The Sun. — London, England, 1831-02-11 00:00:00

publican—lris own opinion being as dissimilar as possible from that school—but he could assure the Noble Lord that Mr. J.'s language, instead of being with him, was de sit/edly an authority against all that he had urged.— (Hear, bear. )—What Jefferson established was, that all property was a creation of the law, supported by usage. Property was the creature of prescription, as a lawyer would call it; and if it were, let him ask the Noble Baron which did he think was the oldest title—the tithe or pri vate right? Was their one among their Lordships who could boast a title so sustained by law as the Church.— (Hear, hear. s—The argument of the Noble Lord was also fallacious in this respect. He supposed that if the tenant got rid of tithe he would get rid of a burden to that ex tent; but the fact would be far otherwise. In that House these arguments would produce no ill effect, but out of doors it would be received as a truth, and he would, there fore, tell the Noble Lord—indeed he believed that every occupier of land, of common judgment, knew enough to tell him that the tenant would be better off than he was now if the tithes were abolished.—(Hear.) It was id's to think of giving the tithes to the public, for from the public they never came, and to them they never, could belong. They were bestowed by individuals for a service which the Church did not fail to render. The Noble Lord might be assured, if the day should come when the tithe would be abolished, he would not give one quarter of a year's purchase for his own property.—(Hear.) The Marquis of LANSDOWNE knew that this subject, from the notice given by a Right Rev. Pi elate, had at tracted the attention of the head of the Church; and he wished, without adverting to the measure in prospect—the details of which he had not beard—he would wish, he said, that any amelioration of this kind should be under taken by the Right Rev. Prelates, and brought before their Lordships with the sanction of the Church Esta blishment. Under these circumstances, it would be im proper for him, and useless now, to discuss the question of political economy relative to the effect of tithes on agri culture, because the Bill to be introduced wou'd bring the subject fully before their Lordships; and he trusted that, when that measure came forward, it would be met calmly, and without any disposition to attribute motives and with that fitting regard to property (no one branch of which could be separated from another) which should always go vern their Lordships' minds, and especially so on such a subject as that of the Church Establishment, opportunities of this kind would be fully afforded when this Bill was brought forward. With respect to any charges against individuals, he should pay a sorry compliment to the Right Rev. Prelates if he deprived them of the opportu nity of having their conduct discussed; but he would earnestly wish that, if charges were to be made, due notice should be given, and that fair dealing should be practised, of giving to all who were sought to be inculpated fair notice that their conduct would be brought under dis cussion. The Earl of RADNOR was not aware that his Noble Friend had made any charge against any Right Rev. Pre late, either on this or the other night. Doubtless he 11 rd made a charge against a person connected with a Prelate; but now, as to the Noble and Learned Lord who had ac. cused bis Noble Friend of bringing forward a charge, that Noble and Learned Lord was mistaken, for the charge had begun on the part (X the Right Rev. Prelate. His Noble Friend had entered upon nothing but the dry ques tion of political economy; and as to the subject of non residence, that had been introduced by a Right Rev. Pre late not now in the House, who had said that the fault lay not in the Bishops, but in the impropriators, who thought that if the condition of residence attached to their advowsons it would lower their price in the market. What his Noble Friend had raid to-night was merely in answer to that statement. He was old enough to remember—for he was then in the House of Com mons—when the Bill was brought in by Lord Stowell, in 1803, and that Bill was fought out most pertinaciously by one who would be admitted on all hands to have been the firm friend of all our institutions, Mr. Wind ham, who declared that the Bill was one for non residence, and not residence. Now the Noble and Learned Lord had said that a charge had been brought unfairly against Lord Stowell, in the absence of his Noble and Learned Brother; and why?—Because his Noble Friend had said that the Bill was sent to Oxford. But was that denied ?—Quite the reverse. It had been avowed by Lord Stowell that he had sent it there to be revised and cor rected by the Rev. Heads of Houses there. He would not prolong this conversation at present, but he must say that, on further examination of what had taken place the other night, he could not understand under what pretence it could be asserted that that Bill had been rendered ineffi cacious by what had taken place in Parliament. At all events, it had been fathered in that House by the late Archbishop of Canterbury ; and, baying looked at the Bill brought in by that Prelate's son (the present Speaker of the House of Commons), he could not see how it had been altered. He nes by no means disinclined to give the Bishops power to enforce residence ; he wished they had perfect powers for that purpose : but, on the other hand, their pluralities must come to an end, for proper residence and pluralities could not by possibility co-exist. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM trusted that, when the question was brought forward it would be discussed as property, but not merely as affecting agriculture, but on broader ground, and with a view to the maintenance of what was an essential principle of all institutions, the existence of a Church Establishment. His Noble Rela tive bad said that the Church felt its property to be in danger ; but, if that were the case, so was the Noble Ba ron's own property. The tight of the Church to her pro perty was quite as strong as any his Noble Friend had to his ; and if the Church had reason to tremble, so bad his Noble Friend also, COURTS OF LAW. The LORD CHANCELLOR had no wish to prolong a conversation, of the effects of which he entertained the same opinion as that expressed try the Noble Marquis the President of the Council, and the Noble Duke who had just spoken. All the questions relative to this-subject, he had no doubt, would be discussed fully, and he hoped seriously, as became matter of such grave and important considerations. lie would take this opportunity of putting off a notice which he had given for bringing in a Bill for the Amendment of the Bankrupt Law and the Admini stration of Justice. A Noble and Learned Earl, who had so long presided over that department, was at pr, sent pre vented, by illness, from attending the House; but he was glad to learn that the Noble Lord was now in course of recovery. Desiring the aid and advice of that Noble Lord, he would beg leave to withdraw his notice, and postpone it to Tuesday week, the 22d, when he trusted the House would have the benefit of the Noble and Learned Earl's assistance. As be was on his legs, he would also express a wish