, but he wished to adduce it as a not very prodigious proof of administrative capacity." Perhaps the house will allow me to state the actual facts of this case? Now, considering the extensive transactions in which I have for years been engaged, having had to send out from 6,000 to 7,000 ships and many thousand passengers to various parts of the world, I do not think it very strange or surprising that I should have had once to go before a court of law or been summoned to appear before a magi strate. But in this instance the ship was one which bora - my naree ; and the hon. member somewhat sneered at that circumstance. Now, there are ships of other flags, whi c h I never saw, and of the owners of which I know nothing, which bear my name ; and this honour was conferred on me in regard to this particular vessel—not, certainly, at my own request, but at the wish of the builder. She was a ship of a particular description—she was, I conceive, a stride in advance of the ships that were previously used. Up to the date of her construction, such ships had usually been built above five times their beam to their length ; and I thought ships of the customary build were much too small. I accordingly gave orders for this vessel to be made 74 times her beam to her length, which I took to be an improvement. Now, when a man takes a step in advance in such matters, a great number of people naturally say, "Oh, your ship will not answer; she will capsize, and incur all kinds of risks." However, she came to London, and was - engaged to convey about 300 passengers to Australia. She sailed, and had got as far as the Downs, when I received a telegraphic message, informing me that something was wrong with her compasses, the weather at the time being stormy and boisterous. This communication reached me at midnight, but I immediately started for the Downs, and when I got on board Ifound that the ship's compasses were not properly adjusted. Combined with this circumstance, there was the cry still going on that something serious must happen to this vessel. Well, I felt persuaded in my , own mind that all would go right, and the captldn, toge ther with the crew, had no apprehension, and were all prepared to continue the voyage, believing there was no danger whatever in such a course. However, I said, "If anything occurs to this ship, such as might occur to any other vessel, the public will consider that I am the cause of it, and will blame me for the loss of life that may ensue; the responsibility of 350 lives therefore rests upon my shoulders, and I will not take upon myself anything so serious." Under these circumstances, although against the wishes of her commander, I ordered the vessel back to Lon don, and sustained thereby a loss of between 2,0001. and 3,000/. There were on board of her a great number of pas sengers who were very badly off; but I did not deal with them as the law directs, and give them ls. per day for their detention until another ship was prepared. I made them allowanc es according to their several wants, paying to some ca to some 45., and to others Ss. a-day. The act did not on me to provide in this manner for the cabin passen tgers • re'in but, U nfortunately, a great portion of their number some of them con s i st ing of than the second class passengers, of families who had seen brighter days, and who had lately sold off their all in order to go to Australia. I therefore ma de them compensation likewise; and in t his shape , to pa ssengers of all classes, I gave away another sum of 3 ,000/. ; thus making my total loss by this ship, by my own free act, about 6,0001. I say by my own free act, because the Government officer had passed the vessel and had declared h er to be perfectly sea worthy. (Hear.) Wellamon , g such a body of passengers, you might naturally expect that there would be one or two malcontents ; and accordingly I found four men who were determined to impose upon my good nature. These persons summoned me to Guildhall police-court; and I said that, howeVer liberal I might feel disposed to be, I should con siderate it a duty to resist what I regarded as extortion. te detiands. I am sorry to occupy the time of the house with there details ; but stake remarks of the hon. member for West Surrey affected my personal honour, thest that I shall not be considered guilty of egotism in replyin g to them. I will briefly quote the Times account of what Occurred on the hearing of the case at Guildhall. The newspaper report states that— " Sir C. Marshall then retired with Mr. Alderman Copeland and the chief clerk to consider the preliminary objection, and on ret urn i ng i nto court, Sir C. Marshall said, they were o f opinion that the 44th section did not apply to the matter, Ite. nd as the summons was founded upon it, they mus t dismiss (*), • • Mr. Lindsay'f con d uc t under the circumstan ces was a nature highly honourable to him:" (Hear, hear.) Perhaps the ho use w illit me to m e read a very few wo r d s from the com also rin comments mad p e e by the press on the case at the time. The Economist observes :- 1 : We sce with surprise that the conduct of Mr. Lindsay; THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING-, JUNE 23. 1855, to which we adverted last week with praise, has not been so favourably viewed by all the passengers on board the ship." The Spectator, which was so good as to compare my conduct on that occasion with that of certain steam companies, with regard to which there was considerable noise at the period in question, also contains this remark : " Mr. Lindsay, the owner of the vessel which is named after him, has indeed taken a course which fully sustains the character of the British merchant. Understanding that the ship was not perfectly fit for sea, he has recalled it, and has taken upon himself all the consequent expense and loss. He has not limited his liberality to telling his passengers that they might seek passages in other ships at their own expense, and merely ' without prejudice' to their claims upon himself. He has not forced his master to prosecute the voyage in spite of a certificate from the medical officer that disease would inevitably break out within the tropics. He must incur a very large sacrifice by his handsome treat ment of the passengers ; but that price will probablypurchase its full worth to himself." (Hear, hear.) I hope the house will excuse me for detain ing it so long with these personal matters, after the state ments that were made on a former night by the hon. mem ber for West Surrey. I will now turn, sir, to the main points, to answer which I have risen. An hon. and gallant gentleman, a member of her Majesty's Government, anight or two ago, was pleased to say, with respect to some state ments made by me elsewhere, that they were "virulent untruths." (Hear.) Now, I think I can satisfy the house, in a very few words, and by the best of all testimony, that instead of my statements being " virulent untruths," in stead of their being over the truth, they were actually under the truth. I shall prove my statement from the Government's own witnesses. The first case that stands before me is that of a valuable steam-ship,which I said was ordered to proceed from the Thames to Newcastle to take on board some 12 tons of combustibles on her way to Ports mouth. My proof of that assertion, Sir, is a note which I hold in my hand from one of the departments of the Ad miralty, and which I am ready to submit to the inspection of right hon. gentlemen on the Treasury benches. The note runs thus : " Sir James Graham insists the Robert Lowe shall be ready to proceed to Newcastle to take on board about 12 tons of combustible stores on Monday next, previous to her going to Portsmouth to embark her troops. The owners are to pro vide provisions for 680 men for two months. Government will supply tanks and water-casks and provide the water. There will be from 400 to 500 tons of stores shipped as cargo. The Admiralty expect every exertion to be used in getting the ship ready for sea." But the case, Sir, is really worse than I represented it ; for in this note there is this passage, written in pencil, which I did Rot read elsewhere : " And that men be employed to work day and night ; in fact, Sir James says he must not be disappointed, the service being most urgent." This note is dated the 25th of October, 1854, and signed "H. J. Wentworth." So that it was not 12 tons of com bustibles that were to be taken on board. If that had been so, there might have been some excuse for an order appa rently so absurd, because the articles might have been of such a description that they could not have possibly been stowed in any other ship except that which was to carry them to the Crimea. But the fact was they were nothing but 12 tons of iron tanks or cylinders, as they are called, which were to convey combustibles. But, further, the pencilled passage gives orders to the owners of the vessel to work night and day. To do what? Surely to get these 680 men out? For I wish the house to remember that at this time our army was very nearly driven out of the Crimea, and more troops were urgently demanded at such a critical juncture. But no; on the contrary, this vessel was actu ally ordered to go about 1,000 miles out of her way, and her owners were pressed to work night and day to :get her ready, that she might take on board 12 tons of cylinders. (Hear.) If, however, the Government are not satisfied that the note I have read is a sufficient proof, here is an other, from the dockyard at Deptford, and dated two days afterwards, viz., the 27th of October, 1854 : " begs to acquaint --, that in consequence of a telegraphic message just received, it is not now intended that the Robert Lowe should proceed to the Tyne, as the cylinders intended to be shipped in her will be sent thence to Woolwich." These, Sir, are my proofs from the Admiralty's own wit nesses of the truth of my first statement, and they are at the service of the Government. (Hear.) In support of my next assertion I will adduce similar testimony, that of their own letters. Here they are. I stated that a steamer, valued at nearly 100,0001., was ordered to come round from the Clyde to Liverpool, in order to be surveyed, be cause the surveyor would not go to her. Now, here is a letter from the office of the Directors of the Transport Service and Prisoners of War, dated Admiralty, June 8, 1855, and marked " Immediate." This case is actually even worse than the one I stated, for it was not merely