The Sun. — London, England, 1834-02-26 00:00:00

I 1 1 had I la r end (und er w h ose government, he would remark, there "ad been more prosecutions against the press than under any P o e , e ,.? e ding one) being removed - from that office. He (Mr. : "nn ell), therefore, thought at the time that the chances ine::e_ against government subjecting that publication to prose... 444 . He had already stated to the house the composition ° f the jury that had tried it. There was his (Mr. O'Connell's) 1 ertried sittry of his personal enemies--(Hear, hear)—tried b y a furs, ev e - Tn - ' rY man of Whom had been all their lives opposed ttha e l le - st — r es (Rear.) The jury was selectedfrom the panel after Who struck P t ec table men had b ee n s truck off it. The individual jury on th i s occasion was, be it remembered, ahofficer of t he he Crown, removable at pleasure. Who was the , 'eer that struck the grand panel from which that jury had 4 be en , h n D "'"' e n ? The high sheriff of the city of Dublin. Now,. ine if tt , le men must know that no man could be high sheriff pr n t ,„' ; `, el tY of Dublin who did not pledge himself to uncom. n,,,..-"s'ng opposition to his catholic countrymen. In the 207 ""'es on the grand panel, there were to be found only three ratholies that exist • Now, when the catholic wealth and respectability repr esent ed in Dublin were taken into account, was that a fair s itit h tion of it ? There was a large host of corporators and , e . Pan l—rnany of them had been discharged as insolvents, hen. g ent i" a q of them had been bankrupts. If, as the right cal. 1 etd o eM aa had told them, the publication in question was " "ed to disturbance he (Mr. O'Con. nen, Promote sedition and . 9 orri te wa s . not the person that would have written . it. He had 1 on th e n lt,--Certainly not under any strong feelings of delicacy l 1.. subject to which it referred, for he had no right to feel neat tl , ha tg o i: e had written that letter in the conscientiou f s l d t is ;t ! l ie th e n, ,L_ duty which he owed to his country. He e de `"" Madness of slavery on hini, and, he had said so. t . felt di„ that that house in passing the Coercion Bill—in ' t ' o e n '' st ii"g . a Measure that deprived Ireland of the benefits of the 4 1 ii-, ° ,, t1°11 ' , Pon the tittle-tattle of the right . hon. gentleman, theni the he'n'ti statements adduced by him without his allowing h r eit, h e e fi t s of a committee to investigate and refutet them—he the mer e I,;rePeated, that the house, in taking every thing u a eh an hit sole hi 'd of the right hon. gentleman, and passing . s t o h ei as iceasure had perpetrated a gross and crying injustice m emb er He (Mr. O'Connell) should not deserve to . b e e na a l geve,,, °I that house, or a subject of a constant.' eA .lnent •. feel highly indignant at such ~Altie t , if he did not ~ en, • He would now appeal to every English t gen vielia, ' who valued the liberties of his country, . o d sa e y 'ilth s wtai ld be his feelings, if an Irish parliament, with vfer .lmglan°,,f,..tt Co mposed of Irishmen, had passed such . . a law t he p as :, `---(riear ) Would not his blood boil within him at and ZR oi Su it easure ? He (Mr. O'Connell) wrote, It ~:"a'lled that letter under a full conviction of its truth. first psil;!bliThed in both countries. It was said that it was bas 50 4 r, 1 , 1t ,! (1 in England, but such was not the fact. "as sure tha t he had not taken that precaution, for . of th e ish a e l'iltili e . th at no man would have dreamt of prosecuting such Wa s i a t t i ! ,, " i 4 England. It was first published in Ireland. tae,, c,'"st, then, when it was prosecuted there, that the very s ary 0.1 - e Ns ed to him have been put upon jury—t of th e n ante of whom should were violent opponents the of the policy 'e rY : esel 't government, selected for that jury—ht had 'eat a de,,,! it° , oPposed them in were the elections, and who now the kv,e, P.(ation over here to endeavour to obtain *ora l el ill aehe g'' r a re,erSai of their order for the dismissal of Co . on a. tine th r t ii the commission of the peace ? Did . tlieynn i 4 tau a a t - t o e ir carrying the Coercion Bill—that their indulging t heta or s gainst of Ireland, tende . d to convince L a iint t • the benefitand utility of the connexion of the i., -- i tta 'es ?,, Its own opinion was, that if those . who . wished ad '‘ce t'ot°'"e c onnexion had not done their duty in giving ! ' '' t be t eople of Ireland, they (that house) would at pre 4rit). a dreamng them to separation. They might have a t m le a ; 4,0111:H1st this motion, as no doubt they would —ba be 'atis4 d t S.4l3pose that by such a decision the public would ad (t 'gra eee vil th a verdict discreditable to the governm f en in se -oerai ef `ni to the administration ofjustice.—(Cheers ro kr , r , th e Irish members ) It 'n n . -`4NLEY I ree with the hon. and learned gen . tie i 1 1 ii.ut-ciciPP,tlssiate.L t h h e e i m sa e n mb a i e i g l r .n fo sed r Drogheda , that Mr. Barrett is an man, but by whom has he been r, ',., Net by the government—(cheers)—but by those — h et . i°,,:hs'?="TNEL L was here heard to say to those around him, k r e .„'" alone." kr, ~. [ AXLE . to ~ Y (with great vehemence)—l presume that I k r. n, let alone" in this house—(lmmense cheers.) '1 e t i t attler e ., ° , ) NlsT ELL--I rise to order.—(Loud cries of " Or t);( the I,jkIeTLEY.--1 say, Sir, that the disorderly interruption a ivhi -ri • and learned gentleman is not becoming the house si t ~....(001 that bon. and learned gentleman has the honour to elu l i t r h eat Che ering ) I say that when I am discharging my sPeak i tl n - -e face of the house , and the country, and when I am toti nt _ g before the hon. and learned gentleman and the vo rY, as 1 t rust ' 4 b , I shall always speak, without fear or hesita le ' Imre is ar s face, I need not the permission of the hon. and h e /b ed l t Titte ni an, nor his audible exclamation that I should I Ina.. e _ a ° ne," to obtain a hearing for any observations which N1;: :° --- n , sider it MY duty to make.—(Cheers.) order•;,,l) C,CINELL—I rise, Sir, to order. If I am out of t b ac. in :rat t „ f , - arn about to state, you, Sir, will at once . correc t ight h o r n. - '`' explain the reason of the observation which the t o two rae g m eritt en , an ~ .ttributed to me. It was addressed 'Peaking t o e— near me. In consequence of both of them to th e _ .° eat r n the same time, I was obliged to raise my voice Iri s h Z: mi s , aY, Let him alone."—(" Hear, hear," from several If I used a e", and ironical cheers from the rest of the house.) man to statn3: hlaatddaressed • to I call other expression, I call on the right hon. gentle on him toe stt.atelfw tended as a private communicatioannyi observation him, . kid, from the cause I have two was solely in oice in order to enable them to -0 tw o gentlemen near me ; r4 Y Y • • tl i ll e t e,in S ha T ena A r N a L ud E . Ir a 1 - — au ' g f hearl was obliged to raise ht.h)e house is satisfied m % sure I am.— Ng I have heard the hon. and learned k the in his address to the house, with patience. I only of .., e gentlemen opposite to extend to me a similar degree adeiPratienee for the few word-, which I shalt have occasion to ill, : I to the house. I say again, Sir, that Mr. Barrett is . an . not '' , M an,— but I say again that if he has been i . ll-used th at os i e s Ivii -Y his Nlajestv's government.—(Cheers.) It isby follow 41, ', All] • " ~leir alvare of the legal consequences that would full acts leave him to suffer cheers) —who, them—(lncreased cheers , 1 e°l ' s . hon. and learned gentleman was, that a verd ict c)ous as the . lat'on of the law, leaves t he On °t. a jury awaited such a vio i . ' 4 011 ' • • h t redicament from which one Wor d „, cuate publisher in t a p . ld have re hi, "L that avowal he has made to-night wou . lieved v ' , While he sagaciously secures himself from sharing that ' , .. " (6 a hee of the law which he had himself originally provoked. s tight cheering.) The hon. and learned gentleman has this 4, 4 " i Proved that he clearly anticipated the punishment which Is e i i t ad Nlr. Barrett, for he has endeavoured to makethe house h i _ e re that the nature of the tribunal before which he was 4 : t. was such that he could not possibly escape, and yet, with a p‘s t eristic prudence, he has allowed Mr. Barrett to undergo 16 , 4 2 ishment from which b • ply "ving the notice he has here to fight " ' y sim- - gi l' h r of the ette t, „ . _ - I am the author and pub is e an..., lie would have saved him.