that his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord Wynford) would postpone his motion relative to the law of debtor and creditor, in order to give the Noble and Learned Chief Justice of the King's Bench a❑ opportunity of being present if he so wished. Lord WYNFORD had no objection to allow his motion to stand over, although he did not imagine the Noble and Learned Lord felt much inclined to interfere with the pro posed measure. THE CHURCH. Lord KING begged to inform the Noble and Learned Lord (Wynford) who recommended specific motions to be brought forward, that, if he thought proper to be in the House on Monday se'nnight, he (Lord King) would then bring forward his motion on the conduct of the Archbishop of Dublin, when the Noble and learned Lord might unthrtake that Prelate's defence if he pleased. He (Lord King) had been accused of bringing forward unfounded charges with respect to the nonresidence of the Clergy. Just before coming to the House he had looked at the last returns on this subject, which were those of 1813. The residents, by these re turns, appeared to be 4,183 . ; and the difference between that number and 10,588, the total number in England, must be assumed to be non-residents. That was a fact, and it came from the returns of the diocesans to the Privy Council. He had a ►notion on that subject, and would move for similar returns, distinguishing between the incumbents appointed by lay and ecclesiastical patrons. —(Cries of " Notice.")—He would then give notice of moving for that return on Monday. With respect to another subject, he must say, that the Noble and Learned Lord (Wynford) had taken a confined and professional view of the nature of property—and one much less philosophical than that of Mr. JetTersoe, who described property as the creature of law for the good of society, and therefore any mode of Property that was not useful and beneficial ought, and be hoped would, be altered. Lord STOURTON presented a petition fromWetherhy, Yorkshire, prayin g for retrenchment and the abolition of p miens and sinecures. —The House then adjourned. HOUSE OF commozvs, FEBRU.IRY 10. On the motion of Mr. Alderman WORD, the Bill to pre vent the spread of canine madn ess was e and ordered to be read a second time on Monday a first ti me , Mr. Alderman WOOD presented a petition y next. from th e Bridge Ward of the c it y o f L ondon , complaining of the duty on coals. Mr. TREVORpresented asimilar petition from Romn e y, Mr. Alderman WOO D p resented a p lition fr om the Ward of Bissishaw, praying the repeal Of the assessed taxes. Lord ARTHUR HILL presented a petition from a parish in the county of Down, praying an alteration in the Irish tithe system. Mr. ABEL SMITH presented two petitions from Dis ' senting Congregations,' praying a day to be set apart for a general fast. Mr. PERCEVAL presented petitions from Chatham, and some other places, with the same prayer. Mr. LINDSAY presented a petition from the calico printers of Wigan, against the duty on printed calicos. Mr. WILSON PATTEN presented a petition from Lancashire on the same subject. Sir R. WILSON presented a similar petition from Mid-', dleton. Mr. EGERTON presented two similar petitions from Stockport. Sir R. WILSON presented a petition from the parish of St. Saviones, Southwark, complaining of the expense of the new police, and of its not being under the controul of those who paid it. Sir R. WILSON proented a petition, most respectably and numerously signed, from the parish of St. Saviour's, South:vat k, praying for Reform and immediate and effec tual retrenchment. Mr. KENNEDY presented petitions from Ayr, Irvine, Kilwinney, and the frame -workers of Selkirk, praying for Reform. The HON. MEMBER, at the same time, postponed, until Friday, the 18th, the second reading of his Bill for amend ing the Law of Entail in Scotland. Sir W. HEATHCOTE presented a petition from Gos. port in favour of Reform. Mr. ROBERT PALMER presented a petition from the West India Proprietors who are residents of Wiltshire, praying for compensation, in the event of Parliament con senting to emancipate their slaves. Mr. C. DUNDAS presented a petition from Berkshire very numerously signed, and praying the total abolition of slavery. Mr. R. PALMER was happy to be able to say, that although the petitioners prayed that slavery may be abo lished, the petition contained a passage which recom mended the ettims of the proprietors for compensation to the favourable attention of the House. The petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. BENETT presented a petition from the county of Wilts, signed by 14,000 persons, praying the House to grant an immediate and effectual Reform. It was now beyond' the power of man to contralti the force of opinion, which demanded Reform, and he hoped that the Legisla ture would show itself sensible of that fact, for great indeed would he the responsibility of those who refused Reform altogether at a moment like the present. This petition had the signatures of thirty Magistrates, great numbers cf . the Clergy, and of the most respectable persons in the county ; and he hoped to see county meetings convened by the Sheriff throughout England for the same object. The petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. BENETT presented a petition from the persons who had complained of the return for Winchilsea, and who had entered into recognizances to prosecute their com plaints. They now prayed the House to permit them to withdraw their petition, and to allow their recognizances to be cancelled, on the ground that they believed the Re form Bill, which was to be brought into the House on the Ist of March, would render the proceedings nugatory, and effect their object. The SPEAKER was of opinion that the House did not possess the power, under such circumstances, to allow the petition to be withdrawn, and the Hon. Member !Mr. Benett) therefore withdrew his motion. REFORM. Mr. HUNT presented a petition, numerously signed, from Oldham, in Lancashire, praying for universal suf frage, annual iarliaments, and vote by ballot. The Hon. Member presented similar petitions from Lutterworth, and from a parish in Ireland. Mr. HUNT also presented a petition from some persons resident in London, who prayed the House to advise his Majesty to grant them some land to cultivate in the Royal forest of Epping, instead of forcing on them and other poor persons transportation, under the name of emigra tion, to distant parts of the world. Mr. HUNT presented petitions from the farmers and occupiers of land in several parishes of Hampshire, pray ing a relief from taxation, as the only means of enabling them to fulfil the engagements they had entered into with their labourers, who had congregated together, and forced their employers by violence to raise their wages. The Hon. Member for Preston having, at some length, repeated his exhortations to Reform and economy, A MEMBER, on the petition being brought up, observed, that as the Member for Preston had given notice of his intention to move the adjournment of the House at twelve o'clock, it would be but fair and consistent, if he also moved, at the same time, the adoption of a standing order, that no Member should in future make long speeches on the presentation of petitions.