that they ordered the ship to be sent from the Clyde to Liverpool in order that she might be surveyed, but all the way round from Greenock to Deptford. This was only so far back as the Bth of this month. If the Government wish me to rake up old stories, I can bring plenty forward, but I say that in the present month of June a ship was actually ordered all the way round the land from Greenock to Deptford, in order that the Surveyor should go on board and survey her., The letter states that they would accept the ship, but only upon the condition that she was that moment prepared to come round to the river Thames to be surveyed and fitted for horses. The letter was signed "E. Gifford." The owner remonstrated in a letter, dated the 9th of June, as follows : " Sir ' The Columbian is quite ready; but do I understand rightly from your letter that the ship is to come round to Deptford before being finally accepted 7" The owner was thunderstruck, as well he might be, at such a proposal, and wrote to know what they meant. The re ply he received was the following letter " Sir,—ln answer to your letter of this day, I am com manded by the directors of Transport Service to acquaint you that they cannot spare their officer at Liverpool to proceed to Greenock to survey the Columbian, as his duties require his presence at his own port." That is dated Admiralty, June 9, and signed "E. Gif ford." Here were cases in which the Government required that the ship •should come to the surveyors, when it was stated by one of the owners that bringing his valuable ship from Glasgow to Liverpool would cost 4001. The conse quence was that the merchant, the owner of the ship, who was a Manchester man and a man of business, was disgusted, and gave an order to the broker to write a letter, of which the following is a copy : " No. 8, Austin-friars, June 12.—Sir, I was duly favoured with yours of the 9th and 11th inst. in reference to the screw steam-shp Columbiau. The owners declined to incur the heavy expense of sending so large a ship round to Liver pool or Deptford without first knowing that your surveyors approved of her, and they felt your demand to be so un reasonable and unbusinesslike, when at so small an expense you might have sent a surveyor to the ship at Greenock, that by their orders I have engaged this ship and the Euro- pean elsewhere. --.Tony GLADSTONE," The fact is, that that very day the ship was engaged to the French Government. (Hear.) Is not this a proof, by the months of their own witnesses, of the truth of the state ment I made elsewhere? (Cheers.) Now, the next case I think was the ordering of a steam-ship to go from Deptford to Woolwich, because the engineers resided at Woolwich, and it was more for their convenience to go on board there. Sir. the thing is so monstrous that it is really difficult to believe that it could have occurred. In this case I have no correspondence, but if the house desires it, or if there is any doubt about it, I am prepared to bring witnesses to the bar of the house, who will swear to the truth of the statement. In regard to the fourth statement, which was in reference to sending out 3,000 horses for the use of the army in the East, the hon. and gallant member for Westminster (Sir De Lacy Evans) one night in the house had remarked to me that he was very anxious that 3,000 horses should be sent out to the Crimea, as the ca valry regiments were very much in want of them ; but, that, though the horses were ready, the Government had over and over again told him that "they could not find ships." It was about the let of April that the hon. and gallant gentleman made that statement, but at the end of that month he repeated it, and then said that the same high authority had told him that they could not find ships. On the Ist of May I wrote a letter to Sir De Lacy Evans, in which I expressed my surprise at such a statement, and I said I thought where there was a will there was surely a way. I referred, and found that at the very time the Go vernment were telling you they could not find ships, a friend of mine had in one letter offered to Lord Panmure a magnificent fleet of, I dare say, the finest and swiftest ships in the world, ready in 24 hours' notice to convey, at the low rate of some 16s. or 17s. per ton register, 2,200 horses from this country to the Crimea, and that the only an swer he received was the usual one—that it would be considered. That day I suppose that important letter was popped into the great big waste basket at the War office, or sent to the Admiralty and lost in the chaos which there appears to reign supreme, for he hoard no more about it. These ships have, of course, since that time all gone on their voyages. Last night, in the house, you told me again that the horses were still eating their heads off, while our army prayed for them in the East, and that the same Game kept them here —no ships, at least no suitable ships. It is sad to think of all this perverse— what shall I call it ? —perverse imbecility, if not something worse. I spoke to my friend in the city this morning, and here is another fleet all ready for your horses at about the same low rates. They are all ships averaging from 1,200 to 2,100 tons re gister, and could carry in safety the number of horses af fixed to each. My friend gave me the names of the vessels ; they wore capable of carrying 2 ,66o horsee in all, and he was prepared to procure them that morning for the Govern ment. (Hear.) Now, this is in point of fact based upon conversation between the hon. and gallant member for Westminster and myself, and I repeat here, in my pl ace . that that conversation did take place between us, that I sent a letter to him of which here is a copy, which is at the service of the Government if they want it—(a laugh)—and that the hon. and gallant member a cknowledged it at the time with great courtesy. I therefore repeat the statement here which I made elsewhere, and I have no doubt that the hon. and gallant member is prepared to confirm it. As to the question-of the offer of such ships having been made to the Government, I presume that the Govern ment will not deny that fact, because I think they will find the letter offering the ships, the date being somewhere about the 17th, 18th, and 19th of Match. They will find on inquiry that such a letter was sent to the War-office, and that it was merely acknowledged and referred to as having been handed over to the Admiralty, who never answered it at all. Now, sir, there was another statement which I made; I said that I doubted very much if the re turns which were lately laid upon the table of the house were correct. This is much more important than anything else I said. This house will remember that on the 29th of January a return was ordered upon a motion made by myself, of the stores sent to the East, from the let of January, 1854, to the Ist of January, 1855, containing the nature of the service, the tonnage of the vessels, the period at which they were sent out, and when they arrived at the East. It is only some 10 or 12 days since we received these returns. The Government have been five months making them up. The returns them selves are exceedingly important, considering the amount of money the house had voted for the maintenance of the army in the East, and that that army died unclothed, un sheltered, and unfed, and I was desirous to get at what quantity of stores had been bought, and what quantity had been sent out. Well, Sir. I doubted the correctness of the returns, but the right hon. baronet, the late First Lord of the Admiralty, told me, and not only me, but the house, that the books of the Admiralty, he was prepared t°sa3r, Were as well, if not better, kept than the books in Austin -friars. I had good reasons for wanting to know What quantity of stares had been sent out, and I think the house will agree with me that I arr i ved at a Sound co lusion wh en I expresse d th a t d ou bt , f or the have G overnment been five months compiling these returns, which, had they kept proper books, might have been made out and laid npoti the table, at all events, within a month. But what are the returns all t all ? They do not give a T t h h e e house wanteld'most important. e rt i a t n em of t. s tn ore k s n , o w w hi h c o h w ar m e utehhe food, bow much of the necessary articles of life, had be en sent out ; but these returns give nothi ng more than the quan tity of shot and shell, gnu carriage°, and medicines sent out last year. Why is it that a return has not been made of the stores sent out to the army in the East, which was the return for which the motion was made ? Now, as to the correctness of the return. Here it is ; " a return of the nnmber of transports engaged, with the work they have done," ordered on the 29th of January. The house Will remember that I was, constantly urging the Govern ment to lay this return on the table, but they have taken five months to prepare it, and I believe that, had it not been that they were so urged, we should not have received it yet. The first ship I take up is the trans port 102, and I call the attention of the Government to this particular ship because I find that the captain is now in London, and he is willing to make an affidavit of the truth of the facts which he has stated to me. That ship is returned as having made 12 voyages between the 10th of June, the time she left, in 1853, to the 31st of December, 1854, and to have taken so many horses and so forth, whereas in the list which the captain has given me, instead of 12 voyages, she is set down as having made 51 voyages within these two dates. (Hear, hear.) The return says that 713 tons of cargo have been sent, but I find that 1,063 tons were carried. Again, the Government says that' six military officers have been carried in that ship, but I find , that she has really carried 190 officers. The return men tions three horses as having been conveyed in the ship, but in truth she has carried 124 horses, 227 sheep, and 15 bullocks. The return also says she has carried 324 soldiers, but, in fact, she has carried no less than 4,306. (A laugh.) The return is silent as to her horse power, and cannot state the quantity of coals consumed. But here is the consumption of fuel, day by day, which the Government could have ascertained with very little trouble. I say this is a serious matter. (Hear, hear.) What was the object of the return? I wanted to find out what had become of the 8,500,0001. of the people's money voted by Parlia ment. No information can be gathered from this return, for I have a right to infer that if it is wrong in one in stance it is wrong in others. This return, then, I say, is not merely waste paper, but it is worse, for it deceives the public and the house. (Hear, hear.) I might call the at tention of the house to many other points, but I do not wish to occupy more of its time than is absolutely neces sary. I must be permitted to remark that one thing struck me in this return as somewhat strange, that while certain ships are only getting 20s. per ton others are - being paid 31s. and 325. 