—(Hear, hear.) Mr . . is h 3 ,_ t I repeat, has certainly been an ill.used man, but it 41,4,2 e honnUrable and learned gentleman that he has been tleal;',' (Loud cheers.) The honourable and learned gen tegrets lelogises for his want of caution in this case ; he li esiti oa fir at he had not sufficient caution to have this pub- Nin ry e at rn ade in England. I will ask the house and the \ :, l , i ieh the ow that another man is suffbring in prison for that 9 the bet '• and learned has done, whether, of le accusations gentleman . h hon and , ar ned t oo l "8 that may be brougbt against t e • -a ailon i an ian, he can be justly upbraided with a want of tiernark tellsn this case „_. ?—(Cheers.) The hon. and learned gen earPerators 48 Log this case came for trial before a jury of va Ys oppcLat'd adds—" You know that they have been al-, ;arlioratet;'` tome" Why did he not add, that they were I.: the glori n „ Whar n he had, by joining with them in pledging -, th e b _ ", and immortal memory," thought to conciliate ' h eer, e 7 e s i t and lowest of political purposes ?—(lmmense Rett e on bet wee n ko w nothing of the negotiations that may have all thn him and other parties ; I have felt it my duty itt Sps i h u es t to watch the hon. and learned gentleman in all his not de em hi' Private political intrigues of this description 1 itl erean it necessary to mind. The hon. and /earned th at i rYB that the libel was not published in England first, .. 9 fir st . was latbash in both countries . I now learn for hb ei ti ttle f . i. • ed man that the • , thd u ot a ' eon the hon. and learned gentle . , . , ~lno,c e. , P,PEa t hous first in England, for I really . be t l e ea up to h i i v s cOuntry. n : p i r il e j 4ns , st'atte first appearance had been in with such an ablic:iioon on inground. s why the government, with ution for the ti ? , herte my , th ` s is li i b n e d l ,.did not insbtu 1n E ngland. We felt that its Publics 'aischi so utterly insignificant and destitute of the power ,11 the ef---thas it was so.nie making of any impression Pap er ( al til lnd s „the People incapable England, and that owing to the 141 selis e 7'r ue Su • ° and learned member 'CA -eted .. l's) which the hon. • t reiti 44 14 _°,i- , the vehicle for its publication being of have been so ex anti ,! I li' sti,,,,:l.r.culation, its diffusion .must far prosecuting it, Itaiiilasattie"'eiZtlttihere was . no . nec . essit a y prosecution for libel never oth W taald oni,..ence of . instituting that note which it would sid e of er w ise ,_ . : e ne tnbrusl; it into But on , the other oia,, the„ w a ,,,,,"_ attained in this country . . There, as every (~,I so ows , t i - s the case was widely different. , -, e '"Y, which' influence, I say most unfortunately for the i n Nssion. a" the hon, and learned gentleman possesses over utt;" co - feelin I rendered ths Publma , cips tati „ . gs of the peop ~ . 4, unr aoefase ,•,,,,..1 mno . cuous as it was in England, pregnant h there was no , cf 'pi): ,,noon hon. in Ireland. For tho a u n g was the author 10t Y 41: 81 " °f the on. and learned . gentleman 44 40 n, . 4 in 4,4 _ letter in question, yet . it was known by rho, . 1 4 it pr ,, 44, 1 who read it that the advice and the sug ,k to ictate, "teeded from the hop. 40 iganseci geptleulaP, hav e ere as im lien b ed in Ireland as he would ioar, i lea th eir , 0 , P . i y o ey 'eased t t . .) 4., "eYed in this house and in this country — I ~., ' a have o ,' says that the trial took place shortly after , n , , - ;alllai n of l' connexion with that country, and he appe t a t 7 4 , 1 - 0 4Tellt that've delay. Now it was not the fault o . f e that :' k4°W ' be n tt at trial Was not brought to a speedy issue. ly o f Z '' i111t,, ,d , er than the hon. and learned gentleman ;al "thigin 'Me" W asthe defendant in the quibbl 8 the " .. thrown by id those quibble w ag res„ "1 " t 4 trial, 'and that eyery possible 'trial of aee'n'ed tCd to b y the h e n . an d learned gentleman it. ~ with him i th e in order to postpone teror nent 4 . ...ne h en n e cas t the istinetly Wi ,.and learned gentleman c . harges the i t i l 3 urpo s ,.. of eel ; ' having packed the jury in this case l'eN3ll beg hit Pardoti vietia g him, — no, - not for convicting ( A whom h -e left t ,---for the purpose of convicting the 5h0 w ... 8 aria e h p __ . 0 b e ar the punishment -of his faults.— in en ," that n o ne ; n l L) Now , My right. hon. friend has clearly , I.a There were c h . a!ge is sustainable against the Govern- P rt of the cro originally 207 names on the panel. On list wn not a s' pa rt . , Was r edue __, . Ingle name was objected to until , 4 8 , ruc k 0 „ a ends by 160, leaving only 48. Then each v,-„,_,_ reqUisite nu te h m er e alternately, in order to reduce the list ,)ioner that an the It was done precisely in the same host, jUst as the h ion c ommittee is selected in this house. on• and learnetl gentleman complains that some names that he wished to retain on the list were struck off,, might an election agent complain, and with just as much right, that some names he wished to have on a committee up stairs had beei; struck off. No one would think of making such a complaint, still less would any gentleman come down to this house, and endeavour for such a reason to cast a stain upon a committeeup stairs, asserting that it would not fairly and ho nestly investigate the subject to come before it. Twelve names in this case were struck off by each party, in order to reduce the list to twenty-four, and then because some names that he wished to retain were struck off, the learned gentleman makes that circumstance a ground for attacking the conduct of the government. and ina;.eaching the verdict of the jury. Now, I ask the House of Commons in its fairness—l ask the people of England in their candour—to say whether this is an accusation that deserves, I will not say to be con=i,tered, but even to be entertained for a moment ?—,Clie2rs.) The hon. and learned gentleman says that this letter was no libel, and he tells us that he wrote it in the positive discharge of a conscientious duty. The point as to libel or no libel was cautiously and calmly con. sidered by the law officers of the crown, not only in Ireland but in England. The case was brought under their deliberate con sideration. They were desired to look at it in all its bearings, with an intimation not to select for prosecution anything with regard to which there would be the slightest doubt as to the verdict of a jury. With these instructions this letter was re ferred to the law officers of the crown for their consideration, and it was the opinion of every one of those so consulted that a grosser or more disgraceful libel never polluted the pages of the public press. The hon. and learned gentleman says that no honest man would convict for this publication as a libel. He admits, however, that there were certain passages rather harsh in it—those passages, I suppose, in which he describes this house, though I recollect his having employed still less courteous terms in painting us on another occasion.—(A laugh.) He tells the people of Ireland in this letter that this house is animated with an intense hatred to Ireland,—that England and Englishmen entertain a deadly hostility to that country, and that it was idle to expect justice from such a Parliament. To be sure he introduces the usual advice about peace and obe dience to the law and good order, and all that sort of thing, which so frequently in the learned gentleman's addresses ac. companies the most exciting provocatives to mischief. He calls upon " his good friends," his " sweet friends," and begs them not to be stirred up— " To such a sudden flood of mutiny."—(Cheers.) He tells them to bear with the yoke, though it galls them to the neck—to submit to the injustice, though it be crying and appa rent—to bear with the oppression, though it is most grievous and burdensome, but in no case to violate the law.—(Hear, hear.) Such are the recommendations, and so accompanied, which the hon. gentleman gives to his countrymen in this let ter—recommendations which he has so often addressed to them with similar accompaniments. Now, I put it to any man of common sense in the country - whether he believes that the object of such a pi oduction Wits to enforce obedience to the law er to the Government?—(Loud cheers.) The right hon. gentleman then proceeded to say that it was said that this letter was well calculated to inculcate obedience to the laws, though it might be harsh in some of its terms, but he (Mr. Stanley) hesitated not to say, that no man—no honest man, could lay his hand upon his heart, and deny that it was a libel.—(Hear, hear.) The hon. and learned gentleman had also complained of the jury, and particularly that upon it were two Scotchmen,—men who it was urged were unconnected with the country, but who, he (Mr. Stanley) must add, were not imbued with Irish prejudices—(Hear, hear) — to the exclusion of two Roman Catholics; and the hon. and learned gentleman had asked the house whether it could con. ceive so gross a case of injustice, so gross an instance of par tiality, or so complete a violation of every fair principle, as to have on the jury two Scotch Presbyterians, without one Roman Catholic to try him, Mr. Daniel O'Connell—no, he (Mr. Stan ley) begged pardon—to try Mr. Barrett for this libellous pub lication.