The Sun. — London, England, 1831-08-29 00:00:00

susr ended, and the people hold their breath and lock on. The moment, should such a moment ar me, %then any important section of the House of Lords shall venture to show an hostility to the mea sure, we suspect that the most daring paradox• monger of them all will find reason to be satisfied, that instead of a cooling it is a fermenting process on which the nation are about to enter.—Times. We have already alluded to Mr. Senior's pamphlet on poor laws for Ireland, commutation of tithes, and a provision for the Catholic clergy. On all these important objects of legislation, the remarks of Mr. Senior are worthy of being well considered. With regard to the two latter points, he would have con vinced us, first, that the existing mode of support ing the established clergy by tithe ought to be abandoned; and, second, that the Catholic clergy ought to have subsistence provided for them by law,—Mr. Senior, we say, would have convinced us of the truth of both these propositions, had not our judgment been made up in their favour many years ago. But respecting the first question which he handles,—viz., that of Irish " poor laws,"—we must he content with admiring the ingenuity of his arguments; our opinion of the necessity of a provi sion for the poor of Ireland remains altogether un moved. It is beside the purpose of any inquiry into the justice or expediency of such an institution, to take into account any interests or considerations but such as are expressly Irish. Mr. Senior in sists, and very reasonably, that "legislating for Ireland, we tire bound to look exclusively to the interests of Ireland, and that to impose on Ireland ' any internal regulations, with a view to produce good, or to prevent evil' (he might have said exclusive good or evil) to Eng land, would be a base abuse of the prepon derance in the United Parliament which the " Union gave to England." If, however, it be true, as Mr. Senior alleges, and as we believe, that the establishment of poor laws in Ireland would not prevent the periodical immigration of Irish labourers into England, the gentlemen of Ireland ought to feel the less apprehension of any additional burden which would be thrown upon themselves by such poor laws, since the same number of their native poor would still carry home from their employment in this country the means of livelihood, independent of their parishes. Mr. Senior bears hard upon the opinions of Dr. Doyle, who has written and spoken in favour of Irish poor laws; and we must allow that in some respects his strictures upon this able politician are not much open to cavil. It is to be regretted, that Dr. Doyle's evidence,no less than his pamphlet, seems open to the charge of being both vague and declamatory; and although we have our selves arrived at the conclusion, that for a mass of poor who have been plunged into poverty by a system of which others have the exclusive guid ance, the natural relief is to be found in some mea sure which would impose upon such guides a mo ral necessity of amending their system and turn ing it to the poor man's benefit as well as to their Own, we cannot collect from Dr. Doyle's lips or pen what is the precise measure which lie would intro duce bearing the name of " poor law," more espe cially what are the exact regulations and con ditions by which he would entitle the pauper to a provision under it. We quote the following passages from Mr. Senior's pamphlet, containing a somewhat severe comment upon the apparent ob scurities or inconsistencies of the Catholic Bishop. But we must observe that there is a considerable difference between exposing the weakness of an ad vocate and disprovi! g the justice of his cause or the advantages of a great remedial measure, the neces ai y for which stands on the admitted magnitude of evils now existing : " Dr. Doyle's views are, in several respects, opposed to Mr. tl'Culloch's. He admits (4591) that a system of poor laws would cheek the clearing of estates—be admits (4509) that it might not tend to lessen the number of people. He does not propose any thing so repugnant to the natural liberty of man, or to the habits of the Irish, as a law of settlement under which a man, though not chargeable, could be removed. What he does propose, often as he repeats it, it is not, perhaps, quite easy to understand. " He affirmed (Pamphlet, 46), that no friend to the Irish poor contemplates the introduction into Ireland of the English poor laws, or of a system which would vest in the idler, in the drunkard, or the improvident, a right to subsist at the public cost (25). He states (Evidence, 4,537) that the system of relief which he proposes is one that, in country parts, and even in towns, would be in ordinary years extremely light ; that it would be given, in ordinary cases, to those only whe are not capable of exer cising any industry (1,539.) " An ordinary provision for the impotent, and extraor diaary and temporary assistance to the able-bodied in cases of peculiar emergency, appear from these statements to be all that lie proposes. But, on turning to the pamphlet, 1 nd him asserting (p. 62) the total inability of the poor of Ireland to subsist by