9d. per ton. Here is one at 335. 9d. which was reduced from that rate only in March, and that vessel is described to me as a "hogged" ship, something like broken-backed, or if any hon. member will go and look at the floating battery now lying in Mr. Scott Russell's yard, he will see what I mean, although of course to a greater extent than in the case of the vessel I refer to. I find that ship was kept on until March at 325. 9d., while magnificent 13 years' ships were earning 20s. only. Ido not say there has been anything wrong, but I have been told the captain , of that vessel went out to Constantinople with letters and arranged the business out there. I know it will be said by any member of the Government who may do me the honour of replying to my remarks, that it was impossible to pay off all the ships at that time. That is very questionable, for most of the shipowners to whom the circular of reduction was sent agreed at once to take 20s. I think I have shown the house by the best possible means that I am not a tellerof "virulent untruths." (Hear.) That statement, those words have grieved me deeply—they have gone forth far and wide wherever my name is known—not only in the seaports of England. but in the seaports of the world—and that name, which I trust and believe has been respected by others, has been stigmatised by a member of the Government of Eng land as that of a teller of untruths. I will not reply by any harsh words, but I declare that if the hon. and gal lant gentleman had taken from me all that which I have gained by my industry—if he had taken from me all my ships and all my gold, he would not have done me a worse injury than by depriving me, as he attempted to do, of my good name. During my career through life, from the state of a humble seaboy to my present position as a member of this house, I may have made some envious enemies, who have endeavoured to stay me in my onward course, but no one has ever impeached my veracity. Therefore I say sin cerely I have felt deeply that a member of the Government should rise in his place in Parliament, and, by denouncing me as a stater of untruths, should endeavour to rob me of that character which I value above all price, which was once my only capital, and which, if all my property should be taken from me, would enable me to regain for tune and position —a character for adherence to truth. (Cheers.) I will now bring my observations to an end, although I could say much more on the maladministration of the Admiralty; and, thanking the house for its patient endurance, will conclude by saying, in the words of our great poet,— " Who steals my purse steals trash ; 'tis something, nothing; 'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands; But he that filches from me my good name, Robs Me of that which not enriches him, And makes me poor indeed." (Hear, hear.) • Sir C. WOOD (who was heard with difficulty) said that much as he might regret the delay which the course taken . by the hon. member for Tynemouth would occasion to the business before the house, for his own part he was person ally grateful to him for the statement he had just made. The hon. member, in another place, but in language stronger than that which he had used to-night—(no)—had ques tioned the administration of the Admiralty, not only since he (Sir C. Wood) had had the honour of a seat there, but for a short time before. He certainly had expected that the hon. member for Aylesbury, as leader of the adminis trative reform party, would have been better supported in the house, and that the hon. member for Tynemouth would have made whatever statement he wished to make in that house. But the hon. member seemed to have forgotten the axiom of English justice, that the accusation should pre cede the defence. He (Sir C. Wood) had never intended to 'say that the whole of the hon. member's statement at Drury-lane Theatre was destitute of foundation ; but the hon. member had a somewhat lively imagination, and so dressed up facts that he doubted whether those who had only known them in their nakedness would recognise then. (Hear, and a laugh.) Without further preface he would go through the " facts" as stated in the speech 01 the hon. member. The first point he' had advanced at Drury-lane Theatre was, that he had heard the hon. and gallant member for Westminster say, "1 have been wait ing for more than a month to send out 3,000 horses for the second division. I had bought these horses ; but the Ad miralty say they have not tonnage enough to carry them out." Now (said Sir Charles) it is not true that 3,000 horses were wanted for the second division in the Crimea, It is not true that the hon. and gallant general bought them. It is not true that he was told by the Admiralty that tonnage could not bo found for these horses. If the hon. member (Mr. Lindsay) bad inquired as to the mode of buying horses, he would have found that the second allegation was incorrect ; but the statement is as much ornamented as the proceedings at Drury-lane Theatre, where many members of this house, who were not there, were represented as having been present. (A cry of "Question, question.") Do not the charges at Drury lane Theatre bear upon the question ? (Hear, hear.) I have no doubt my hon. and gallant friend said something to the hon. member with regard to the amount of horses, and the difficulty of sending them out, but I do not think it possible, nor do I think the house will either, that my hon. and gallant friend could have said that which the hon. member imputes to' him. But (continued Sir C. Wood) how stood the matter with regard to sending out horses since the lat of May. The Admiralty were in this respect guided by requisitions from the Horse Guards and the War-office. The number of horses on the Ist of May for which transport provision was made was 2,030. The requisitions in May for transport service were 394—up to the let of June 386—provision being required altogether for 2,810 horses. Now, since the Ist of May, 2,649 horses have been despatched, thus leaving 161 to be provided for. (Hear, hear.) At present there were fitting out horse transports for the conveyance of 230 horses, and the Admiralty had heard that there were four vessels on their way home from the Mediterranean, capable of carrying 738 horses ; so that there was total provision for 968 horses by ships either ready or on their way home. At the present moment the Admiralty had horse transports capable of conveying 5,550 horses. They were employed mainly in the Black Sea and Mediterranean, and had conveyed Bri tish, French, Turkish, and Sardinian troops, and Spanish horses and mules from Spain. The Admiralty bad had every reason to believe that many of these transports would have been back long ago ; but after conveying 2;000 horses for the Sardinian army, application had been made for the transport of 1,000 more, and this had delayed the arrival of the transports. The vessels to which the hon. member for Tynemouth made reference, as being available for the transport service, were sailing-vessels ; but the cavalry officers remonst ra t e d against the use of any but steam-vessels, and the Government as far as possible had yielded to that remonstrance. Perhaps the house was not aware of the amount of service performed this year in conveying men and horses. The house would be pleased to hear that between the Ist of January and the 31st of May—and here he might say that tlle official re turns were considerably below the truth— Mr. ROEBUCK—Why should they be below the truth They ought to be correct ! Sir C. WOOD—There was such a thing as overstating the truth. (Hoar, and a laugh.) He took uncommonly good care to keep within the mark, and trusted the hon. member for Sheffield would always follow the example. (Hear, and laughter.) Well, the official returns showed that we had landed 90,000 men—English, Prench, Sardinian, and Turkish. We had conveyed to the Mediterranean 13,000 men—thus making in a 11103,000 mon; and provision had been made for 3,500 more. We had conveyed 12,460 horses, provision having been made for 1,590 mo result which whole, 14,050 conveyed and provided for—a result which showed that they had no reason to be ashamed of the efficiency of the service. (Hoar.) The next statement of the hon. gentleman had reference to certain vessels in the Clyde ' • and her e h e (Si r C. W oo d) mus t b e perm itt e d to express his surprise that the hon. member had not been more accurate—(hear)—fro m his intimate acquaintance with the proceedings of the house in which he was a part ner. With respect to the European and the Columbia, the hon. member said that he made a tender of one of them to the Government, but the conditions attached wore such s a the hon. he that it was impo ss ibl e t o agree to them, and that ho after wards offered it t o th e F rench Government, who accepted thlneermtohearnyalsl p u e d e t o o , n d h i t e i 0 (Sir n s, it.o Wood) What conditionsco u l o t y ; whether or to the conditions of the charter-party, he could not gather. The European was tendered in March at 608.6 d. a ton, and the hon member asserted that the conditions were so altered that no man of businesowoald have accepted them. But why- was the offer rejected ? The Admiralty wanted a horse transport, with a height of 7 feet 6 inches between decks, and the offer was declined because the space between decks was not sufficiently high. If he had wished to send out ponies instead of horses the offer would not have been so unreasonable—(a laugh)—but the sole condition being that the vessel should be fit for the service, and that condition not being complied with, the offer was declined. The Columbia was offered to the Government in May, but declined because it was not sufficiently high between the decks. The charter-parties had been objected to, but in order that they should not contain anything unreasonable they were submitted