—(Cheers and laughter.) In the first instance, the hon. and learned gentleman, in November last, while endea vouring before the court to obtain a postponement of the trial, had then also complained of the manner in which the jury had been selected; and the question had been solemnly argued be fore the Court of King's Bench, and the objection raised was set aside by the Court, on the ground that no legal objection had been offered,—that the charge of partiality, made merely on belief and suggestion on the part of the hon. and learned gentle man, was completely refuted, and that on the affidavits before the Court the Crown solicitor stood fully exculpated. Such, in common with the full bench, was the decision of the learned Chief Justice, on whom the hon. and learned member for Dub lin had passed so glowing an eulogium the other day, and ad mitted tha against that learned individual no exception could be taken. The hon. and learned member for Dublin had said that no honest man could have found the publication in ques tion to have been a libel. He (Mr. Stanley) must, however, remind the house that the Court upon the trial pronounced no opinion upon the publication, but left it to the jury to draw their own inference ; but when the question as to the matter being a libel or not was raised before the full bench, and when it became the duty of the Court to pronounce an opinion upon it, that opinion, without a doubt in the mind of any one mem ber of the court, was, that not only was the publication a libel, but also that they concurred fully in the verdict of the jury.— (Hear, hear.) Nay, he (Mr. Stanley) was convinced that a very few passages of the publication (with which he most as suredly should not now trouble the house) 'would on perusal satisfy every unbiassed and impartial mind that the jury and th• Court had come to a just and proper conclusion, and that the letter in question was, as alleged in the information, a wicked and seditious libel—calculated to produce the mischievous effects which wese attributed to it. Whatever, however, was the character of the publication, the hon. and learned gentle man had avowed himself the author, but had allowed another individual to bear the brunt; and though he had declaimed against the unfairness of the trial, he (Mr. Stanley) thought it did not mark much of generosity in the hon. and learned gen tleman's permitting another person to bear the responsibility. (Hear, hear.) As to the fairness of the trial, he would add that, on the part of the Crown, not a single objection had been taken on striking the jury to any name upon the panel, whilst on the part of the defendant 160 names were objected to before the list of 48 jurors was completed. Notwithstanding the de claration of the hon. and learned gentleman that no honest man could concur in the opinion that the publication was libellous in its character, he (Mr: Stanley) had shown to the house that not only the law officers of the Crown in Ireland, but also in England, the jury who had tried the case and the judges who had passed sentence, all agreed in the opinion that no man could read the letter and not feel that it was a wicked and se ditious libel. He himself had no doubt upon the subject— nay, the only doubt he entertained was, whether the party now suffering was the individual who really ought to suffer for its publication.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. SHELL—The question was not so. The question was not whether Mr. Barrett was suffering justly or unjustly, but whether the jury was packed or not.—(Oh, oh, oh I) The question was not to be decided by theenthusiastic gesticulations of hon. gentlemen, but by facts.—(Hear, hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman, the secretary for the colonies, had com menced with an attack on the hon. and learned member for Dublin, and with that attack he had concluded. He said Mr. Barrett was ill-used. True, he had been ill-used, but by whom ? Not by the hon. member, but by the government.— (Hear, hear.) The statute of 1815 was dug up from its obli vion, to be a formidable engine of persecution. The noble lord (Althorp) had, with a candour which reflected the highest credit, and was worthy of him, stated, that the secretary for Ireland had written to the Stamp-office, three weeks alter the passing of the sentence, respecting it. Thus a statute was awakened from its dormancy, to persecute and prostrate. Mr. Barrett was an ill-used man ; he admitted it ; but he was Mused and persecuted by the authorities of the state. Much had been said about the hon. and learned member for Dublin leaving another to bear the brunt of his battle. Now he (Mr. Sheil) had the honour of being counsel for Mr. Barrett, and he felt himself called upon to state, that the individual whose name was appended to the letter had tendered himself three times to stand in his shoes if such was deemed necessary. —(Hear.) He gave credence to the right bon. secretary's in tentions to do justice towards Ireland, but he questioned his capability, and it was not to him, but to some other members of the cabinet, that he looked for any good that might be done towards his country. The hon. and learned member then cited a case which occurred in 1822, in which no catholic was allowed to be on a jury, and likewise two cases which occurred in 1832, in which there was not a single catholic a juryman in either. It was also alleged, as the right hon. secre tary wellknew, that in a number of trials which had taken place with respect to tithes, the juries were exclusively composed of Protestants, He begged to call the attention of the house to two trials which took place in 1833—the one was the King v. Welsh, and the other the King v. Barrett. In the first of these cases there was not more than one Catholic on the jury, and there was not one single Catholic in the case of the King v. Barrett. He would now go back to facts, and he would assert, without fear of contradiction, that in this case the jury had been packed. In the list of 48 jurymen there were only four Roman Catholics, the truth of which the Secretary for the Colonies had not denied. The pannel was originally composed of 704 jurymeni . the majority of whom were Roman Catholics ; and it had been asserted that the officer of the Crown went through 207 of those names, and, according to the statement of the right hon. gentleman opposite, no objection had been started to them on the part of the Crown. He begged the attention of the house to this cardinal incident of the case ; namely, that they found no objection, and that the clerk of the Crown selected his list of 48 names. The right hon. secretary had said, with great plausibility, that the solicitor of the Crown did not object to the clerk's list. Of course not ; there was a reason for that. The right hon. gentleman had said that the clerk had stopped at the 207th name ; but if he had gone on further, he would have found immediately after on the list ten Roman Catholics. There was.the list in his hand, and it would be seen, upon examining it, that the first names were those of members of parliament, aldermen and common council of . Dublin. This was a proof that perspns were placed on the list according to their rank. There was the pannel before them, and if they dared carry it before a corn. mittee of inquiry, all his assertions about it would be found to be correct. He said that the panel was in the hands of the right hon. gentleman opposite, and the right hon. gentleman would see that after the 207th name, the names of several Ro man Catholics followed. The right hon. gentleman would see that the sheriff of the city of Dublin had framed, as he before stated, the list according to civic rank, and it was notorious that the clerk of the 'crown took jurymen from that Bit accoril. ing to his orders from the castle. Even the 48 jurymen that were chosen went through a species of accommodating filtra tion on the part of crown, since even that portion of the list was sent to the solicitor of the crown in order that it might receive his approbation. But the truth was, that the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Littleton) was more conversant with the potteries than the situation of Ireland. What did the clerk of the crown do afterwards ? Why, he took the list of 48, and finding on it the names of Roman Catholics, he struck them out. What objections had the clerk of the crown to those names ? He could have none—save that they were Catholics_ since one of the persons struck out was a bank