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUNT said that it would save him a great deal of trouble if such an order as that to which the Hon. Gen. tleman alluded—namely, that no speeches should be made on presenting petitions, but that the petitions should be merely put into the bag of the gentleman at the table— were to be enforced; fur be had a hundred petitions in his possession to present to the House, and he understood that thousands of others were in preparation. He hoped, how ever, that the plan of Reform which his Majesty's Minis ters were about to bring forward would relieve him from the trouble of presenting these petitions. That it cer tainly would, let the plan be almost what it might, if it included the ballot ; but if it did not include the bal:ot, he was convinced that the inhabitants of every town and every village in the kingdom would petition—(No, ne)— and he should recommend them to meet fur that purpose on the day appointed for the general fast, as he was sa tisfied they could not perform any act more acceptable to God and man. SEA-BORNE COALS. Sir R. VYVYAN presented a petition from the ship owners and other inhabitants of 111evagissey, in Cornwall, praying for the Repcal of the Duty on Sea-borne Coals. Mr. DUNDAS presented a petition from the Lord Mayor, Aldermen, and other inhabitants of the city of York, signed by above two thousand persons, praying for the Repeal of the House and Window Tax. Mr. BAYNTON supported the petition. Mr. DUNDAS presented two petitions from parishes in the county of York, in favour of Parli imentary Reform. Sir JOHN BURKE presented a petition from Galway in favour of the Galway Elective Franchise Bill. Sir ROGER GRESLEY presented a petition from the city of Lichfield, in favour of Parliamentary Reform. Mr. SCHONSWAR presented a petition from Hull against the payment, by the seamen of the mercantile navy, of sixpence a month to Greenwich Hospital. ELECTION POR THE FORFAR DISTRICT OF BOROUGHS. Sir C. FORBES rose to present a petition, praying that although the Standing Orders had not been complied with, the house would receive a petition from William Ogilvy, Esq., complaining that an undue return had been made of the Lord Advocate, Francis Jeffrey, Esq., for the Forfar District of Boroughs. The Hon. Baronet entered into a detail of the circumstances which had rendered it impossible to comply with the Standing Orders. After a few words from Mr. Schonswar, Mr. Wynn, S:r C. Forbes, Mr. Wynn, Lord Althorp, and Sir G Clerk, the petition was laid on the table, and the ballot was fixed for the 22d of March. CANADA. Lord HOWICK withdrew his motion respecting the Canadas. Mr. HUME presented a petition from a person named Child, respecting the Bible-Patent Monopoly. The Hon. Member made several attempts to speak, but they were rendered abortive by hoarseness. At length the Hon. Gentleman, amidst cries of " hear, hear," and laughter, moved (as we afterwards learned from Mr. Speaker), in dumb show, for a Committee to inquire into the nature and extent of the duties of the King's Printer in Ireland and Scotland, and how far the system was beneficial to Government, and whether it was proper to be considered. Lord NUGENT would not offer any opposition to this motion, and stated, that already a Commission had been appointed in Ireland to inquire into the expences of print ing for the two Houses of Parliament generally, and also into the outlay for stationery, which he hoped would be considerably reduced.—( Hear, hear.)—He added that the subject alluded to by the Hon. Member would also come under the consideration of that Commission. After a few words from Sir R. INGLis and Mr. Gout- BURN, confirmatory of the intention to leave the motion unopposed, it was put and agreed to. Among the num ber of Members named on the Committee, were Mr. Hunt and Mr. Jeffrey. The LORD ADVOCATE gave notice that he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to continue the existing Bankrupt Laws in Scotland, as those laws are now about to expire. BUCKINGHAM PALACE—THE RIDEAU CANAL. Lord ALTHORP was understood to say that there was a notice of motion in his name on the paper, for referring the estimate of Buckingham Palace to a Committee ; but as the papers connected with that subject were not yet on the table of the House, he should beg to postpone it to a future day. The Noble Lord, we believe, mentioned the day, but it was not heard in the gallery ; and some Observations with which he commenced his motion for re ferring the papers connected with the Rideau and Gran villes a tio . C a a l n a t l o s n , e t ci ri a n m whichni i t t to e h e .s ye r w vw e r e e r , e from ddi v t ,:r h e e d low c o o l i n y v er- in audible. Hi s L ordsh i p itnates wer e , f or t h e Rideau Canal, that the present esti -693,000/., and for the Granvi demi, 160,0001., making together a sum of 943,0001. ; but, as these estimates were continually vary ing, it was impossible for him to pledge himself that these sums would be the utmost that would be re quired for these works. He should, therefore, prefer having the opinion of a Committee upon their, to under taking himself to ask the House for a certain supply on their account.—(tear, hear.) There was no doubt that a water communication of this sort would be valuable in Canada, not only for the purposes of trade, but for those of military defence. The sum of 572,0b0?. had alreadY been expended, and it certainl,7 wohid he a misfortune to render such an expenditure useless; but still, when it was consi dered that that sum was only half of what might yet be re quired, it was worthy the consideration of the House whether it would not be better to sacrifice that which had already been expended, than now to enter on a fresh ex. penditure—an expenditure, the amount of which, from any experience they had had of the past, they must know could not be fixed with certainty. Under these circum stances, he thought the House would feel that he was justi fied in moving to refer the matter to a Select Cointnittee. Mr. WARBURTON agreed With the motion of the Noble Lord, and thought that Ministers hail taken the only course' they could properly adopt, namely—that of bringing the subject fully and fairly under the considera tion of Parliament. He objected to the expenditure of so much British money upon a Colony in which, but for the existence of monopolies and restrictions, there would be no trade with this country. If the same sums that had been expended about these Canals, or if only 200,0001. were laid out in improving the roads about the metropolis, the country would be a great gainer by the expenditure, while, by devoting that money to the construction of these canals, it was expended without any benefit to this country, mim e interests ought always to be considered in matters of this sort. Sir J. NEWPORT gavehis cordial support to the motion. Mr. LABOUCHERE had voted in favour of the ori ginal grants; and he did not now shrink from the respon sibility he had thereby incurred. He was perfectly ready to meet the question, should the Committee he appointed ; and he believed that nothing but good could come from it. He admitted that the colonies ought to assist the mother country, instead of being a burden to her. He should dis approve of them if, whenever they possessed the means, they did not render her assistance ; but he