to five shipping firms in London, and the conditions were declared to be only such as were ne• cessary for the protection of the Government. If the hon. member had been inclined t‘• tell the whole truth, he would not have omitted to state .what had taken place since he (Sir C. Wood) came to the Admiralty. He had received the hon. member in the presence of Captain Milne, and the hon. member had said that the mode of transport adopted by the Government was as good a mode as could be sug gested, and the mode least open to fraud ; and he also stated that the charter-parties, as framed, were necessary for the protection of the Government. The only suggestion. the hon. member made was with respect to the mode of keeping the accounts, but going into the next room with Captain Milne he found that the very form he recommended had been in force in the Admiralty for upwards of a year. But that was not all, the hon. member wasso satisfied with the charter-parties that he copied them, as would be seen by his contract with the French government. The charter party between "Mr. Lindsay and his excellency the French minister "• was not only an imitation of oufcharter-party, but a servile copy. Everybody know that there were cer. tarn risks excepted, but in these exceptions in the charter party with the French Government were found " the acts of God" and "the Queen's enemies." (Laughter.) . The Emperor's enemies should have been the phrase ; but our charter-party was considered so perfect by the hon. member that he could not change a word. The Emperor must stand the risk of his enemies, but the Queen must be pro tected. (Laughter.) And se with another portion of the charter-party having reference to provisions for the French officers. The proposal was to provide them with " breakfast, dinner, supper, and a pint of good port wine, or other good ` foreign wine,'" 7c•rench wine notboing mentioned, so great was the desire not to depart from the words of the English charter-party. (Laughter.) But he (Sir C. Wood) now came to the case of the vessel which was desired to call at Newcastle on its way to Portsmouth. He admitted at once that the vessel was ordered to New castle, but that was to be "previously to hergoing to Ports mouth." The hon. gentleman stated at Drury-lane Theatre that it had been ordered that on her way to Portsmouth the vessel must call at Newcastle ; and that remark was met with those " cheers and laughter" which a packed and assenting audience are easily moved to. He said : 7 -- " The steamer was under orders to go to Portsmouth to take up troops immediately for the Crimea, but orders were given by the Admiralty to the owner that in her way to Portsmouth she must call at Newcastle. (Shouts of laughter, hear, and cheers.) If this was not so serioirs a matter for the country he could laugh himself, but to be or dered to go to Newcastle to call for those 12 tons of stores ! (Hear, an cheers.) The owner wrote to the Secretary to the Admiralty, saying that these 12 tons could be brought up from Newcastle for 61., but that it would cost the country 2,0001. for the ship to go round for them. The Admiralty wrote a very angry letter as if he was presuming to dictate to them, and ordered the ship to go round. The owner again re monstrated, and an order came down in which it was said that Sir J. Graham insisted that the ship should be made ready to go to Newcastle to take in 12 tons of combustibles on the following Monday on her way to Portsmouth.' Still the owner said he could not put the country to the expense of 2,0001., and he would not let the ship go let the consequences be what they might. (Cheers.) In three days, the Admiralty being ashamed to write a contradictory order, a letter came from another department, at Deptford, in which it was said, Captain Austin begs to inform Mr. —' (Cries of name.') He would give the name to any one in confidence, but he did not think he should be required to state it publicly. Well, ' Captain Austin begs to inform]Mr. that, in con sequence of a telegraphic message just received, it is not in tended that his ship should go to the Tyne, as the articles at Newcastle will be sent thence to Woolwich.' " Now, the ship in question, the Robert Lowe, was a vessel chartered by the hon. gentleman to the Government before he was a member of this house, but after that was trans ferred to Mr. Gladstone, and with reference to the manage ment and payment of which, up to the last few days, the hon. gentleman was in communication with the Admiralty. But why was the Robert Lowe ordered to Newcastle ? He would tell the house. At the time the transaction took place the Government was very anxious to obtain the means of forcing the harbour of Sebastopol, and, in consequence, his right hon. friend the late First Lord of the Admiralty communicated with Mr. Rendel, an eminent engineer, and after concert with him and other, persons it was arranged that large explosive cylinders should be constructed for the purpose of blowing up certain ships sunk at the mouth of the harbour, and the patities by whom it was recommended that these cylinders should be constructed were eminent manufacturers—he supposed he must thus designate them —at Newcastle. And here were the reasons, as stated in a letter from Mr. Armstrong, the owner of the vessel, why the Robert Lowe was orderer' to Newcastle. He said : " I take the liberty of suggesting that much valuable time would be saved by shipping them direct from the Tyne. They cannot, I believe, be sent by continuous railway to any of the Royal arsenals, and the delay and risk of accident at tending the shifting of such heavy things from one railway carriage to another, and the cartage of them from stations, would be considerable. Tho powder for charginc , the maga zines might be obtained from Tynemouth fort (where I under stand there is a sufficiency) and. sent to these works, so that the apparatus might be delivered here ready for use, without requiring subsequent disturbance." (Cheers.) Here was the reason why the Robert Lowe was ordered to Newcastle; and Mr. Ainastrong, seeing what took place at the meeting in Drury-lane, forwarded the fol lowing statement to the Admiralty : " I believe it was my own suggestion that the steamer which was to convey these oyliuders to the Crimea should take them on board at Newcastle, in order that they might be charged and finally closed np before they left the manufac tory ; and you will recollect that, in consequence of this course not having been pursued, the cylinders had ultimately to be charged and closed up one by one as they were received on board the Robert Lowe, in the Thames, and that actually more time was thus consumed than was occupied in the mak ing of the whole apparatus. The weight of the cylinders and their accompaniments is enormously understated by Mr. Lindsay. I cannot to-day (being Sunday) get you the parti culars, but I believe the weight was nearer 50 tons than 12. How iifr. Lindsay can make out that it would have cost 2,0001. to send this vessel (of which I understood he was himself the owner) to Newcastle I cannot conjecture, but I will venture to say that the demurrage ultimately incurred in consequence of not sending her there would be at least an equivalent expense, besides involving a great delay, which (as was then considered) was of the utmost importance to be avoided. There was no convenience at Woolwich, such as we had at Elwick, for charging these heavy cylinders, and the authorities there were so scrupulous about risk of explo sion, that they would not sanction the operation being per formed within the arsenal." And to this statement he (Sir C. Wood) might add that he believed the real weight of each cylinder was 70 and not 50 tons. Now, he hoped he had satisfied the house that there were good reasons for ordering the Robert Lowe to Newcastle —(cheers)—and that the sending her there was not a mere whim of freak or senseless order of the Board of Admiralty. (Renewed cheers.) Bat the hon. gentleman went on to say that the owner wrote an angry letter to the board, stating that he would not expose his vessel to the risk of sending her to Newcastle, and that subsequently receiving an order to do so he ultimately replied that he would not send his vessel there. Now; here was the owner's letter " Might I be allowed to point out to their lordships the risk attending a ship of so large a tonnage being sent to the north of England at this season of the year, and at a period when such great destruction has been caused by the-storms which are experienced there. Should any accident occur, it may detain the regiment going in the Robert Lowe for the sake of 12 tons of combustibles. Every order received byme shall be strictly attended te." (Laughter.) Now that was the only letter of remonstrance received by the Admiralty, and it was not a very angry one —certainly he did not think it justified the assertions of the hon. gentleman. (Cheers.) But was the answer to that letter a positive order to go at all events to Newcastle? The answer sent was, "that the' comptroller-general begged to inform the owner of the ship that he was not to go to Newcastle." And why not? Not from any change on the part of the Ad miralty as to the desirableness of the original arrangement, but because the ship was not ready when the service re quired of her was to be performed. (Cheers.) The conse quence was the cylinders we're sent by railroad at a consi derable expense, and were charged at Woolwich instead of at Newcastle, and all because the hon. gentleman's house were not ready to fulfil their contract. (Renewed cheers.) And now that he had made mention of the Robert Lowe, he might be allowed to allude to another fact, which would not a little surprise the house. A great deal had been said about the stowage of the Robert Lowe, but all the hon. gentleman's statements upon that point proved utterly in correct upon inquiry. The only ground stated by the hon. gentleman why the Robert Lowe had not been properly packed, and had not delivered its charge as ordered, was in consequence of the captain and chief mate having been removed. Now the house would be a little surprised to find that the person who changed the master and mate of the Robert Lowe was no less than the hon. member far Tyne mouth (Mr. Lindsay) himself, who did it with the know ledge of the Admiralty, and they were sent away because they were not acquainted with the stowage of the vessel. (Cheers.) Well, the third assertion of the