director, and one of the Catholic gentlemen who had signed the resolution against the repeal of the union. It was a strange inconsis. tency on the part of the government, to show themselves at one time the prosecutors of a judge before a British parlia ment, and at another time, as in the present instance, the de fenders of the packers of juries. Lord ALTHORP held in his hand the affidavit of Mr. Kemmis, which had been read in Court, in order to show that what had been said about the mode of selecting the jury was not correct. He alluded to this as it was the oath of Mr. Kemmis as to what took place relative to this matter, and when the affidavit was submitted to the judge, he decided upon it as the hon. and learned gentleman had stated. The noble lord then read certain portions of the affidavit, by which it ap peared that the deponent swore that he first attended for the purpose of striking a jury list—they then adjourned, and on the last day deponent again attended, when forty-eight jurors were selected. He was asked whether he would make any objections, and deponent said that he would not make any objet. tion to any of the persons called, although, on the part of tra verser, numerous objections were made, so that 207 names were called before the officer pricked a single name ; and depo_ nest further said, that all those objections were not valid, or legal, yet they were yielded to. Now, continued the noble lord, if anything could be a proof of the mode of selecting this jury, this affidavit must be one. Must it not be admitted as a correct statement ? It was made on an affidavit, read in the court, and liable, if it contained false statements, to the penal ties of that court. It appeared to him from this statement, that the mode pursued could not be called anything like packing a jury. Besides, the persons accused of packing this jury made no objections to the names on the list, whilst the opposite party, as pretty clearly appeared, did make several objections. As he knew of his own knowledge the facts but imperfectly, he thought it right to read the affidavit to the house. Mr. O'CONNELL—But the affidavit does not say that the objections were yielded to. Lord ALTHORP again read that part of the affidavit which says " the objections were not valid and legal, yet the names were not retained." Does the hon. and learned member say they were retained ? Mr. O'CONNELL—I do; I say they were retained. Lord ALTHORP recommended reading the affidavit, down to the words " yielded to." The noble lord was prevented from proceeding further by several exclamations on the part of the hon. members, that they were satisfied, according to the affidavit, that the names objected to by the traverser were not retained. Mr. ROEBUCK was desirous of putting one question on this matter to the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Littleton) —namely, whether the 48 jurymen chosen were selected from within the first 207 names on the list, without any objection on the part of the accused ? If such was the fact, he consi. dered that the present case fell to the ground. Mr. LITTLETON distinctly understood that such was the case. Mr. HUME said a great deal of personality had been made use of in the course of the debate, instead of following up and explaining the real question. It really seemed as if hon. gen tlemen opposite wished to blink the question altogether. The true question was, had justice been fairly done ? He confessed that it appeared to him that it had not, since there was not one Catholic on the jury, while it seemed that there was a majority of Catholics on the list, . Mr. LITTLETON begged to say, in way of explanation,that it was clear that the traverser's attorney went on objecting until he had obtained 48 names, with which he was satisfied. If he wished to object to 100 names more, he would not have been stopped. Mr. FERGUS O'CONNOR agreed with the hon. member for Middlesex, that the right hon. secretary for the colonies had rather indulged in personality, and that he had wandered away from the question altogether. The shouts of applause with which the right hon. gentleman's speech was received were monstrous, since it did not contain one particle of argu ment. The hon. member maintained that in the present case a fair jury had not been given, and he defied the opposite party to prove the contrary. The hon. member concluded by moving (as was understood), by way of amendment, that the matter be referred to a committee of inquiry. On the question being put, Mr. STANLEY rose to offer his most strenuous objections to the amendment. He opposed it for this reason—the hon. member who proposed the original resolution did so, and came down to the house for thepurpose of obtaining a vote of censure to be passed on the Government ; but finding his case falling through his hands, the present amendment was substituted. — (No, no, from the Irish members.) Why, then (retorted the right hon. secretary with much vivacity), don't you adhere to it—don't you follow up your original motion? Yqu are now, then, it seems, steering a middle course—you abandon your first resolution, and you call for a committee of inquiry. If you move for a vote of censure on the present government, I, as a member of that government, am prepared and willing to meet your motion, but I strongly object to your amendment. — (Cheers.) Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr. MORE O'FERIULL rose at the same time; though there were loud cries for the latter hon. member, he gave way, and Mr. O'CONNELL said, there had been a great deal of flip pancy of assertion during the debate, and a greater flippancy on the part of the right hon. secretary,.in ihe few words he said for the purpose of avoiding inquiry. No reliance was to be placed on what was gleaned from Kemmis's affidavit. Why, that very man was an accused party in the transaction, and it was not true to assert that, if Mr. Barrett's attorney had ob jetted to any of the 48 jurors, he would not have been allowed to be upon the jury. He should like to know whether those who defended the composition of this jury had pointed ourany persons on it by whose characters they would stand or fall. For his own part he had pointed out two Scotchmen ; but the right hon. secretary opposite, the admirable debater as he was called that evening, taunted him with pointing out those two persons merely because they were Scotsmen. Now, it was not for that reason, it was because one of these Scotsmen was a great bigot and a tory, and had belonged to the Kildare-street society, and to societies of a like description all his life; the other Scots man was a tory, though he was not so great a bigot as the first. It was for these reasons that he pointed out, as objectionable to be on a jury, these two Scotsmen. The right. hon. gentleman had alluded to another question, and taunted him (Mr. O'Con nell) with his conduct towards Mr. Barrett. Now, the truth was, that he was the first, after he heard of a prosecution about to be commenced, to write to Mr. Barrett, telling him to sub stitute him (Mr. O'Connell) at once in his place, and stating to Mr. Barrett that his friendship for him would not at all be diminished by such substitution. Mr. Barrett's answer was, that he would deliberate. He ( Mr. O'Connell) wrote a second time, and told Mr. Barrett that the only question to consider was, which of the two was to be prosecuted. Mr. Barrett, in answer to this letter, wrote that his mind was made up ; that the newspaper in question was his property, and thatthat property had been increased by his (Mr. O'Connell's) writing in it. Mr. Barrett, in this letter, moreover added, "It they catch you they will be sure to convict you, and send you to gaol for three years, and Ireland can't allbrd that.—(Laughter.) Therefore I'll substitute myself for you, and go to gaol." Yet, after all that, he (Mr. O'Connell) was taunted by the tight hon. gentleman with /king guilty of libel—though he (Mr. O'C.) could state that there was no libel in the letter which a man feeling for his country, and seeing the oppression it suf fered, would pronounce as such. He (Mr. O'C.) did not mean to say, however, that it was not a libel according to the present state of the law.—(Hear, hear.) The right hon. gentleman was always pleased to make him (Mr. O'C.) his victim in that house; the right hon. gentleman spared every one elsebut him alone. But he would tell the right hon. gentleman that no one spoke words more like calumny than those used by him towai him (Mr. O'Connell) within the walls of the house. He did not exactly know what reason the right hon. gentleman had for his hostility, but hebelieved he could guess it.