could not agree with the Hon. Member for Bridport, who seemed to think that it would be better for this country to give up the colonies than to expend money on their improvement. Mr. RICE supported the motion, and condemned the practice which had so long prevailed, of works of this kind being begun without the sanction of Parliament. He did not mean to blame the late Ministers in this respect; for though these works had been so begun, the fault was not one attaching to particular men, but to a system. He trusted that an Hon. Member opposite would turn his at tention to this matter. He felt bound to say, that be be lieved the late Chancellor of the Exchequer had behaved with perfect candour in this affair when he liad made his statement about these works before the Finance Commit. tee, for he had no doubt that the Right Hon. Gentleman hail not at that time the least suspicion of the sums that would really be required for the work. Mr. GOULBURN said, that the Hon. Member did him no more than justice in making that observation; he cer• tainly was not aware of the large sums of money required for those works. He agreed with the motion of the Noble Lord opposite, that the Committee would be the best tri- buaal for considering the expediency of making a further outlay. The reason which had induced the Hon. Member for Taunton to vote for the original grants was the same as that which had induced the Government to propose them—namely, a belief that the work would be of the utmost importance to the Canadas. He still entertained that opinion, and believed that the Rideau Canal would be of importance to that colony in both a commercial and a defensive point of view. Me believed Ile might add, too, that there would be no backwardness on the part of the House of Assembly to lend their aid in furthering these works. Sir ROBERT PEEL thought that the Committee now to be appointed ought to be vested with a very wide dis cretion as to the examination they would institute into the subject. As he understood the proposition now, it was to refer the matter to the Committee, that they might re port on the expediency of continuing the outlay now be gun. In his opinion they ought not to make their report till they had minutely examined every part of the subject, whether as connected with commercial or warlike ad vantages; and they should ex 'mine evidence not only on matters which they could afterwards state to the House as the grounds of their report, but en others, which it might be dangerous to publish. After a few words from Lord ALTHORP, the Com mittee was granted. On the question of the names of the Committee, Mr. WARBURTON denied that he wished to give up all our Colonies. He did not wish to burden the country with expences that would be beneficial to the colonies alone. Mr. H. Twiss and Mr. ROBINSON both deprecated these incidental discussions, and wished those Hon. Mem bers who objected to the grant of money for the necessary improvement of the colonies to bring forward the question in a formal manner. Mr. BARING said there could be no doubt that some of the colonies occasioned this country much vxpence, and brought it no advantage. Ile thought that the lonian Islands were colonies of this description, and, for his part, he should be willing to give them up to Greece. The country should be enabled to determine on subjects of ex penditure of this kind with their eyes open. He feared that the motion of the Noble Lord would not have the effect of doing what some Members seemed to imagine-- stop the expenditure of the money referred to ; for, if his recollection was not deceived, the money had been already spent—(Hear, hear! from the Ministerial bench)-- an d the only effect the Committee could have, was that of preventing the Ministers from coming down to ask a sum beyond that now stated. Sir G. MURRAY concurred entirely with the motion of the Noble Lord opposite. He took it for granted, that it was not the intention of Government to abandon this colony; and the question, therefore, became one of economy alone ; and the business of the Committee would be, to inquire whether the money already expended, and likely still to be laid out on this canal, would not be devoted to a beneficial purpose. The completion of the canal was important for the military defence of the country. Mr. MABERLY thought that the Noble Lord had taken the only proper course that could he adopted. Mr. GUEST urged that the estimates produced before such a great work was undertaken was a mere farce, and that the money expended in Canada would have done much more good if expended at honie. He hoped that the Committee would take into view th• million of money that was to be spent upon fortifications. Lord ALTHORP agreed that it was desirable that the whole subject should be investigated by the Committee. Mr. HUNT observed, that it had long been his opinion that no colony ought to be retained by Great Britain which was not able to support itself, and he was rejoiced to hear from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the system was to he entirely changed. Mr. TWISS explained; after which the Committee was appointed. WILTS COUNTY GAOL. Mr. HUNT, in pursuance of notice, rose to move for a copy of the regulations of the County Gaol of Wilt shire, at Fisherton, in order to ascertain whether it was the rule as well as the practice, for persons charged with crimes to see their attorneys only in the presence of the gaoler or turnkey ; and farther, to ascertain whether it was a fact that a certain confession, drawn by a prisoner of the name of Lush, sentenced to death, had or had not been placed in the hands of the gaoler? The Hon. Mem ber referred to what had been said upon this subject on Mond ,y night, and to the doubts that had been thrown upon his statement by the Under-Secretary for the Home Department, as well as by the Attorney-General. Ile was prepared to prove the truth of all he had asserted, and with this purpose he moved for these documents, which he believed Government would not resist, in order that, if such an objectionable practice existed, it might be instantly remedied. If the paper were refused, he would procure affidavits from every attorney in Salisbury to establish, that they were not allowed to receive instruc tions from prisoners for their defence, without the pre sence of the gaoler or turnkey. While addressing the House, he might advert to a sort of indirect charge of spurious humanity made against himself; be certainly could not charge the House generally with any such sen sitiveness, whether real or spurious, and day after day the Members listened to the most affecting complaints in pe titions of the distresses and sufferings of the people, with out the slightest indication of condolence or sympathy. Perhaps this want of feeling might, in part, arise from the innumerable representations of this kind made to it of late, and the callousness of its feelings could not be more clearly indicated than by the laugh with which it met the statement of the Hon. Member for Middlesex—that he was so hoarse and in so much pain that he was not able to address the House. He wished that the people of England should know with what coldness and indiffe rence their representations of distress were received. He concluded by moving for the papers he required. Mr. WARBURTON