hon. gentleman was, that a vessel was ordered from Deptford to Wool wich for survey, at a very considerable expense. Here was his statement : " A steam-ship was lying at Deptford, and the Government engineer who was to go iu her lived at Woolwich. It was necessary that before the ship was engaged the engineer should inspect her engines. Orders came from the Admi ralty to the owner to take her round to Woolwich in order that the engineer might walkon board. (Bear 2 and laughter.) The owner answered, that it wou ld b e b e tt er for the engineer to come to the ship than for the ship to go to the engineer, and that it would cost the country less, as the engineer could come over to Deptford for 4d., and the ship would cost 1001. in going to Woolwich." With regard to the assertion thus alluded to, his (Sir C. Wood's) conviction was, th a t i n that, as in other cases, the hon. gentleman had overrun his memory. (Hear, hear.) However, that being so, h e a ppli e d i mme di a t e ly t o Capt. Austin, an officer of very high character,. .who had charge of the whole transport service, and required of him to re port what actually took place. Well, he would read an extract from Captain Austin's reply ;- - " I can with certainty declare no such thing as a transport proceeding from this to Woolwich has ever been ordered by the Admiralty, or contemplated by me ; the system is for the surveying officers to search out and visit the vessels 'at their stations in the docks or river; this established custom is of daily occurrence." But in order to make matters more sire he had also ordered a report from Lieutenant Weptworth, the agent of transport vessels, and that report said : " I know nothing of the steamer worth 50,0001. being ordered from Deptford to Woolwich to have her engines in spected. All ships have been surveyed by me, and had such an order been given I should have, known it. In all cases where ships have been ordered for survey in any part of the river I have considered it my duty to proceed to them, and not require them to come to Deptford. . . . The state ment that ordering a steamer from Deptford to Woolwich for inspection would incur an expense of 1001. is absurd ; supposing she could not use her own steam, she could be towed there for 101." Now as he could not say for certain the name of the vessel to which the hon. gentleman referred, he (Sir C. Wood) had only to rest upon the authority of those gentlemen that no such occurrence ever took place. But not content with ascertaining that fact, ho inquired what could have possibly given rise to such a statement; and from those inquiries he strongly suspected that the occurrence alluded to took plaos in reference to a vessel called the Tyne mouth, of which mention had been already made. And it was certainly true in the case of that vessel that an order was given with respect to it, with which the lion. gentleman did not choose to comply. Tho Tynemouth was under repairs, but she was reported by Mr. Glad stone ready to go to sea next day. Well, the control ling officers considering there was reason to doubt that assertion, and inasmuch as the vessel was to go down the river to have her compasses swung at Greenhithe, direc tions were given that she should go down with her own engines, in order to test the truth of the assertion that she was ready to go to sea that day. That order was not complied with : and why? Because the engines wore not in a fit state to take the vessel down ; that when the vessel was tsurveyed at Greenhithe the gentlemen then found she was not fit to go to sea, and that her engines were quite u n fit f or their purpose. (Cheers.) And here again the hon. gentleman interfered personally, and tried to induce the Admiralty, through his (Sir C. Wocn. s) hon. friend the secretary to the board, to order the vessel to proceed (so we understood the right hon. gentleman, who throughout spoke so indistinctly that it was very difficult to catch his meaning). And he might be allowed to state that I ho believed it was upon the 4th or sth ofJune Mr. Gladstone informed the board that the vessel was ready to go to sea ; whileit was upon the Bth or 9th of June that the surveyor of the Board of Trade made his report and said : ,‘ The surveyors went yesterday to survey the hull and machinery of the Tynemouth steamer, but could not deliver declarations, because the ships boats were not on, board, and were not expected until the next tide ; the register was not on board ; the screws for the side lights required fitting ; the safety-valves wore not in accordance with the act, and could not be examined, there being a fire in one of the furnaces; a orauk pin required fitting; the liars engine required fitting; the fire hose could not be found," dtc. So that four days after the vessel had been reported ready to go to sea she was not even in a state tit to be surveyed, and s'..e ultimately left Greenhithe without receiving a cer tificate from the Board of Trade. Now, if that was the case to which the hon. gentleman alluded, he did not think it exhibited such very gross mismanagement or careless ness on the part of the Board of Admiralty, in ordering the vessel to proceed down the river—rot for their own purposes, but for those of the owner of the vessel. (Hear.) Well, the hon. gentleman then went on to make certain statements in reference to some returns as to commissariat stores, and which were not included in those moved •for by the hon. gentleman. He (Sir C. Wood) was ready to acknowledge he did not know why these returns had not been laid on the table. Those actually before them were simply returns of ordnance stores. If, however, any hon. gentleman wished to find the quantity of provisions sent out, he would find it in the 13th appendix to the fourth report of the Sebastopol committee. The hon. gen tleman, however, stated that there were grievous and gross inaccuracies in the transport returns laid upon the table ; and he referred to transport 102, which was this very Tynemouth. Now all that the Government could under take to supply was the number of officers, privates, and horses placed on board each vessel as it left England ; but they knew nothing of the number embarked in the Black Sea, at Varna, or Eapatoria, or at Constantinople. All those were details of which they were ignorant, and there fore he would not dispute the statement of the hon. gentleman that the Tynemouth did actually convey a much greater number of officers and men than she em barked at Plymouth. Such were the assertions upon which the hon. gentleman had founded his charge of maladmi nistration against the Board of Admiralty. With regard to those assertions, as he bad already said, he would not use any harsh term. For every statement which he had made he had given chapter and verse, and be would leave it to the house to judge how far the assertions made in Drury-lane, and repeated, though in a modified manner, there, in the presence of hon. members themselves, were borne out by the facts. (Cheers.) Now, he was unwilling to trouble the house with anything further, but he must be permitted to observe that when the administrative reform ers charged the Government with mal-administration in such strong terms, and chose the transport service as the particular branch of the public departments in which it had occurred, they must remember that it was precisely in the transport service that the Government depended less upon itself and more upon private establishments than in any other public department. With regard to the Queen's ships the Admiralty could do whatever it thought fit; while in reference to the transport service, the stowing of the vessels, for instance, depended upon the masters and owners—the sailing of them upon the mas ters and transport officers ; so that the Admiralty had very little control over them. But he must confess, when he looked into the management of the transports by other parties, he was unable to recognise any such great distinc tion in favour of the management of private pa 'ties over that of the government. For instance, there were three classes of emigrant ships, viz., those taken up by the Go vernment, those proceeding from a port where a Govern ment agent checked everything that went on, and those pro ceeding from a port where there was no Government agent, and where everything was done on the responsibility of the owners. Well, he found the greatest possible difference be tween the per-centage of loss oflife in vessels sontrolled by Government and those over which the Government exer cised no control. (Cheers.) And that whereas in the for mer the loss was very small, it was considerably greater in those with only a partial superintendence on the part of Government, but it was greater still where there was no control at all. (Hear.) Now, it would be remembered that some time ago the instance of " the Seringapatam " was mentioned as a great case against the Government, and the public were led to suppose by the hon. gentleman that that vessel was entirely taken up by the government. Well, the contrary was the fact—it was no such thing—it was a ship freighted by Mr. Green, a member of one of the first firms in the country, on board of which passage was taken for a considerable body of troops. Now he believed the ship was originally seaworthy, and that the occurrence which took place arose entirely from bad stowage. There fore, what was wrong in that case did not arise out of the mismanagement of the Government. Again they were told the other day of the woncleriul performances of Sir S.Peto, of whose efforts in the Crimea it was impossible to speak too highly. But they had had reports from the captains in charge at Gibraltar, that the transports employed by Sir S. Pete would bear no comparison with the vessels sent out by the Government. Now the hon. member made charges so mercilessly against the Admiralty, and contrasted their management so strongly with the administration of pri vate parties, that he could not avoid recalling attention to the case of the emigrant ship William Lindsay, in order to show how much better the hon. gentleman could manage matters. (Hear, and a laugh.) This William Lindsay was the first of a series of vessels sent to sea with the most ex cellent intention of facilitating emigration to Australia. Now he would read to the house what the hon. gentleman proposed to do, and then he would tell them what he actu ally did. (Laughter.) In 1852 the hon. gentleman ad dressed a circular to every