—(Hear, hear.) With regard to the statements made by the right hon. gentle man as having been made by him, he denied their truth. :this he would say, that to the present moment the right honourable gentleman had pursued him (Mr. O'Connell) or. every occasion, in and out of the house, with the most unrelenting, bitter, and persevering hostility—(Hear, hear)—an hostility, he was sorry to say, which was too much shared by the right hon. gentle. man's colleagues—by whose (Mr. Stanley's) opinions they were but too much led.—(Hear, hear, hear.) With regard to the packing of the jury, and the assertion made that Mr. Barrett might have objected to more if he had thought proper, he could say that he had never addressed twelve men more—less deter. mined to do justice than the twelve men who formed that jury. With respect to Mr. Long—his conduct, the right hon. gentle. man admitted, he was obliged to watch. Mr. STANLEY had only said that he was often obliged to watch him in his political career. Mr. O'CONNELL had thought that more was said. But the impression was so strong in Dublin against the fairness of the jury, that if any person were to say that it was a fair jury, he would be laughed at—(Hear, hear.) He (Mr. O'Connell) admitted that there were five or six fair, honest, and upright men upon the panne'. He knew they would content them. selves with appealing to the passions of the house.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped, however, tliey would consider of it. It was a qui stion of importance. It was a question as to the packing of a jury, and he warned the Government that, by reflising an inquiry into it, they led the public into the foregone conclusion, that they already knew what would be the result, and dreaded it.—(Hear, hear.) As to the letter itself, he would not say that some passages in it, taken separately, might not be con. *anted into a libel, but he was convinced that, taking it io gether, and as a whole, no honest man would pronounce it to be one.—(Hear.) Mr. MORE O'FERRA4 L was in ccknsciensle convinced, that if the election of the jury had been by ballot, and that the six gentlemen whose rejection was complained of had been members of the jury, that circumstance would in no measure alter the verdict of the jury.—(Hear, hear.) He could not, however, but admit, that jurors in Ireland were not generally fairly chosen.—(Hear, hear.) In Queen's County, for instance, Catholics were universally rejected.—(Hear, hear.) He re. gretted the temper in which the motion had been received, and thought that the question shoidd be decided' Its own merits, and without regard to party feeling.=(Hear, hear.) Mr. 'A GLIONBY Said,that in the variety of assertions which had been Made on both sides, it was impossible to divine what the real state of the case was. He therefore thought it advis able that a committee should be appointed.—(Hear, hear.) ,ar, rested th e i r def ence on th e The governmcnt, app affidavit of a person, Mr. Kemmis, who was an officer of the crown, and might, if he had done wrong in'the exercise of his functions, be put upon his trial. The list of names from which the pannel of forty.eight were selected was very large, containing 207, and the crown had an unlimited discretionary power of objecting to names.—(No, no.) Very well, then, if this was contradicted, here was a fact that ought to be inquired into.—(Hear.) He thought it rather extraordinary, that out of so large a number only seven should be Catholics. He was himself unconnected with Ireland, and also with the other (the ministerial) side of the house, and, for his own part, he wished for an inquiry. If it were denied, the blame would rest on the shoulders of those who refused their assent.—(Hear.) Mr. LAMBERT said, that the question was, not whether the practice of excluding Catholics from juries had ever pre vailed in Ireland, but whether it had been done in the present case ?(Hear, hear.) In the absence of facts to guide him, he had to judge from the motives that might have influenced the government, and he was at a loss to conceive how, if the verdict was to be favourable to the government, it was that the officer of the Crown should have selected Orangemen.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) If he had this object in view, he must have made a great blunder. Now, it was well known, that so far from there being a previous determination to bring in Mr. Barrett guilty, great hesi tation existed among the jury in consequence of the eloquent speech—he was quite ready to do the hon. and learned member the justice to acknowledge that it was an eloquent speech —made on that occasion by the hon. and learned gentleman as to the nature of the verdict; but the libel was so strong, so plain, so evident, that they could not avoid giving the verdict they delivered.—(Hear.) He was himself a most ►mpartial judge of the business, for he knew nothing of the details but from what had been brought before the house that night.—(Hear, and a laugh.) Government, in his opinion, were fully justified in instituting a prosecution against the publisher of the libel, and he assured the house that the people of Ireland were not so demoralized as to besatisfied with nothing but seditious publications, that were made the conve nient vehicles of party malice and private slander ; and lie felt that unless some check was given to the impulses caused by the circulation of these prints, the country would be ruffianized. He had no hostility to the periodical press, and he had given in his own person an opportunity for hon. members to judge of his sincerity. For the last twelve months, there was no insult too great, no calumny too gross, to be heaped upon him, and this not on private grounds, but because he presumed to differ with a certain par, yin Ireland. But there was a limit to pa tience and forbearance, and he trusted that hon. members would remember that the spring, when too heavily pressed, must bend. Mr. LYNCH rose amidst cries of " Question." The hon. member, who was very indistinctly heard, was understood to say that the way in which the forty-eight jurors were reduced to twelve was for each party to strike off one. The solicitor for the crown had struck off the list four Catholics and two un exceptionable Protestants. Mr. LITTLETON admitted there was an error in the mode of selecting that jUI y, but it was an error on the side of libe rality, not of injustice. It appeared from an affidavit made in a court of justice by Mr. Kemmis, the solicitor for the crown, that after he and the attorney for the traverser had reduced the list of 48 names to 24, the attorney for the traverser objected to Mr. Stewart Blacker, and the deponent (Mr. Kemmis) con sented to remove his name, and place that of Mr. Robert Arm. strong in its stead.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. BARRON acquitted the government of all intention of acting unjustly in the trial, but stated, that inasmuch as the belief that injustice had been done prevailed in Ireland, it would be in his opinion advisable to grant the committee of inquiry.. Mr. WYNN said he could not give his support either to the first motion or to the amendment. If the house passed the resolution, it would be, in fact, prejudging the case, and (hat without inquiry; if they adopted the amendment, they would be committing the absurdity of inquiring why one man and another man holding particular political opinions were on a list of jurors, when in fact those persons were not allowed any choice in the matter. Lord ALTHORP said he should vote against the amend. ment in the first instance, and then endeavonr to have the re solution negatived When a motion which was virtually a vote of censure on the Government was proposed, he considered that they had a right to press forthwith for a decision upon it, ay or no. The only question before the house was touching the truth of the allegations put forth. If they believed the affidavit of Mr. Kemmis, they must see that there was no ground for even a suspicion of misconduct. After some observations from Mr. LALOR, which did not reach the gallery, Mr. O'DWYER rose to reply. He declared that two of the jurors, Messrs. Long and Hynes, were notoriously political par tisans, and had themselves been guilty of uttering libels against the House of Commons at a public meeting; and `with reference to the conduct of the hon. and learned member for Dublin, he read an extract from a letter which he said he had received from Mr. Barrett, in which that gentleman stated that the author of the letter had offered to come forward and be tried in his own person; but that a feeling upon his (Mr. Barrett's) part that Mr. O'Connell had nothing but vindictive punish. ment to expect, and a desire that his services in Parliament might be preserved to his unhappy_ country, induced him to decline this offer. The house divided— For the amendment 28 Against it 132 Majority lO4 The resolution was then (it