attributed the apparent inattention of the house to petitions to the vast mass of business of the kind brought before it, which rendered it impossible for every Member to deliver his sentiments on presenting a petition. He recommended that, as in the Congress of the United States, a Committee should he appointed to classiiy petitions, so that as each class was brought forward, the Members interested in them should address the House. Mr. G. LAMB thought that a brief statement of facts would show the Hon. Member (Mt. Hunt) that the papers he wished 'for were unnecessary. In consequence of a pe tition on the subject, which the Hon. Gentleman bad pre sented at the Home Office, inquiries had beer► set on foot, and he (Mr. G. Lamb) had received from Lord Radnor— a Magistrate not deficient, as would be allowed on all hands, either in humanity or in love of justice--a letter upon the subject, and transmitted (as we understood the Hon. Member to say) a copy of the regulations of the county gaol at Fisherton. Hence, it appeared, that there was a rule that no written communication should be made by prisoners unless they were first seen by the gaoler; and confessions were not excvted, lest they should be made the cover for communications of a different kind. It was quite true that a turnkey was present when Lush saw his attorney, Mr. Seymour, and that the paper given to the latter, which had been previously drawn up by a fellow-prisoner, was carried by the turnkey to the gaoler, who having cast his eyes over it returned it by the turnkey in a few minutes. Of this docu ment no use had been made upon the trials, as he (Mr. Lamb) learnt from a letter "he had received from the Learned Gentleman who had conducted them. It was quite true that, in the county gaol of Wiltshire, the prac tice did prevail of allowing prisoners to communicate with their legal advisers only in the presence of third persons; but he (Mr. Lamb) admitted at once that it was wrong, and that it ought to be remedied. In other well-regulated gaols —at Lincoln, for instance—it was provided that pri soners should see their attorneys without the interposition of third persons; and he was well pleased that it should go forth to the country that persons confined on criminal charges, in any part of the kingdom, had a right to con sult with their legal advisers alone. Mr. NORTH called upon all the lawyers in the House to censure the practice of requiring turnkeys or gaolers to be present during the communication of prisoners with their attorneys. Mr. TWISS believed that at Fisherton gaol the mal practice had arisen from a misconstruction of the rule laid down by the visiting Magistrate. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL concurred that it was a great abuse ; and hoped that hereafter it would net exist in the county gaol of Wilts, or any other. Mr. Alderman WOOD said, that in the great metro politan prisons it did not prevail. He had visited all the prisons of the country, and could say that in many the re gulation prevailed, that prisoners should not see their at torneys without the presence of the gaoler or his deputy. Sir T. BARING denied that it applied to the gaol of which be was a visiting Magistrate. Mr. Alderman WOOD added, that he could name a considerable number of prisons in which the regulation existed. Sir C. WETHERELL doubted whether the Hon. Al derman was correct, notwithstanding he was one qui mores hominum multorum vidit et urbes. At all events, it was quite clear that the practice was against right and justice. - Lord NUGENT said, that such was not the case in the gaol, with the regulations of which he was acquainted. Mr. W. WHITMORE thought that any confidential and professional communications between an attorney and his client, a prisoner, ought not to be subject to inspec tion by a gaoler. Mr. G. LAMB concurred readily in this proposition : oral and written communications between a prisoner and his legal adviser ought to be free from all inspection by third persons. Mr: DICKENSON observed that no such rule pre vailed in Somersetshire. Mr. HUNT rose to reply. It had been said that the Noble Lord was a visiting Magistrate of the gaol in ques tion ; but that proved nothing with respect to his know ledge of the gaol, for nobody knew less of gaols than did visiting Magistrates. He was perfectly satisfied that Lord Radnor would be the last man in the country to sanction any improper practices, were he once made aware of their existence. By the Bill which was introduced by the Right Hon. Baronet, the then Secretary for the Home Department, no regulation could become the law of gaols unless it received the sanction and was signed by the going Judge of Assize, having been previously agreed to at a full bench of Magistrates. That law was agreed to by the Legislature at the time he (Mr. H.) was locked up in pri son, and was one which certainly would be likely to pre vent nmany abuses that had previously existed. The Hon. Member for Somerset was one of the visiting Magistrates of the gaol where he was confined ; but was it therefore to be inferred that that Hon. Gentleman was aware of all the oppressions there practised upon him, or of any of the sufferings of the other prisoners? It was a matter of notoriety in all country gaols, that the moment the visiting Magistrate rode into the town the whole prison be came the scene of general bustle and activity—what with covering up this and hiding that, changing one thing and removing another, the prison would in te❑ minutes put on an appearance as totally different from its general aspect, as any two things could possibly be.—(A laugh, and cries of " Hear, heir.") No ; the fact was, that no visiting Magistrate bad the means of making himself ac quainted with the real state of the prison from any obser vations of his own. In his own case, he was deprived of the advice of his professional adviser ; at least he was re fused admission ; his family were kept from him ; the me dical man who had been in the habit of attending him was refused access, for the purpose of performing on his eye. The Bill, however, of the Right Hon. Baronet, had this beneficial effect—that without great omission and neglect, injury could not be done to prisoners. With respect to the matter now under consideration, he had to state further, that the paper in question had been in the hands of the gaoler for three days. That fact, he trusted, would afford the visiting Magistrates a lesson, and he hoped that they would profit by it. Of many of those topics he was en abled to speak with something of authority ; for he had himself been confined, and knew the doings of prisons by experience. However, as the purpose for which he brought forward his motion was in a great measure answered, be should not then, from any feeling of vanity, press the matter further. Mr. G. LAMB explained. He did not say that Lord Radnor was one of the visiting Magistrates ; he merely said, that the matter had been referred to him, and that he undertook to investigate it. Mr. BENETT also explained, and the motion was then withdrawn. THE RECORDERSHIP OF DUBLIN. Mr. SHAW, in moving for the papers of which be had given notice, said that the document which gave occasion to his present motion was rather a mockery of the rights of petitioning, than any thing like a serious