clergyman in Great Britain for the guidance of their parishioners in the matter of emigra tion, and here was the circular ? " Rev. Sir,—Considering the immense number of persons of all ranks who are now leaving this country for the Aus tralian colonies, and the wide field of employment offered to them there as compared with their native land, it is a matter of regret that comparatively few have the means of judging as to the efficiency of the vessels advertised, or the responsibility of the owners and charterers, and too often rush thoughtlessly, in the absence of proper information, to secure passages in vessels of which they know little more than the name. As from your position you may have many inquiries on this subject we are induce •I respectfully to draw yolk attention to the arragemonts we have made for carry ing out the necessary emigration on a scale and in a manner suited to the requirements of the times ; and to beg your valuable aid in making the same known throughout ' your parish for the benefit of those who may have any desire to make their future home in the distant colony of Australia. We may suggest that the chief points on which intending emigrants should inform themselves are, the class and size of the ship by which they purpose sailing—her height be tween decks—whether she is coppered and copper fastened —whether well ventilated, and who is the owner or charterer. In a word, they should ask themselves the question—ls the person who undertakes to send them on a voyage of 16,000 miles one of established reputation or a mere adventurer ? Finding that emigration to so distant a colony has not been generally conducted in the manner in which it ought or might have been, we have arranged to dispatch monthly, or twice every mouth, according to the demand, vessels owned by ourselves, or entirely wider our management, and fitted with every improvement that science can suggest, so as to insure to those who may proceed to that colony as large a measure of comfort and safety as it is possible to obtain on a voyage so lengthened. . . The three following ships have been fixed to sail on the Ist December, January, and February . respectively:- W. S. Lindsay, James L. Bogert, and Swarth more. These are all very superior, new, first-class vessels, built expressely for carrying passengers. . . On the Ist of August we will dispatch two magnificent ships, which are building, fitted with steam auxiliary screws. [The hon. gen tleman warms with his subject.] 'One of these vessels will be named the Caroline Chisholm, in which Mrs. Chisholm, with her family, will return to Australia, accompanied by 500 single females, to every 50 of whom a matron will be appointed, whose • duty be to instruct those under her charge during the voyage, for which purpose a portion of the lower deck will be set apart for a school-room. (Hear.) This will be a most desirable opportunity for respectable females who have re solved to emigrate, as the advantages to be derived from Mrs. Chisholm's maternal attention and patronage in the colony must be of lasting and substantial service to those who proceed under her guardianship. (Hear, hear.) The second ship, which will be exactly similar in every respect to the Caroline Chisholm, will be called the Robert Lowe, after our respected friend the present member for Kidderminster— (laughter)—who resided for several years in Australia, and I was there an active member of the Legislative Council. (Hear, hear.) . . • •'' Well, no doubt, the having Mrs. Chisholm on board as a passenger was a very great inducement to emigrants. But how did the hon. gentleman carry out his professions ? Why, the first of these vessels was the William Lindsay, but it was obliged to put back for some reason or other,and the emigrants had to be landed. The second vessel, how ever, with which the hon. gentleman had had nothing what ever to do, did perform the voyage, and arrived at her desti nation in perfect safety; but with regard to the third which was built under the orders of the hon. gentleman himself, the surveyor reported her so unsteady that ho would not allow her to go to sea. Well, those were the two magnifi cent vessels which were to carry emigrantseto Australia under the care of Mrs. Chisholm. It did so happen tint the Caroline Chisholm never went out to Australia at all, and it turned out that she was now called the Tynemouth. (Great laughter.) So that the vessel that was to ha,ve con veyed these happy female emigrants, was employed instead in carrying the munitionsof war fir Government. As for the Robert Lowe, the house had seen what had become of that vessel. And such was the manner in which the hon. gentleman had performed his promises, put forward with no slight ostentation. Well, but in addition to that, he had to notice to the house some contracts with the Govern ment for the supply of coal, undertaker) , in the name of Mr. Gladstone. These contracts were to deliver the coals within a certain time, and he believed it was beyond all doubt that the coals were not delivered within the time. It so happened, also, when he himself was at the India Board, he had an opportunity of seeing how the firm to which the honourable gentleman belonged ful filled such contracts with the Indian Government. In May, 1852, they contracted to ship a certain quantity of coals in August of that year, which were not, however, shipp e d until June 1853, anclAhe whole of that time there were letters passing between the hon. gentleman and the Ad miralty on the subject. Again, 4,500 tons were to be shipped for Bombay in August, 1852, and these were not shipped until August 1853. Now he would not say that there might not have been very good reasons why these contracts had not been fulfilled ; still he must remind the hon. gentleman that those who lived in glass-houses ought not to throw stones, and that allowance ought to be made for difficulties in carrying out a great measure. (Hear.) But, above all, when he made statements impugning the characters of deserving won, he ought to take uncommonly good care that they *ere within the fact, and well borne out by the truth. (Hear, hear.) And he ought not to allow himself, even if his statements were not directly or altogether false, so to embroider them as to disguise the truth, and thus, for reasons best known to himself, raise up a superstructure not based upon actual circum• stances. (Cheers.) Sir DE LACY EVANS said, after the speech of the hon. member Lot Tynemouth had appeared in the newspapers, he received a note from the Minister of War, requesting to know froni him how far the statement of the bon. mem. bor was accurate so far as he (Sir Do Lacy Evans) was con corned. His answer to the noble lord was, that he had seen the statement referred to in a day or two after it was made, and he had mentioned to the hon. member in that house that there were some inaccuracies in it. The hon. member replied by saying there might have been some verbal inaccuracies in it, but he did not think that sub- stantially, it was incorrect. He (Sir De Lacy Evans) - now wished to state w h a t rea lly did occur in the brief conversa tion which he had had with the hon. gentleman; and as that conversation took place in that house while a debate was going on, it was not unlikely but that some mistake might have been made as to what ho said. What the hon. member had previously said was this—that he had heard from what he considered to be good authority that the Government had purchased some time before some 2,000 or 3,000 horses, for the purpose of remounting the cavalry and artillery in the Crimea. As to the remark of his (Sir De Lacy Evans) having purchased these horses, that, of course, was a mistake, for it would be absurd to suppose such a thin;. It was not. however, absurd for him to feel much anxiety and interert upon this subject, and to endea vour to exert himself in forwarding this object. The hon. member said that he (Sir Da Lacy Evans) was naturally most anxious that the transport of those horses should not be delayed, because he, knew that the army,in the Crimea was greatly in want of them • but that ho heard that the delay had arisen because the Government could pot pro. cure proper ships of war to convey them ; and that he had asked him (Mr. L.), knowing him to be connected with the ,shipping interest, whetliet he thought there could be so great a deficiency of shipping fur the purpose re quired ; and, if so, whether he could' suggest some means of tueeting this difficulty. New his (Sri Do Lacy Evans) only interference in the transaction was his observation that he had hoard, from what he considered to be good au thority, that the Government had purchased 2,000 or 3,000 horses for the cavalry, but that, a considerable delay had occurred in transporting them to the Crimea. He had fur ther said he had heard from a certain quarter that sufficient shipping could not be procured for their conveyance. He then naturally inquired from the hon. member, knowing him to be a good authority on the subject, whether there was really such a Scarcity of shipping in the market. He took no further share in the controversy. He admitted that he did certainly incline to the opinion that the horses were kept longer there than they ought t o b e . H e did no t think_ that it was good economy to keep the horses there so long, even though the proprietors of ships demanded higher prices than they ought. He had then a letter in his pocket from an officer in the Crimea, not at all referring to this controversy, but expressing the deepest regret that the cavalry horses had not arrived out sooner in the Crimea. That was all he knew of the casa. (Hear.) Admiral BERKELEY said, after what had taken place be would not—though he could mention other 'matters— add one word to what had fallen from his right hon. friend. He, however, begged of the hon. member to be more cau tious in future in making allegations against an absent man who was not there to defend himself, and under whom the transport service was conducted at that time. When the hon. gentleman made a statement in regard to thelateFirst Lord of the Admiralty, and against himself as being one of his advisers, which was not in accordance with fact, it was natural that he (the gallant admiral) should feel extremely indignant at such reports. He fe t, however, that he had given expression to some strong language on the occasion ; he regretted having done so. At the same time ho thought that the case fullyjustified