was understood) negatived with out a division. Ron, at al mltt tent a nd th e lib el this I WI th, o tqlh th in r)1, PhD, h ad aki c i tr er iqd a ga n ee to, eo u th e ti nt l ega a nd e Vel test Vth ( to , ; that Way l ega ,s and the goy ( for 1 114 1 Pecs, (A l sh, to eri the,. t he' Part to tj . • LIBRARY OF THE HOUSE. Sir It. INGLIS moved that a standing committee of'ls mem bers should be appointed, to be renewed at the commencement of each session, to assist the Speaker in the direction of the library, and to whom all matters relating thereto should be re ferred. The motion was agreed to and the committee appointed. On the motion of Sir J. GRAHAM, the Exchequer Receipt Bill was read a second time. The Smuggling Act Amendment Bill was, after a short con versation, in which Captain YORKE and Mr. HUAIE objected to it, and Sir J. GRAHAM and Sir E. CODRINGTON approved of it, read a second time. The committee on the Bankrupts' Estate Bill was postponed till to-morrow (this day). The Transfer of Aids Bill, and the Exchequer-bills Bill, were read a third time and passed. Mr. O'CONNELL brought in a bill to secure the liberty of the press, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on the 12th of March. The Hort'. MEMBER gave notice that on that occasion he should move that the bill be referred to a committee up stairs. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned at half-past one o'clock. COURT CIRCULAR. The King gave audiences yesterday to Earl Grey, Viscount Duncannon, Earl Howe, Lord Lyttleton, Lord Farnborough, the Right Honourable Robert Grant, the Judge Advocate- General, and Sir James Graham. The Duke of Cumberland, the Duke and Duchess of Glou cester, the Princess Sophia, and the Princess Sophia Matilda lunched with their Majesties yesterday. The Duchess of Kent entertained a party at dinner yester day, at Kensington Palace. The Duke of Sussex took his last sitting for the Reform Pic ture on Monday, and Earl Grey on Saturday. At the Queen's Drawing room, on Monday, amongst the company present were M. de Moraes Sarmento, the Portu guese Minister; Duke of Somerset, Countess of Tankerville, Lord Castlereagh, Lady Emily Foley, Lady Brougham, Sir Jeffrey Wyatville, and Mr. Thomas Poynder, Treasurer of Christ's Hospital. Mr. Poynder accompanied the Deputation from Christ's Hospital School. M. de Sarmento, the Portu g,tese Minister, attended the King's Levee on Friday. Mr. Secretary Stanley gave a •grand dinner at his residence in Carlton Gardens, on Monday evening, in honour of her Majesty's birthday, as Secretary of State for the Colonial De partment, to the Governors of Colonies (recently appointed), the Commander of the Forces, the Secretary at War, the Pay master of the Forces, the Judge Advocate General, the Ad jutant General, the Master General of the Ordnance, the Quartermaster General, and the Under Secretaries of the Department. The Duke.of Cumberland, the Duke of Sussex, the Duchess of Kent, the Princess Augusta, and the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, several of the Officers of the King's Household, and a select party dined with their Majesties on Monday even ing, at St. James's Palace. Their Majesties had a concert in the evening. Mr. Masoui performed on the violin a sonata of Mayerbeer's, and several other pieces, playing alternately with the Band. The perform ance commenced with the overture to " Semiramide" (Rossini). The Duchess of Kent and the Princess Victoria walked and drove in Hyde Park yesterday fin' some time. A numerous meeting of Members of the House of Commons was held yesterday at the Foreign-office. The Members were met by Viscount Althorp, Viscount Palmerston, Mr Secretary Stanley, Lord John Russell, Viscount Duncannon, and other Members of the Administration. The Spanish Minister transacted business yesterday at the Foreign Office. Mr. F. Buxton, M.P., and Mr. Burnley, transacted business yesterday at the Colonial Office. FASHIONABLE INTELItICiNCE, AR. 11 :11 7 '44 CIIELTENHAM, . . Lady Vainillig, Gen, Darling, Capt. Laws, R.N., Capt. F. R. Whinyates, Capt. Watts, Capt. Hyde, Capt. Hawkins, Capt. Jones, Rev. M. Williams, Rev. C. Otway, Rev. M. Fry, Rev. T. Frampton, Rev. J. Smith, Rev. A. Alcock, Mr. and Mrs. Groves, Mr. and Mrs. Wihiams, Mr. and Mrs. Edwards . , M. and Mrs. Holland, Mr. and Mrs. Brooke:, Mr. and Mrs, Garner, Mr. and Mrs. Ward, Mr. Steele, Mr. rower, .kr. H. Fowler, Messrs. G. Hart, Crichet l , Elliott; Johnson, Hodgson, Gow, Lousada, Wiiklns, Phipps, Starke, Hall, Barrie, Ditray, Hamilton, ecillingwood, Green, Huddeisfield, Tudor, Roberts, Davy, Holloway, Cooke, Taylor, Giese, Wallis, Loveridge, Halsell, Crowther, Ratnsden, Charleston, Downing, Howell, Thompson, Bourne, Ford, Peri;ins, Merton, Crompton, Holmes, Mrs. Ashton, Mrs. Hardwicke, Mrs. Hallen, Mrs. Robertson, Mrs. Clifton, Mrs. Neeld, 'Mrs. Raymond Barker, Mrs. Tudor, Mrs. Beamish, Mrs. Talbot Crosbin and the Misses Crosble, from Castle Ward, Ireland, Miss Harrison, Miss Day, Miss Newnham, Miss Tudor, Miss Attwood, Miss Baynton, Miss Huntley, Miss Rowland, &c. &c. FASHIONABLE CHANGES.—Major Hodgson Cadogan, and family, and Miss Thornhill, at Farley Lodge—Mrs. and Miss Sadler, for Oxford, &c. &c, FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE. OFFICE of the LORD CHAMBERLAIN to the QUEEN, QUEEN'S HOUSE; ST. JA M ES' FEB. 25, 1834. Notice is hereby given that the Qszeen will hold Drawing Rooms at St. James's Palace on the thfca ing days : March, Thursday, 20th. April, Thursday, 17th. May, Thursday, 15th. May, Wednesday,2Bth, being for the celebration of the King's birth.day. June, Thursday, 19th. WHITEHALL, FEB. 25 An Address to the King against the repeal of the Legislative Union was transmitted by the Mayor of the city of Waterfcrd to the Right Hon. Viscount Melbourne, one of his Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, and by him presented to his Majesty, who was pleased to receive the same very graciously. ST. JAMES'S PALACE, FEB. 21 This day the Count de Mandelsloh, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from the King of Wirtemberg, had an audience of his Majesty to deliver a letter from his Sovereign. QUEEN'S-HOUSE, ST. JAMES'S, FEB. '2l This day the Count de Mandelsloh, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary from the King of Wirtemberg, had an audience of her Majesty to deliver a letter from his Sovereign. ST. JAMES'S PALACE, FEB. 21 By command of the Sovereign, Major-General Sir Hugh Frazer was invested with the Ensigns of a Knight Commander of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath. The King was this day pleased to confer the honour of Knighthood upon Major-General James•Viney, of the Royal Artillery, Companion of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath, and Military Knight Commander of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic Order. The King was this day also pleased to confer the honour of Knighthood upon Major-General James Kearney, late of the 2d Dragoon Guards, Military Knight Commander of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic Order. The King was this day also pleased to confer the honour of Knighthood upon Lieutenant-General Evan Lloyd, of the 17th Lancers, Military Knight Commander of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic Order. The King was this day also pleased to confer the honour of Knighthood upon Lieutenant-General Thomas Gage Mon tresor Military Knight Commander of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic Order. The King was this day also pleased to confer the honour of Knighthood upon Salusbury Pryce Humphreys, Esq., of Bramhall.hall, in the county palatine of Chester, Captain in the Royal Navy, Companion of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath, and Military Knight Commander of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic Order. CROWN-OFFICE, FEB. 25, 1834. MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT PARLIAMENT. BOROUGH OF DuNcsnvAN.—Ebenezer Jacob, Esq., in the room of the - Hon. George Lamb, deceased. BOROUGH OF KENDAL—John Barham, Esq., in the room of James Brougham, Esq., deceased. WHITEHALL, FEB. 18 , The Lord Chancellor has appointed Richard Sothert, of the city of Bath, Gent., to be a Master Extraordinary in the High Court of Chancery. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Surrey. Surrey Regiment of Yeomanry Cavalry. John Booth, Gent., to be Cornet, vice Warren, resigned, Feb. 13. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. THOMAS PAYNE, dealer in horses, Quebec street, Marylebone. BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. GERARD COWELL, cotton-spinner, Salford, Lancashire. BANKRUPTS. JAMES HAYWARD, builder, Queen Ann-street, Port land-place, to surrender March 14, at one, and April 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Wells, Percy-street, Rathbone-place ; Graham, official assignee, Copthall-buildings. THO MAS SHAW, cotton-spinner, Charlsworth, Derby, March 25 and April 8, at ten, at the Commissioner's Rooms, Manchester. Richards and Walker, Lincoln's inn -fields, London; Higginbottom and Buckley, Ashton-under-Lyne, Lancaster. RICHARD HEALE, wholesale grocer, Mincing-lane, March 4 and April 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, official assignee, King's Arms-yard, Coleman-street ; Holt and Gardom. RICHARD ATKINSON, woollen cloth-manufacturer, Huddersfield, March 5 and April 8, at ten, at the George Inn, Huddersfield. Sandau, Old Jewry, London ; Jacomb and Tin. dale, Huddersfield.' GEORGE FOWELL WATTS, money-scriviner, Bath. hampton, Somersetshire, March 6 and April 8, at eleven, at the White Lion Inn, Bath. Williams and Bethell, Lincoln's Inn. fields ; Graves, Bath. GEORGE BETTS, upholsterer, Charles-street, Grosvenor. square, March 7 and April 8, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Crocker and Dixon, King's Arms-yard, Coleman street; Whitmore, Basinghall_street, official assignee. JOHN WHITE and GEORGE WHITE, coach-proprie tors, Kentish-town, March 7 and April 8, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Howell, Hatton-garden ; Cannan, Lothbury, official assignee. MOSES SAMUEL, merchant, Liverpool, March 7 and April 8, at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. Topham and Son, Liverpool ; Adlington, Gregory, and Faulkner, Bed ford-row, London. DIVIDENDS. T. Ingram and T. H. Ingram, fish-factors, Lower Thames. street, March 18—J. Robson, ship-owner, Newcastle.upon. Tyne, March 18—W. Blofield, carpenter, Hosier-lane, Smith. field, March 20—H. Baylis, printer, Johnson's-court, Fleet_ street, March 20—P. Barratt, jeweller, New Bond-street, March 14—K. C. Mackenzie, bill-broker, Finch-lane, Corn hill, March 19—T. Birch, ironmaster, Broseley, Shropshire, March 19—B. B. Hutchinson, victualler, Wappingwall, March 1 19—T. Gooch, linen-draper, Crawford-street, Marylebone, March 18.—G. Remington and A. Remington, cabinet •makers, Oxford street, March 19—J. Brown, merchant, Austin.friars, March 18—W. R. Williams, spirit-merchant, East Retford, Nottinghamshire, March 27—W. Clark, brazier, East Retford, Nottinghamshire, March 27—W. Dickins, sen., plasterer, Northampton, March 20—W. Gerard, boot-maker, Liverpool, March 24—J. Bawden, printer, Devonport, March 20—R. Clark, linen-draper, Newark-upon-Trent, March 24.—E. Frank_ land, draper, York, March 19—R. Batley, merchant, Nor. wich, April 2—A. Denham, tallow.chandler, Chorley, Lan cashire, March 24—R. Blake, rope-manufacturer, St. Mawes, Cornwall, March 21—J. Devey, ship-owner, Bishopwear mouth, Durham, March 19—W. Roberts, clothier, Calverley, Yorkshire, April 9 R. Passons, surgeon-dentist, York, March 20. CERTIFICATES.—MARCH is, square—R. Feney, bookseller, Fleet-street—! Smith, wheel- W. Short, cabinet-maker, Henriettastreet, Brunswick wright, Liverpool—F. Gray, nail factor, Harborne, Stafford shire—P. Powell, lace-merchant, Brighthelmstone—H. R. Plaw, merchant, Modiford.court, Fenchurch.street—T. Tingle, iron_ founder, Ecciesfield, Yorkshire. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.. T. Bennett and J. Coare, chymists, Loughborough, Leices. tershire—G. Garton and J. Garton, whitesmiths, Exeter—J. Dearden and T. Dearden, jun., carpenters, Halifax—J. Em. merson and W. Emmerson, tailors, Newcastle-upon-Tyne—T. Price and J. Price, jun., tailors, Sackville-street, Piccadilly—G. Widdowson and W. Tate, goldsmiths, Strand—N. Tidmarsh, S. Nichols and R. Nichols, merchants, Manchester—J. R. Hunt and D. A. Fowles, coal-merchants, Bath—T. Whiffing ham and T. Heywood, silk-throwsters—J. and E. Jackson, smiths, Manchester—C. W. Glynes and C. Glynes, attorneys, America_ square, Minories—J. Corbishley, J. Barker, and C. Corbishley, silk-mauufacturers, Macclesfield (so far as regards C. Corbishley) —J. Miller and W. Kay, calico-manufacturers, Manchester— C. Wright and G. H. Lewin, solicitors, Great James-street, Bedford-row—T. Youil and R. Glossop, common brewers, Scul coates, Yorkshire—J. Baker and R. M. Bishop, ship-brokers, Fenchurch.street—J. Barron and R. Mills, brass-founders, Wells-street, Marylebono—E, Winter and J. Rickords, wine merchants, Deal—R. Rostron, K Rostron, W. Houghton, and J. Leach, packers, Lancaster (so far as regards J. Leach)—J. Collier and J. Roughsedge, jun., brokers, Liverpool—T. Rogers and W. Lytham, grocers, Liverpool—W. Summers and S. Sum mers, furnishing ironmongers, New Bond-street. THE' ARMY. (From the Limerick Chronicle.) The General Courtmartial now sitting in this garrison for trial of noncommissioned officers and privates of the Royal Artillery, 32d, 60th, 69111, and 85th regiments, is composed of the following otlieers ;—Lient.-Colonel Brandreth, R.A., Pre sident; Mors Jackson, 85th, and Trevelyan, 60th ; Captains Hunt, Hunter, and Power, 85th; Hon. G. W. Edwardes, 324 ; Stephens, R.A. ; Crombie, 60th ; Calder, 32e1; Lieu tenants Knox, 85th; O'Halloran, 69th; Hodge, 4th Dragoon Guards; Todd, 85th; Hamilton, 85th; and Ensign Tennant, 85th Regiment. Acting Deputy judge Advocate, Lieut.. Colonel Manse', K.H. Private Thomas M3grath, 60th Rifles, is sentenced by Court martial to three months' confinement and hard labour ; Pri vate Samuel Walbroun, 85th, to four months' confinement and hard labour; and Private Daniel Kelly, 85th, to three months' imprisonment and hard labour, for breach of the Articles of War. Arrangements are in progress to fit up an extensive Cavalry Riding.house in this garrison, which has been long a desi deratum. Colonel Chatterton, K.H., has again resumed the command of the 4th Royal Irish Dragoon Guards at Cahir. Captain Wathen, of the 15th Hussars, has received leave of absence from Lieut.-General Sir Hussey Vivian, to enable him to proceed to England; and Surgeon Jeys, of the same regi ment, has been permitted by the King to proceed to the Con tinent. An order has been transmitted from the Horse Guards, di. recting an inspection of the different Infantry regiments, with a. view to the disbanding of all men under three years' service, who shall not be deemed fully efficient for future service. On Tuesday, in consequence of this order, there was a parade of the 60th Rifles at the Royal ,521.6, air Edward Blakeney, - after which they marched mental Hospital for doctor's inspection. Then of three hundred young men in the above gallant three years' service. It is said that the same order will extend top the cavalry of under seven years' service. The troop of the 15th Hussars, which was in attendance at the election for Dungarvan, has returned to head-quarters, Cork Barracks, The second battalion of the 60th Rifles will take the out posts at Beggar's-bush Barracks, Pigeon.house, and Porto. hello, Dublin, on the 3d of next month, relieving the detach ments of the 59th Regiment. _ _ Two companies of the Royal Regiment have marched froth Londonderry to EnnishoWen, to support the civil power. Lieut. Desbrisay, R.A., is stationed with the Royal Artillery force at Duncannon Fort. The Thunderer, 84 guns, now at Cove, takes 400 Marines to Malta, including the companies at Spike Island, under Col. Parke, C.F. The Army and Navy Pay Offices are to be consolidated. One species of economy adopted by the present Government is, to convey troops between both countries and the colonies in winter weather, when transports may be had at a cheaper rate than in summer. It is easy to guess how the service will re ceive this change. The Master-General and Board of Ordnance have ordered that Carrickfergus be henceforth discontinued as an ordnance depot; the stores, &c., will therefore be removed to Charlemont Fort, which, with Enniskillen, will be the only ordnance depot in the northern district. ) te ' - , betorp'Pkqatt I ed • 0 re a u nt corps EAST INDIA SHIPPING. The East India Company's ship Scaleby Castle arrived off the Wight on the 23d instant. She left China on the 25th of October, and St. Helena on the 7th of January. The under mentioned ships arrived in China as follOws, viz. :—The Mar quis of Huntly, 10th of August; Duke of Sussex, 24th ditto; Waterloo and Minerva, 4th of September; Prince Regent and Farquharson, 19th ditto; Thomas Grenville, 22d ditto; Bom bay, Thames, Herefordshire, and Lady Melville, 23d ditto; Inglis, 24th ditto; Kellie Castle, 2d of October; Warren Hastings, 10th ditto; Vansittart, 12th ditto; and the Lowther Castle, 18th ditto. ARRIVALS AT ST. HELENA.