design to ef fect any public or useful object. The petition purported to be a petition from the prisoners confined is the gaol of Newgate in Dublin, when substantially the petitioner was no other than a single individual named Joseph Andrew Macdonnell. Now, at the time referred to in the petition there was no such person in the prison, nor for a month previously, as he was enabled to chew from the certificate of the Governor. Iu that petition it was alleged that se veral persons were confined in the gaol of Newgate, and were kept there, though ready for trial—were kept in prison, and could not be tried in consequence of his (the Recorder's) absence from Dublin. What was the fact ? At the time when that assertion was made, there was not a prisoner remaining in the gaol except two, and they were not prepared. He was not one hour absent from Dublin during the confinement of any one of the petitioners, or rather of the persons who signed a petition that virtually came from Macdsnnell, who, though he was a Catholic, and never professed any other religious forms of church discipline, nevertheless made it a matter of complaint that there had been some delay in the coming of a Protestant Clergyman, for whom he had sent. In strictness, Mr Blacker was not bound to come, for he was not the chap lain of the prison—he was merely the City Chaplaim ; yet, when he did come, Macdonell laughed, and said he would petition. The next charge was made against the medical officers of the establishment. The petitioner stated, that the said officers refused to come to his assistance, though it had been represented to them as a case of life and death— that, in fact, there was danger that he might die within the hour ; though in truth and in fact, he was, during the entire term of his imprisonment, in perfect health. He had also been informed that the brother of this Mac lt t l e ta d d , o a ff n e d re t t i ! e bail e t n o c t e h a e d A m la i t g t i i s n t g ra o t e f by whom il, the Ahleagwisa-s c el o o i t n in m el i trate agreed to accept the security offered, but Macdonnell refused, and expressed his desire to be sent to prison, saying that he had his reasons for wishing to be sent, for that he wanted to bring over the Recorder from London to try him, and that he would make the medical men and the Chaplain attend, or else have them dismissed through the instrumentality of the Hon. Member for Clare. Mac donnell was, when first sent to prison, placed at the debtors' side, but was there so unmanageable that there was no permitting hint to remain. He was knocking down every one w h o came i n hi s way; barring out the turnkey ; sett ing fi re to t h e f urn i ture , and, in short, so conducting himself, that it became a bsolutely necessary to remove him to the felons' side, which was the object he had i n v i ew, i nten di ng th en to prevail upon the prisoner s th ere to s i gn a petition praying for a repe a l of the Union.—(A laugh. )_When be was brought into Court, he endeavoured to raise a mutiny in the dock, and exerted himself to prevail upon lain fellow-prisoners to .111. v e three c'h 2tsforki repeal of the Union. His appear ance on that occasion was certainly most extraordinary, and possibly that very extraordinary appearance might have excited the sympathy of the Hon. Member ;—the prisoner wore a loose coat, a coloured shirt, no neckcloth, his face distinguished by a superabundance of hair, and his person otherwise decorated with the insignia of liberty.__ (A laugh.) He must be permitted to observe that Hon. Members ought not to take representations of this nature without something like investigation —the petition was, on the face of it, without probability. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then went on to observe, that ht t the Hon. Members (for Clare and for Middlesex) were misinformed with respect to the sittings of the Quarter Sessions in Dublin--they sat quarterly, and might adjourn for six weeks at a time, as they saw fit ; the Recorder had no power to alter those. It had been charged against him, that when, elected to the office of Recorder, he pledged himself to sit for three days in every week ; to as permitted a bar rister that he begged to give the most unequivocal contradic tion—what he did say was in reference to the Act which, him m oh within ib t i o tin p g ra t e l : practise on his jurisdiction Recorder circuitfrom judge,practising and in his chambe rs .-_ He said th a t he would not avail himself of the per.. mission which that Act afforded him ; he thought it would better consist with the dignity of the judicial office not to practise as a barrister either on circuit or in chambers—to say nothing of that abstinence from private practice enabling him to devote more time to his official duties.—(Hear, hear. )—There was another topic to which he thought it important to advert, namely, what had been said on the subject of his support of the late Government. He denied that he ever came into the House for any such purpose. He certainly would support the present Government so long as it proved itself worthy of the confidence of independent Members; but no longer should any Government have support of his beyond the moment when that support could not be given with inde pendence and consistency. The whole of what had been said with respect to his salary he set at perfect defiance. He received and held his situation in perfect indepen_ dence of the Crown : it was a judicial office, and one which he should be sorry to see degraded, by its holder be coming a quarterly mendicant at the Castle for his salary, or applying for it annually in that House. If the Re corder of Dublin was to be excluded from that House, let the proceeding be adopted on principle, but let not him be made the object of a personal enactment. He con. eluded by moving for a return of all prisoners in custody and tried during the Recordership of Sir Jonas Greene, and the present Recorder, and those during the same pe riod remaining for trial, with the number of adjournments and sittings respectively, with the number of traversers and prisoners held to bail at each General Quarter Sessions, showing those during that period which had been untried in consequence of the absence of the Recorder ; also, co pies of warrants issued for the augmentation of the salary of Recorder of Dublin, under the 48th of George 111., c. 140, and the sth of George IV., cap. 150. O'GORMAN MAHON seconded the motion. The petition was, as the Hon. Gentleman had said, that of John Andrew M‘Donnell ; but it bore the signature of fifty other persons. Of M'Donnell himself he knew no thing. But he knew that person to belong to one of the first families in Ireland. Having received from him a let ter, stating that he was in a gaql in Dublin, suffering confinement for a crime of which he knew himself to be innocent, demanding a trial, and unable to obtain one— and stating that others were similarly circumstauced— he (O'G. M.) felt himself bound to lay the case before the House. The Recorder, indeed, had now informed him of one fact, of which, until then, he bad not heard, • that the petition had fourteen fictitious signatures. He was sure that it was unnecessary for him to inform the House that he was unaware of such a deception having been practised. Ile disclaimed an intention to cast imputations upon the Recorder, or to act towards him with any want of courtesy. On the contrary, when the peti tioner complained that he could not obtain a trial in con sequence of the Hon. Member being absent froth his duties in Dublin to attend to his duties in that House, he (O'Gorman Mahon) had communicated to the Recorder his having that petition to present. On his way to the House, however, be had met with a gentleman, one of the ' Hon. Member for Dublin's constituents, who told him that he had requested the Hon. Member to remain in Loudon, as business was to come before the House in which the gentleman was interested. But the Recorder was called away from his duties in Parliament to his duties in Dublin, and could not remain here to attend to the Par liamentary interests of those whom he represented., On hearing that circumstance, he (O'G. M.) felt it his duty to present the petition.