it. Mr. LINDSAY said he understood that, notwithstand ing the report of the inspector Lieut. Wentworth, a troop ship was sent to sea within one hour of the time when the last of her cargo was placed on board. Lord ELCHO asked the Secretary of the Treasury, whether it is his intention, before moving the increased grant of 10,0001. for the National Gallery, to lay upon the table of the house any information ar regarded the new pointments of director, keeper, and secretary, travelling agent, and accountant ; and also,, whether any Treasury minute, establishing and regulating the constitution of the gallery, had been prepared and will be made public previous to the vote being taken ? Mr. WILSON said before the committee was called upon to decide upon the vote referred to, a paper upon the subject would be laid before the house, which, would state, not only the responsibilities of each officer, but also the grounds for the appointment of them. Colonel NORTH, in reference to the subject lately under discussion, referred to the case of a troop ship being sent out to the East without the proper conveniences, and ex pressed a hope that the Government would always claim the right of inspecting all such vessels, with a view to the comfort and safety of the troops on board. It was stated that the troopship in question went to sea without buckets or fire-engines, or boats. NEWS FROM THE CRIMEA. Mr. CRAUFURD wished to ask the Government for some further information in relation to the unfortunate in telligence which appeared in the papers of that day. As there were various rumours abroad, and as there would be no opportunity of making a statement upon the subject until Monday next, he hoped the noble viscount, in defe rence to the anxiety that existed in the public mind, would he able and willing to give some details of the news received from the Crimea ? Lord PALMERSTON said that a telegraphic message had been received early that morning from the Crimea. It was necessarily very short. The substance of it had been already communicated by Lord Panmure to the newspapers of that morning. Of course, when the Government were put into possession of further details, his noble friend would communicate them to the public as soon as they were re ceived. The motion for the adjournment was then agreed to. EDUCATION (SCOTLAND) BILL. The house then went into committee-on this bill. The CHAIRMAN said that the question before the com mittee was, that clause 1 as amended stand part of the bill. Mr. BLACKBURN rose to move an amendment. He did not think that by the clause as it stood the popular re ; presentatives would have sufficient control at the board. He, therefore, proposed to omit clause 1, with the view of bringing up a clause at another stage of the measure, to the effect that it shall be lawful for her Majesty, upon the recommendation of the Committee of Council upon education, to appoint a minister of education in Scotland who shall be answerable for the operation of the act, and who shall be paid a certain salary, the amount of which to be fixed by her Majesty's Treasury. Mr. MACKIE supported the amendment. Lord W. GRAHAM' wished to know from the learned Lord Advocate whether there were any words in the bill ao prevent the appointment of a Roman Catholic at the board; and if not whether he would object to the insertion of some such words on the bringing zip of the report? Mr. V. SCULLYhoped that if the Roman Catholics were to be excepted from any voice in the matter, thel would be also relieved from any taxation under the bill. Mr. C. Bruce said that the hon. and learned' member for,Cork could not have been in the house when the noble lord at the head of the Government made such large promises of pecuniary assistance to the Roman Catholics in Scotland in support of their scheme of education—pro posals which took the Scotch members by surprise, but to which no objections had been made by any member on his side of the house. It appeared that these promises of the noble lord had a wonderful effect upon the Roman Catholic members of that house in inducing them to support the Government in this measure, which, without such assis tance, would very likely have beeu objected to by the house. When the Roman Catholics in Scotland obtained such pecuniary assistance from the Government, he did not think it very unreasonable that they should be asked to bear their fair share of the burden for the carrying out of this measure. The LORD ADVOCATE said he had no intention to introduce any words to promote the object which the noble lord had in view. He believed that the people of Scotland were under no apprehension as to this matter, and ho did not think it at all necessary to make the provision suggested. Mr. HADFIELD thought the objection raised by the noble lord a serious one. According to the preamble of the bill, the Presbyterians were only to have the benefit of the measure. There were, however three bodies belong ing to that denomination—viz., the Established Church of Scotland, the Free Church, and the United Secession Church. Now, the first and last of those bodies were de cidedly advei•se to the bill, and the only body that would benefit by it was the Free-Church party. The learned Lord Advocate had put the worst test possible in this bill when he provided that the teacher, whatever might be his character and ability, if he did not teach according to a particular catechism should be rebuked, or suspended, or deprived altogether of his situation. Mr. F. SCOTT thought it would havebeen more respect ful to the house if some member of the government had •risen and explained the reasons for constructing the clause in its present shape, which he c o uld assure th em wou ld prove most unsatisf ac tory to the people of Scotland. Mr. A. PELLATT said that he bad good authority for stating that the bill was looked upon in Scotland as a more piece of clap-trap, and that the provisions made for the education of children in that country war already amply sufficient. The new schools would be, no improvement ; on the contrary, they would turn out to be a ,check on the progress of education in Scotland. The voluntary principle had been most successful there, but the effects of the bill would be mischievous in the highest degree. He should give his unqualified opposition to the bill in every stage. Lord W. GRAHAM stated his intention to move, on bringing up the report, a clause to the effect that, as the bill was to apply to Presbyterians only, no Roman Catholic should be constituted a member of the board. The committee divided— For the clause , Against it ••••• Majority —5O The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill. Or clause 2, Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the application of the public money in the manner proposed by this clause. He should like to have an estimate of what the probable expense of carrying out the system would amount to. Scotland had already a superior system of popular education, and he did not see why the country should be thus favoured by the expenditure of the public money more than any other part of the United Kingdom. He (Mr. Williams) approved of neither of the three bills before the house, though he sup ported any one of them as a step in the right direction ; but none of them propased to take any grant of public money, except that before the house, and that he objected to. 101 The LORD ADVOCATE said, if a system of national education was to be had, the nation would have to pay the expense of it in some shape or other, as the voluntary sys tem, at least in Scotland, had been tried and had failed. In England and Wales, also, the denominational system had failed ; and there was no option left but that proposed by the bill. The Privy Council grants were only available where a certain amount of wealth existed in a locality, and not in poorer parishes, such as were to be found in Scot land. Mr. WILLIAMS said the bill embraced :very school in Scotland, and as there was a good system of schools to that country, ho thought that an undue proportion of the sum granted for education in the United Kingdom was allotted to Scotland. The amendment was negatived without a division, and the clause was then agreed to. So likewise was clause 3. Clause 4 baying been put, Mr. E. LOCKHART proposed an amendment with a view to leave the superintendence of tho religious educa tion in the parochial schools under the superintendence of thepresbytery, _ _ Tlie LO - RD - ADVOCATE opposed the amendment, and said be considered that the bill as it stood would do justice to all parties interested. After some further discussion. the committee divided, and the numbers were— . For the amendment Against it Majority Clause 4 was then agreed to Clauses 5,6, 7,8, and 9, inclusive, were agreed to, with some verbal amendments, On clause 10, referring to p aroc hi a l sc hoolmasters, Sir APCAMPBELL moved an amendment, to the effec that the hentors should fix the salaries of these school masters at any sum not more than 341. nor less than 201 .... 77 , _ 115 ... -38 per annum. The amendment was, after some conversation, agreed to. Upon the question that the clause should stand part of the bill, Mr. W. WILLIAMS objected to the clause upon the ground that the sum, which would Was under its too operation great as compared with tho proportion be expended upon education in ti Scotland,n of tho population o f th a t country to that of the rest of the kingdom. The committee divided, and there appeared— For the clause as amended .................. 21G Against it .......... c1au5e.......... 5 Majority for th-211 Was received with The announcement of themaj.;iii ............ shouts of laughter. Clause 11 having been proposed, Mr. CUMMING BRUCE moved that the following pro viso be inserted :—" That where any parochial school master within the counties of Aberdeen, Banff, and be allowed to. retire as above, he shall c . on , Moray, may . . tinue to retain unimpaired his rights in connection with, and his interest in, the bequest of the late James Dick; and shall, notwithstanding his retirement, be entitled to receive annually, during his life, such allowance' as may bo granted to him by the trustees of the said bequest." After some conversation the amendment was agreed to. Clauses 12 and 13, as amended, were agreed to. On the motion of Mr. 