-The Rosslyn CaAle, from Cal. cutta and the Cape, Jan. I, and sailed 2, for London ; the Au. rora, from Batavia, Jana 1, and sa led 3, for Amsterdam; the Jupiter, from Batavia, 1, and sailed 3, for Cowes; the Marga. ret, from Calcutta, 2, and sailed 4, for London; the Cervaii te , ; from the Mauritius, 2, and sailed 4, for Liverpool; the Triau, from whaling, 2, and sailed 4, for New York; the Paris, from Batavia, 2, and sailed 3, for Cowes ; the Triton, from whaling, 4; the Dankbaarheid, from Batavia, 4, and sailed 5, for Rot terdam ; the Princess Victoria, from Calcutta, 4, and sailed 6, for London ; the Joanna, from Calcutta, 4, and sailed 6, for Greenock; the Voltaire, from Bourbon, 5, and sailed 6, for Nantes; Cape Breton, from the Cape, 5, and sailed 7, for Liver pool ; the Scott, from Singapore, 5, and sailed 6, for Liver pool; the Prince George, from Calcutta, 5, and sailed 6, for London; the Colonel Brown, from the Cape, 5; the Jean Gra ham, from Calcutta, 5, and sailed 6, for London; the Mary, from the Mauritius, 6 ; the Hebe, from Singapore, 6, and sailed 6, for London; the Sophia, from Batavia, 6; the Courier St. Denis, from -, 6. ARRIVALS AT CHINA—The Helen, from Bombay, Aug. 4 ; the Edmonston, from Bombay, 4 ; the Colonel Young and the. Austen, from Singapore, 6 ; the Margaret Hunt;ey, from Bombay, 10 ; the Tartar, from Liverpool, 11 ; the Elizabeth, from Singapore, 17 ; the Camden, from Batavia, 22; the Lord Amherst. from Calcutta, 24 ; the Duke of Sussex, from Bom bay, 26; the Virginia, from Singapore; the Cambrian and Earl of Clare, from Bombay, 31 ; the Cabot, from Manilla, Sept. 2 ; the Minerva and Waterloo, from London, 4 ; the Lady Hayes, from Calcutta, 4; the Sir T. Monro, from Pedir Coast, 13; the Prance Regent, from Penang, 19 ; the Farquharson, from Bombay, 16 ; the Peru, from Penang, 21 ; the Thomas Gren ville, from Manilla, 22 ; the Lady Melville, from Bombay, 22 ; the Thames, from Bombay, 22; the Bombay, from Calcutta, 23; the Inglis, from Calcutta, and Herefordshire, from Born.. bay, 24; the Universe, from Manila, 26; the Sylph, honk Calcutta, 27 ; the Homanjee Bomanjee, 30; tke Warren Hastings, from Batavia, October 8 ; the Mangles, from New South Wales, 8; the Vansittart and Falcon, from Calcutta, 9 ; the Lowther Castle, from Bombay, 10 ; the Kellie Castle, from Calcutta, 10 ; the Sarah, from Bombay, 11 ; the Castle Huntly, from Calcutta, 16; the Rose and Buckinghamshire had not arrived. • Departures from China—The Cecilia, for Calcutta, Aug. 1I : the Water Witch, for Calcutta, Sept. 1 ; the Charles Forbes, for Bombay, 1 ; the Bee, for New South Wales, Aug. 2 8 ; the Sulimaney, for Sourabaya, Sept. 14 ; the Hope, for Batavia, 20. The Bee, for New South Wales, was lost in a gale August 29 and 30, one seaman drowned. She filled with water about fifteen miles from St. John's, and drifted in pieces upon the island of Hueling, whence the Captain and crew were sent overland to Canton. The Victory sailed for Bombay, Oct. 14, and was to sail thence Jan. 5, for London ; the Guardian, for Singapore, 22 ; she arrived at Singapore, Nov. 5, and was to sail the 15th for London. The Waterloo and Farquharson to sail Nov. 5 ; Bombay and Herefordshire, Nov. 25 ; and Thames and Inglis, Nov. 28. At the Cape—Marquis of Huntly, and Lady Melville, Dec. 5 ; Kellie Castle, Dec. 16 ; Vansittart, and Warren Hastings, Dec. 21 ; Duke of Sussex (uncertain) ; Lowther Castle, and Castle Huntley, to sail Dec. 29 ; Minerva, and Prince Regent, Jan. 5 ; Thomas Grenville, Jan. 12 ; Rose (not arrived) ; Buckinghamshire (not arrived) to be the last ship. The Hebe, from Singapore, has arrived in the Downs, sailed Nov. 11, St. Helena, Jan 6. ARRIVALS AT SINGAPORE.— The Two Sisters, from Bombay, Oct. 4, and sailed the 6th for Batavia ; the Statesman, from Rio, the sth, and sailed the 16th for China ; the Australia, from London, the 6th, and sailed the 23d for Malacca; the Red Rover, from Calcutta, the 7th, and sailed the 9th for China; the Buckinghamshire, from Penang, the Bth, and saled the 1I th for China ; the Larkins, from Penang, the Bth, and sailed the 10th for China; his Majesty's ship Alligator, from Madras, the 10th, and sailed the 10th for Batavia; the Fairy, from Liverpool, the 11th, and sailed the 18th for China; the David Clark, from Calcutta, the 13th, and sailed the 21st for China; the Carnatic, from Madras, the 14th, and sailed the 17th for China; the Arab, from Batavia, the 14th; the Clive, from Malacca, the 14th, and sailed the 16th for Ma lacca ; the Bombay Castle, from China, the 16th, and sailed the 23d for Malacca; the Hanover, from Glasgow, the 18th ; the Charles Forbes, from China, the 18th, and sailed the 21st for Bombay; the Virginia, from China, the ' 19th, and sailed the 20th for Malacca ; the Georgians, from China, the 21st, and sailed Nov. 3 for Batavia; the Catherine, from Penang, the 22d; the Cecelia, from China, the 23d, and sailedthe 29th for Penang; the Highland Chief, from Madras. the 4th ; the Trial, torn Penang, the 24th, and sailed Nov. 1 for Malacca ; the Victory, from China, the 26th, and sailed the 31st for Malacca and Bombay ; the Elizabeth, from China, the 26th ; the Frances Charlotte, from Manilla, the 26th, and sailed Nov. 6 for Batavia ; the Lopes, from Manilla, the 28th, sailed Nov for Batavia ; the William, from Liverpool, the 28th. `.u• Allalevie, from China, the 30th, and sailed Nov, 5 fcr c ..,alcutta ; the Caledonia, from China, the 31st, and sailed Nov. 5 for Bombay; the John Bannerman, from China, Nov. 4, and sailed the 6th for Bombay ; the Guardian, from China, the sth. DEPARTURES —The Avoca, for China, Oct. 4; the Will Watch, for Malacca, Bth ; the Eleanor, for Tringaun, 12th ; the Glory, for Sumatra, 14th ; the Johanna, for Ceylon, 16th; the George, for Rangoon, 19th ; the Scott, for Liverpool, 23,1; the Cornwallis, for Bombay, 31st; the 'William, for Manilla, November 6; the Dorothea, for New York, Sept. 12. ARRIVALS AT BOMBAY.—The Elora, from Glasww, Oct. 7 ; the Gilmore, from London, 9th. DEPARTURES.—The London, for London, Oct. 1; the. Cal cutta, for Liverpool, Ist. ARRIVALS AT THE MAURITIUS.—The Eliza Jane, from the Cape; the LSt. Hilda, from Oporto; and Lady Fitaherbert, from London, Nov. 17 ; the Emerald, Glenalvott, and Eme rald, from the Cape ; and Arcturds, from Bristol, 18th ; the Caroline, from New South Wiles, 20th. DEPARTVREa--The Finlater, Nov. 16; the Harriet and Falloden, 17th, for London ; the Victor, for Cork, 17th ; the Cervantes, for London, 17th ; the Daphne, for Hobart Town, 19th ; the Atlas and Waterloo, for Madras, 21st; the En chantress and Caroline, for Bengal, 22d. ARRIVALS AT MANILLA.—The Cabot, from London, Aug. 8, and sailed 21st for China; the Thomas Grenville, from Lon. don, 28th, and sailed Sept. 8, for China; the Lotus, from New *auth Wales, Sept. 3 ; the Universe, from Singapore, 3d, and sailed 20th, for China; the Pyramus, from Singapore, 26th ; the Sapphire, from Liverpool, 26th. THE DIORAMA. This exhibition has just re-opened wi',:n a change of views The first of thepictures represents Fountain's Abbey, one of the most striking and pirturesque of the monastic ruins which e al i ,n t l oN t g ' ec h e e r e nl 4 i t ep h r e s are scattered. over the kingdom, The scene is represented by ea; Boore r rt g ehc e e s e do, represents_ p a ets n hr d ee sb seems eedhittiae,_i 1 moonl.ght, and the light is made, by means of the contrivances peculiar to this exhibition, to present different effects which a, is t i n , e r r s h t ai high s p r i a n c t t i h c e a bhl heavens, N t , o e n t s h , o p s a s e o s f e s nature. behind one l approach The omfot the the s paf nearly uipipllie,rfiaxsoioiad, a gn s (1 to pour ofi is 1 its ,Cobscured, sir;a:drniii building. d a n .1 suffering C , t t l ae n tede i x s ta e rb x eb t m r e e ey m ' sideea! and rh ea, accurate; e ; the only fault that struck us was, a th n a d t t t h he atrtehfleelcitglio,itisocsennthtehficrpuo:gisle ethmeeddootorboentothoestlreeftngsiidnecoisltehuart, of the day, while all the rest of the picture ,s that dim tone which belongs to night, the iai, ,gl , Royalanexperienced is line t omf andostfknowledge France. The other view is, however,' with out any defect or drawback. It represents the crypt of the cathedral of St. Denis, and some of the chapels constructP:, i n ico,wbile T o h g e e e b ff e ec th t:if , this that subterranean edifice which are devoted to the t' - . in „, yof - i - - .eapproa he, the reality so nearly as to .make one d0.:..0s at the first glance for the moment ca,,ti vt.cd), whether it can be possible ...,:.at we look on a mere imnt. of day appears to stream ' seen as truly throuf::., those which are more remote; while the strains of niusic so played as to give the notion of remoteness; ~ r, ro fs n 'cl gh t t c l a ie n nearestil conceived. xv window, w , la he d e to be e t , nd a powei, - ,:ul force to the fascinations of tlviscene. Madame Tussiud's e..h .; uu e.•trinues to !I.lvance in .p9puiarity, the more i! is visited by the , onnoisseurs in t,e fine sus. It ;ti a w, ich in every respect, worth a visit.