—(Hear. )—lie was glad that he had so done his duty. If he had not done so, the House would not have been gratified with the display of talent which the lion. Member for Dublin had that night exhibited. That Hon. Gentleman had said that if he (O'G. M.) had looked into the petition, he would never have presented it. But he did not think that the phraseology of the petitions sent to the House was to influence Parliament in forming a judg ment upon their merits--(Hear.)—He was sure that if petitions were to be rejected on account of the inelegance or inaccuracy of the langusge, they who stood in need of protection could never lay their complaints before the House—if their petitions were even written by some Mem bers of Parliament themselves.—(Hear, and laughter.) But the same carefulness of style was not to be expected from men incarcerated in a gaol, as from a gentleman reclining at his ease upon a sofa. The petition came from a person not only in prison, but innocently imprisoned— kno tying that his release would be the result of his trial, and not only unable to put himself upon his trial, but even to ascertain when he was to be tried. The gaoler could give him no information. No one could tell him, because the Recorder was absent. The punishment which would be awarded to him, if guilty, was inflicted on him by anticipation ; because the Recorder of Dublin was in the House of Commons in London. Anti now the lion. and Learned Recorder taunted him (O'Gorman Ma hon) with undertaking the defence of a maniac. If the man were, as the Recorder said, a maniac, it was at least proved that he was an innocent one. Ile could not see that the wrong, or the pain of the man's imprisonment was diminished, by his having no waistcoat or cravat.— (Hear, and laughter.) It was well the poor fellow had even a shirt.—(Hear, and laughter.) Here was a young gentleman of good family, and, as the result of his trial proved, an innocent gentleman, shut up in a cold miserable dungeon, on account of the Recorder king a Member of Parliament ; and now the Recorder ' called the poor gentleman a madman, because he had no waistcoat—(Hear, and laughter)--and said, that his complaint was only one respecting these imaginary griev ances of which people in Ireland were accustomed to com plain. Certainly it was quite an imaginary grievance, for a poor man without a waistcoat or cravat to be shut up in prison for six weeks, having committed no offence. If a man were as mad as a March hare_(Laughter)—that seemed a very indifferent reason for shutting him up in a dungeon.—(Hear.)—That was bad enough—hut it was too much to tell him that he ought not to complain of the injustice because he bad no waistcoat. The Corporation, whom the Recorder represented ; for he (O'Gorman Ma hon) denied that the Hon. Gentleman was the represen tative of the people of Dublin—that Corporation, con sisting of bankrupts and insolvents, paid the Hon. Gen tleman 400/. a-year for attending in that House to watch over their interests—(No)--and the House yearly voted him 1,6001. more for discharging duties in Dublin incon sistent with his ditties in Parliament. He bad heard much of Reform in England, and of Reform in Scotland ; but instead of anything being done for Reform in Ire land, where one of the grossest abuses that existed in the representation was complained of, the Mem ber for Dublin stood up, and called the grievances of Ireland imaginary, and described the aggrieved as maniacs. The Hon. Member for Dublin said, that he supported the Government ; if that was any merit, he would not deny the Hon. Gentleman's claim to it. Ile was sure the Hon. the Recorder would support every Administration as well as he supported the last and the present. No doubt, if there were twenty Governments in the next twenty months to come, as opposed in prin. said, that as the last and the present, th e H on . t h e R ecor d er would keep his pl ice on that sid e o f t h e H ouse. Mr. SHAW said that the si mp l e f act was, t h at t h e prisoner complained, was oc casioned not by his (Mr. Sh aw ' s ) a b sence i n Parl i ament, confinement hub y ‘tAl.le usual whichadjournmentßT o the had the honour to preside. ch Mr. for Clare would b r i ng i n a Bill to prevent apttrieviefent the Courtn persons.oinnvll Memberle he judicial the principle rin offices cil in Dublin from)leoftheßillwitcakihnexgesl.tutt excluded in that diril i.A l l i a tu s t te s r e s , in Chancery from Parliament, lie would support it. The motion was agreed to. Sir W. FOULKES presented a petition from Petworth (as we understood), praying for a general fast—(A loud laugh)—also anot h er f rom --- to the same effect ; also a petition from Bantam, praying for an alteration in the Tithe Laws. Mr. VILLIERS STUART presented a petition from freemen and freeholders of Carrickfergus, complaining of the forgery of several names to a petition against the return of Lord George Hill. Lord ALTHORP (as we understood him) gave notice, ' that as he did not entirely approve of some provisions of i the Bill brought in respecting the Game Laws by the Noble Lord, the Member for the county of Bucks, he would hint self submit to the House a Bill for the a ntentlin e e t i t b : Ith ma Sir R. BATESON moved the second teadig ' hp orte Settlement of the Poor Bill. ce i , 6 f 100,1 ~k _clit tlx . : ::alt., A desultory conversation on this Bill took Os ' , ' eLttit a , was entirely inaudible in the gallery. The SPEAKER suggested that it svolii° l "" . • 'tit to have the Bill re-committed. , Ae itte ,I col The House accordingly went into a C° l6l2 ' ~h c e Poli several verbal amendments were agreed to. ht t Euro] On the House resuming, Mr. WESTERN brouged Report, which was ordered to be received tills„,ed ter ~ Tour, The Postmaster-General Bill was read a th u . 4°lved Ithi eh p tss e d. :i st i i -. co tl Mr. HODGES presented a petition from o i o h ' l een i ling, for a yemission of the Malt Tax ; also aPe i ave Ir , Brenchicy, for an alteration in the Tithe 1 01 ' titl e to 1 petiti:in f rom 'Warden, for Reform. t(414 7 Adjourned at a Quarter to Twelve. ____......"% tbei!el; XI, 'ICS OF stocics 'nits B ink Vtock 3•per Cent. Red. 3 per Cent. Cons. 801 / 4 % .3% i,er Cent otit , led 89% PO tccw:3% per Celt ...89 1 ,% ~ i%, - A 3 per Cent Ann. 1725.... - 4 per Cent. 12325 9 9 1,4 0 Bork , ong Inn. to expire Jan 1 5 0, 185, 1860 1 7 1,c-16 Oct. 9 - Jan. 5, 1860 - Jan. 5, 1880 - April 5, 1880 - Jan. 5, 1870 - 6'. I,A f AT 0 New 5 per India stuck ........ 