'A. PELLATT, • The CHAIRMAN reported progress, and obtained leave to sit liza,b3 on Monday tioxt. LIMITED LIABILITY BILL. In answer to Mr. GROGAN. BOUVERIE said, it was his intention to proceed seriously with this bill this Jessic]. BILLS OF LADING (No. 2) BILL. The house having gone into committee on this bill, Mr. BOUVERIE opposed the clause which introduced the custom of attachment of ships' cargoes. Mr. CAIRNS defended the clause, which he stated was in accordance with the opinions of every chamber of com merce in the kingdom. He should divide the hoses on it. Mr. THORNELY opposed the clause, which was de fended by Mr. HORSFALL. Mr. HENLEY could not agree to the clause, and if the house went to a division he should vote against it. Mr. NAPIER approved of the clause, though he thought it might require some alteration so as to limit it. , After some further discussion the committee 8d For the clause 49 Against it Majority against the clause ...........• —ll The remaining clauses were then agreed to, and the bill passed thrugh committee. The Union Charges Act Continuance Bill Was r ead ab second time. FLOYER objected to proceeding with the bil l at that lte hour. The a Youthful Offenders (No. 2) Bill was read a secon d ti The Christ Church (Todmorden) Marriages B ill was read a second time. , d) Bili Was The Woollen, &c., Manufactures (Scotl and) read a second time. d thrOugb The Piers and Harbours (Scotland) Bill Passe - O a ths committee ; as did also the Administration of (Abroad) Bill. The Ecclesiastical Courts Bill, as amended by the Lard e ' was agreed to. Theßailways (Ireland) Bill, on the motion of Alf' BUTT, was read a third time and passed. The house adjourned at five minutes to two. Mr. P AeKE paired with Lord ELCHO for the r emaind er of ihe session. COUNTRY MARKETS. y t s a m e l t scarcely W Oh enal derate request at the late rates.s Barley, bean% ct s t W ith little attention. iT t n t u e e n eds d d a ta n hy c e, e :r o f v a t l h u e e.. t roes!, isia! c 00 1 little nittee abeonadsti npinees:ei eahsiinuattasid "atE°Ol,—JuNE 22. WAKEFIELD JuNg 22. Bruited. Barley maintains its pri c e. Beans and The wheat trade very quiet, grid business very Oats - shelling fully as dear. 5tea,.,. CoN.—ln our market wheat may EXETER—JUNE 20. to 9s 9d. Malting barley , 4s 6d to 53 Orleans, grincLingod t o Os Od to Os OL • Oats, 3s 8d to 4s Od. Od. Peas, 00s Od to 00s to 545 Od to 664 FLOUR. —Fine, 56s Od to 58s Od ; seconds, Od per sack. a nd eelveo CATTLE.—Prime beef , 12s 6d per score ; cows a I, reari n g 10/. 00s to 16/. ; butchers ' calves, 5d to 50 per 1 1 . 3 , od to calves —s to Shee, 6d to 841. l' ara ; i t ' sillisv Od per lb. Store hogs, largepsize, 00s to 00s ea°, per lb. 00$ to 00s ; small, 0 1 3 s to ON. Bough fat , 4 i" k" - Pork carcases from 10s Od to 10s 6d per score. be quoted fromd o 9 . s , 3dos INVERNESS.—JuNE 19. 4 03. 13° qr., mon, '''''' CORN.—Wheat, white, per 74s Od to 7- 8 N , od to ley, chevalier, 31s Od to 32s0d-; dit t o , com 31s Od. Oats, 21s Od to 32s Od. ditto 250 Od ; ~, MEAL.—Oatmeal, per iimp • boll 24s Od to,. , , 160 6 1; second, 00s Od to Os Od ; ba.rleyraeal, .6 0 " " - Fa to 9 " ' peasemeal, 16s 6d to 20s Od • bran, per stone, Os , 0 0d to Ist flour, per 2801 b, 57s Od 2 t 60s Od ;2d ditto, al 2 s a 00s Od ; oatmeal, best, per ° at. of 141 b imPon 1 , Si to Os Od ; ditto second, Os Od to Os Oct ; barleloe'od c ob, to 00s Od ; peasemeal, is 10d to Os Od ; Ist fl oat 3s 6d credit; 2d ditto, 2s 6d cash, 2s 9d credit' BRISTOL SUGAR—T 22. ters have The business this week has been dull , and itelV r s sw eet given way to 6d per cwt. West India Purehar,oodo. to about 170 hhds. Not much doing in refiner s ° COAL MARKI Prices of Coal per ton at t ET.—Jura 22. ;he close of the market. 0. a, s. Chester Main... ~x 18 Cookson's Hartley l6 6 Holywell . . Howard's West Hartley _ _ _ Virallsend, 14e ' . ° 21 Haswell ...................... ~ot 06 Lambton: ....... ............ Lumley .................... 18 1 „' Pensher ................ 19 v_ Riehmund ............... 16, Russell's 'lotto] ........ 21 . ...... 6 Stewart's .......... 9 9 Cassop .... . .................. Hartlepool ............... 5 ileugh Hall. ................. 0 South Kelloo ..............19 9 Tees .................. .. 0 West Kelloe ............. ••17 Whitworth ..........•. 1 7 6 E ven wood . ............. . . 2s Carr's 3forthyr Derwentwater •rov, a re „,ol 02 6 F o th erg ill's Aben Llangennee h .............. 2,0 W a yne's Mer thyr ••••• .27 ; M i th e l Cannel rwr .. .519 g 'g Skiborwen Me...... v Trimdon ......... • ... Netherton 17 9 Ravensworth Hartley l7 9 Ta,nfield Moor l5 0 Taufield Moor Butes 15 0 Walker Primrose l5 0 Grey's West Hartley l7 3 West Pelton l5 0 Wylam 18 0 i7I Sold ........ , Wall send, &o. Acorn Close lB 6 Bell and Brown 17 9 aosforth l9 0 Harton lB 3 Heaton Hilda l7 6 Riddell Wharnclifre lB 0 Eden Main... 19 6 Belmont 19 0 Framwellgate lB 6 Ships at market... 6 HEABORNE MAILS• .-0 0c° agora' b pas . (N ethifles that the mails are sent from the ...-----• Y the night--and DI by the morning--despac.b.) 10 ° Day when made or Trona iv •• bat e ilo ifi d, in General Post- port , ec. g/ ig• ~....„ Office, London.* DT . l _,-- --- -"--, goo lAmmeeririceaa(b(ybnyriutpasotkat):l,Every Friday ... • LiverP °°l ... --....---.........-- r ,,, D:ptioaaceeriCkke:elt;NhyThlE ..United..3....B.ts-Nii. Australia ( via Cape e a of Bo G u o th od - . 1*140. s i:o il u u e th t: s a na : sp ; i o ° : , I: H A D ul l e t e to xnoans (v dA la ia lifars . e . Res) N .a.p. . • . 1 ,. •• • • ...•.•...•• , ...„„s 7 4 ampton) ...•• •••• •• ........ • • • Dover ..• •• .. tai 1 17n e'r 4 • '. jail •• ..... • • • • .. nth ••• Africa (West Coast). . N 23d of the month.. Mine 7 cAl::Bahamas •• • 17th of the Month 'SouttiaolP AI. pelf., ::rioyrosoes.d...H. 6:::.........:NN 4869,8,2240, ft 3 0 (i f °mfg.. 51).o.vterhain••t-:: Belgium „ . ... 14 Daily . .„, . . ; • Dover .• ••• •! J oe ;; var i o us pc ..- 9 Cape of Good Hope ..N C 2; l ia- j rp a azlie i ldnin el ;s ;s i l r e ld s .ns ... d ..;.. ):... . ....IN : Mon :121°110 : fit tbeee;ligin°(;::tl::::1:: g°9°gg l iuuuuthtlithtilm:anlP: t°':.::::: / J lllitr'inunl i n:le es' Chili.„...„ . ...it,/ 2riticltii of inontl,l9 China .... ••• • • • Once 18 month.; • ~ ii 7 i toyer .• .• .• Constantinople .... .. V 8, 13, 18,13 ' -•smotn. 3outhssuPf on Li e sdaill C0n5tantin0p1ece:.......m..8,..3;.. T4twhiBcco2Oth ot .. Do vcr ••• • • • - • 1 Cont. of Europe M tic N Twice dally " •• I TYI IOOIIII Egypt (see India) Gibraltar 2,1 4 7 1. , - ' June 16 Greece (see India) 7th of Mon. fionthampt )1 , Groytown .... •• •• "114 "d B'l Ss Friday I ll una a d in viaa b nn : vi tr ah g a h so . u . . th . a . n . .w.t ).,..tisiN 2 T n u ct o o d:a 9 i ga il °l-1 0 72 : 0 0 .f n in t . I.i. rlBll;t:lehh:artianialp;• h : Cc ; 11 .111)! -- 2 Oa" 6 ,‘,/ patty. ..• ..... I)over .•. •• .11 June 1 Holland .• • .ft.he month. tiouthampti a .io llonduras ... ...... •• all' , lonian Isles (see India) 7, ~, ~. uulyitead .. e 6 Ireland ,;,,, ....„ A/ & .3i 'Twice daily • Jun • •f•in BouthalriPt• 71 Lisbon ..., .... .. 54 '7, 9, 17, & 27 ° India (vie 31arsoinews 9 4 1 th Ila t : 11 7 1 0 2 1 . .2 5 O t b t 2 h 7o ;re f raon°tnt; D P l o Yi v Madeira M th of the `month Madeira ............N 23d of month •• • • of mon I)ovieerr°.u...th.....:•: 117,10 Malta ...... . .._..N 8, 18 , Malta (see India) Dove: •. I, . ' Mauritius (sceludia) 1 Mauritius , , ......N 14th of the month , ~,o p f 6 I Sc 28 of mon. TOY Mexico ...: .. ... 361 2nd of the month.. ifioil , :: Naph„..........., N sthlsth2sthofraon.Dov,lo'•;i et Ol5 /0 New Granada .. • • —34 2d & 17th of montli:Sollious po rtl vil New Zea1and.......... By Ovate ship ..iVari ~ ... I Papal States N ithlsth2sthormon. Dover . 1.,t00 , Souvuerptbarof t . ai . : Jane 16 peninSula ..... M 7thl7th27 thothion. ISolitha'''' r4r;tlN•a•ta“l:-..... 7 3211 Sicily N sthlsth2sthofraon, Dover •.• . , ell 1 B id y & pri l a t t h o o s f hi m p o . n . .., l s c o sr itt io t l m po p _ F . : 4 :: )'trurer4ol° Tuscany .....: N iithlfitb2sthofmon. Paver •• 'ton: j tr,,,,,,,be1a M,2dBa 17th °inlet:lt'll tioutharoP 11 ; _ ... 1 •• •• Papal States N P en insula .... • M Peru •• • *•••• • • •• Port Na t a l .. • • N Sicily N Tuscany .• •• •• •• • • • N Venezuela Van Diemen's Lan d (soc s the When any of these dates fall on a Sunda::::::";ititrie:;41:::::: spatched on the following day, with the excoptioge dap*. Southampton), and the Malta, both of which Wil l preceding day. Australia) .......... West Indies .... 17th of month i . n s Jr "° OF A SON. frytte'r " On the 21st inst., at 15, ,Lancer Sussex-square s. wife of Archibald Little, Lieut.-Col. 9th __ st ioor. , T o On the 19th inst., Lady Edward ThYllu e ihe Res' . On the 20th inst., at Hay, the wife of v •J' lit :°' Bevan. L (14 1204, On the 21st inst., at the New HatnPs. e3 " 11 ' . 0 °' LaWrallee. e / 012° ' On the 21st inst., at Hither-green, Ti l/ H. Furze. BIRTHS. lady of Mr. T. S. On the 22d inst., at 14, P h ster-terOce e O i r sai A l. DAUGHTER. t he nor 4 orc e ha VO W com On bo th E e d 2 g l in st gt i o n n st., at Blackwell, the wife of le — Cl O ift n ,, , i , Ci , t F h ,s e q 2 . lst insi. at Clapham-rise, the wife a ll . the On the 21st inst. ' at York -street, Fort e' wile of George Law, Esq. MARRIED. Co l/1 On the 20th inst., at St. James's, Pi c cadilly , , houeloeti James, third son of Isaac Hind, Esq. of Greenvi'T later in the county of Cumberland, to Sophia, only del , t , Thomas Baker, Esq., of Jernayn-street, St. Jell ies i tele ° ci On the 22d inst., at the National Scotch Church, b Gip 1 A street, Duncan Dewar Hepburn, Esq., of Notting ' Annie, the older daughter of J osiah Harvey, i'lq .. 3 Junction-wharf, Whitefriars. -R e itlf ra f '. On the 21st inst. atWiddington, Essex , th e - --v : of ' E. Fowler, of Saffron Walden, to Susan, Townsend, Esq., of Widdington. D I E D. Willi 0 I li On the 18th inst., at Merton -house, Brighton, . 0, Flnlme Bodley, Esq., M.D., aged 75. n Fi e On the 21st inst., at 89, Jermyn-street, Mr. Joh v , aged 43. G e orge iii , On the 18th inst., at Biarritz, near Bayonne, daughtex Anderson, formerly of the 72d Highlandeis, and son o H.On Anthederson, Esq. W : d e, 0 E 18th inst., at Brighton, J. W. tonshir Wobo C oun ty Court Judge, of Brackl e y , Northamp 41. t if On the 21st inst. at 67, G r eat Portland-stree t Church, Esq., aged 7 9. oo (i e j 00 LONDON : Printed and Published b y KURD ' A f of No. 11 2 , Stran d, Printer, at The Sun Waco, 1 4. " . t r Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, ija the wa n • Middlesex, Saturday, June `.3, 160. ;Il k *