1 5 i itt' Bonds. ....... south Sea Stoelc •Md Annuettes New Ditto ........ 3 00` er Cent. Ann : " 44 Ex. Bills, .£l,-14 1' Oitt6 ........ Ditto equal' ..... .... Ditto Commerc i a l , Ditto AdvertiseA,:„..o Bank for Accou nt , ' . ..,41, India for Accolin• Cons. for Feb 25'''_,A01 PRICES OF FOREIGN FUNDS THIS DAY Al. U lfS 'o • ...., ~ Austrian Bonds — - Neap01itan......;•" . ," ....•:,. Brazilian Bond, 5 7% Peruvian 80n",,... , , Buenos Ayres Bonds - 'Portuguese Bon"' .... ~, Cililian Bonds ... — Prussian, Old ..'...".) rol.cmbian Bonds — Ditto, New ......»•"', Ditto. 1 .824 Danish Greek Bonds — -- 1823 ........ c,,, , f Ditto, 1825 — French Rentes, i ! ":..,i Guatemala Exchange - ~, __, ~,,, Mexican Bonds —.— 3 per ce.'".,/, limo !ST, — Exchang. , FOREIGN EXCHANGES ON tIOND— nI4.• HAMBURG, FEB. 4.-13 7.,.—Tw0 months, I"' BERLIN, FEn. I.—Three months, 6. 21%• CHRISTIANIA, JAN 22.—Three months, 6. i• LEIP6IC, JAN. 28.—Three mon th s, G. 14w. ST. PETERSBURH H , J A N. Yl—Th ree mon ths, ' AMSTERDAM, FEB. 8.-11. 90. Two Months, 11. 85. El) Jr . • LONDON, lr gi the "" 111 s FRIDAY EVENING„ FEBRUARY 11 ; disci a 1 I all i . i s:: ti o o f n ye t s h te e rd F a i y ve jti G stl i y .ea r t erri p ar o l4 o , 6 er il . a s T tra h i e ig ‘ e ‘ made of themselves with their parade of i it,„l4ists ventinn in Belgic affair s ." Th e res ult certr'lfsmi nor. been precisely that whi c h, of all others, i 5 t p ile vt e to h t ou l agreeable to all the said Allied Powers, ec"cio, a ll rld lat, th b e e) l ,o ei r r i s d t al l l ik t e h l i y ag t s o , istemndosttodtel:eirabpriee,,Fechepo op t th 4 e tt of th of N E V u e r a o r p e e. not among those who deny t" e ;P i xi, a h r.OO bleu !pi e interference in any case with the affair °° e o, l ' 4te 'er nations, inasmuch as that right is of the m a tBne e , as the tight of an individual to meddle 1 ' if and neighbour's concerns, depending solely 11 ,V ilalr e W al question, whether it is likely to cause mer e - o ce i h e T er of evil. Greece and Portugal are ir' sls l ,?, ve lv d °4l4 the necessity of foreign interference with % t er' h e h e the general tranquillity, and the prese rv e r, humelity ; but how far those precedents c ' r Er ie Of t - 1 1 . ) C cable to the Netherland,s is, at least, e %. e rf t a o "Jose doubtful. And it is quite certain that en jAfitotii to rv 7Peal tion having for its secret, if not its avoll e 'oci t he Q Y the making of advantageous terms for th e no n / AL, il -° " ,l dynasty in Belgium, could not be justified 14,, well understood principles of international iti`fte' ploys We hold the jealousy entertained of theocle will nation by the greater portion of our 805 0 ' 4. it , e :Proe olt . well as by many of our mercantile interestbsroo t t d: i n a n l s tp)eeirrfige hostilityc tly thatt o idl eGxrhe a aa t r ta lihe:io.aßi absurd. Britain 8 FL: 0 8 11 0i f o a r` t y c,l e : hvi i than that the policy of Lord CAsTLErrOotlcit "b successors in diplomacy, has very not tira ':o l t4 / 41 ' H. Great Britain a sort of bugbear in the et' e- o f t ! kl ' t Z ll, er Liberals of Europe. But the indifferee?6, l ee(/. „ 1 14: 4 G ' ew E s,ti l laT i i g tche l l i ie s o l lf i vttn i e n haeb g seNt e li n iFe e ;:i r .n a eTt l to European politics b° 'l l o 6l ' , to spread a notion that they care not se ife f li t , 4 4a. l ?ep t i T hat elsewhere, so long as they enjoy it th eril ths r c hor► siNgbibeece:fetia,r—irs school esl t ib t s l y r j t j r :s i se t sti, i/ c1 he e i (tt1 4 :4, , i upon the nation at large. , s; i n 01' 111 b l lat t iUn and most active party in Belgium, 'l - g f e % tl . : l ' it with very great moderation in subroßtifite.• monarchical Government at all, e nd P° s o ol° IPtLied to e a to the considerations of ancient recollect"001)11 c°meee of prepossessions, their own wishes for the Vie: t ore ment of a Republic. If such men a s 10' r ( i pr e f, tO s si l t itrlf WEYER, TIELMANS, Or DE POTTER, Il L e ilf r(4 e l rl ,sti 4 o e h ' hard for a Republic, the event might hav e 11- n d 0 11 : 4 if p'. e Ad( much the same as if LA FAYETTE had ' t°- 1 tie,,,( 1 the French Republic in July last; but t it (,2 4 n t 4 ieg men in Belgium have sacrificed thei r ° , ‘ e ' ff J ; :o 4 4i;: e to the force of circumstances,—wheo or/ , 1 4 "ce : ''1 3 t rence has beers shewn to ancient i ' t l 3 4 ' 444 ns to ! eh e, the poetry of history—when a more r e eta ,lis f d ? 14 41) 13' vience to the supposed wishes of the Al' e L ei! 14 of U g displayed than could possibly have be eri t bsC c ie ° ' , e ' tri l ' 4 d at or desired--it is rather too much to °Lilo' th t , i etei t : nt t ' other individual than a Member of the ne'rriodi? h °te stet. gress ought to have any influence, direc t ? ari over the choice of the Head of the ne i g i sc hid l o ir le 4 o ` l e t o tr t r h ' M. DE POTTER has published a lette r ' co rfic o re ti 4l P e le pears in the French and Belgic Journals' , t r ing of our having called him an agitatortio eti/ into too much respect for the great learning I . jilie f %+, , ,; 1 ( 1e 4 , ordinary energy—and the fervent lov e (7 0 00 0 0 0f' ;ti4 t which we believe M. DE POTTER to P 11 01 0. tt i Z; have applied to him the term of agual ° 7 t o po' At:''n :1, 44 fensive sense, such as we should aprdi t we pt o 4 v .4t ed a BETT and others in this country. P I log fle,,tit help surmising that M. DE POTTER 11 35 ot / l'et , 1 11 Wi tha e d an union with France—a desire for w hi i i e erfol' far from blaming him, that, we verily bectitiOoor°l'l had suffered a tenth part of the PO ge fer red ' 1 44 4 4 i D e E gh P iti O c T e TFLß ng ha s s, itl A L ‘ . ' e e should have h ij av e e vi t i ts b n i g o o ei ti ff rit ot ( 05i tent 4 l „ 4 4 ;k l , 4l ,t i l ' i : than have continued the slaves of theo;,tl N e Y f fl ael he avaricious, low-minded, tormenting (11 c e „ t teh oi house of Orange. fitil‘ ''/),1! aa- t We have received by e xpresi t" yet' c lu to t ,° l um France dated yesterday, and Papers endo 010 Wednesday night. The felloaring i 5 ' t it,: Avi dp ri a nd , tfi e fift " a letter of the latter date in of 1.11 tier 0--nn " There was to-clay much more firron e 7c e rio: i i,o;,f, ,Tl l i g, ir and also more business done. The 3 P c f er° 4' Of • 1 1' , e a t .6 ktr . t o „ at 60f. 35e., fell to 60f. 25c., and N s , j o g s fe r .,V t fl at out the least re-action to 601. 80e, ci°sreport°6oov,eo t t4i t Ra e( and the 5 per Cents. 931. 75c. Various..eriaiojeo culated, but none announcing yet the de,' . ;, e t r it t „ov by the King. It was reported that o DV: 11 14 tti sure had been found in the caves of t" e idee' bt,pi 4e l , e a v la s p i tb e 61t which the necessity of a loan would v of po teitt sin r ther this be true or not, the assurance the cal' wanted this year gained groun d, and si'al to I e improvement in to-day's market." * Et ,, MADRID, (JFArIion:SOG,--aligN7thniinsg2llisets:leicteigdel:f 11° r 4, THE PETITION from MERCOcif, BANKERS, and OTHERS, of trfiAII A Y I LONDON, to both HOUSES o f PAr t '"llY r praying for a TEMPERATE REFORM in th 1.1, SENTATION of the PEOPLE in the C 4900 HOUSE of PARLIAMENT, and RETREIO (OS in the EXPENDITURE o f th e PUBLIC I %A m - 4e for Signature at the City of London Tavern, .P . " street.