their own labour unassisted by the State ; that the number of destitute is exceedingly great (7) ; that one-half of the population Lave no inte rest in the preservation of order (11); that the poor law which he proposes, is to shelter the houseless, clothe the naked, feed the hungry, comfort the afflicted, relieve the distressed, put an end to vagrancy, separate the imposter from tLe virtuous, compel the idler to do his work, and remove from the turbulent the food of sedition. And lie directs us to organize the population, place them in their proper classes, assign to them their respective duties, and ensure all of theta s ubsistence (55). " Ireland, in short, is to be one vast house of industry, divided into as many wards as there are parishes, in each of which a Committee of six, elected by the householders, is to take care that no person wants house-room, fuel, food, or clothing ; taking care also that no person be idle, drunken, improvident, or an imposter, but not being 'guilty of the unspeakable wickedness of throwing obstacles in the way of marriage, or of warring with Heaven by checking the multiplation of the human kind.' (27). And all this is to be done by a system that, in ordinary years, would he extremely light ! " If any moral fact can be ascertained by experience, if the testimonies of all ages and all countries have any weight, it is established that idleness and improvidence can be prevented only by leaving them to the punishment inflicted by nature—want, and degradation. What are the securities against them, if we obey Dr. Doyle ? First, that the committee selected to administer relief are not to be obliged to give relief but as they think proper (4,551); that they would be careful to limit the assessment as much as would be necessary, and at the same time not to stint the poor beyond what was Just (4456) ; and, secondly, that there always has been, and there always will be, an aversion in the minds of the poorer classes to seek relief I (4551). 4. On the first point I cannot but agree in Mr. Wyse's anticipation (6949), that but a short interval can elapse between the establishment of the assessment, and relief being claimed under it as a right. Dr. Doyle's pamphlet is the best commentary on his evidence. " If a man want bread to sustain his life, he is bound to give in exchange for it any other property he way possess, or hire out for that purpose his labour or what ever he can sell, except his liberty or virtue; but should he have nothing to dispose of, or find no person to give him food in exchange for his goods or labour, he is to apply for subsistence to the bead of the state, to whom the e ase of the whole community is confided, or to the Magi strate or other person to whom is intrusted the admini stration of the laws. Should his application be unsuc cessful, and his life be about to perish of hunger—but we can pursue this subject; no further. If then the right of every individual to preserve life be incontestable ; if no man can deny this right, neither can any man deny that the governing power in a state is entitled and obliged to provide, in (ale shape or other, for the preservation of the lives of its subjects ; whereas, if it neglect to do so, it must either punish as crimes what in reality are not offences against the laws of nature, it must permit what are called theft, robbery,, 'violence, and even bloodshed, when these happen to be committed by its subjects driven to iecotninittitl of them by extreme want.' (p. 72-74.) . The only diff erence i n this respect between the plans of M Cullo c h and Dr. Doyle is, that, according to Mr M'Culloch's O en, the rightis to be a legal right, en forced by the magistrate; according to Dr. Doyle, it is to be a natural and indefeasible right to e . enforced by what are called theft, robbery, a v r i y ole t ce,a c n ' d bloodshed. " But it will not be necessary would notensact•ethiet, poor for be yondtlte Committee, says Dr. - r) just.' tally believe that they what was would not. I fully believe that with s what are y and bloodshed' before their called theft, robbery, violence, eyes, they would respect the natural and indefeasibl e right to relief, as long as a particle of property remained to tip pease it. But this we are told, would not encourage idle ness, and provide far the dissolute at the expense of the industrious and good, because it is the duty of the State to have such a code of municipal law, and such a preventive and correctional police, as will punish idleness and correct vice (73). A police to punish idleness ! How constant is the tendency of extremes to meet—of systems which begin by promising besefits inconsistent with freedom, to end by inflicting evils peculiar to slavery.* But we are tut! that there always has been, and always will be, an aversion in the minds of the poorer classes to seek relief.' Admitting the existence of this aversion, when the relief is to come from the pocket of the persons to whom the ap plication is made, what reason is there for expecting it when the relief is to come from a third person, and the ap plication is made to a public officer, specially appointed to receive it ? Every one must feel the difference between requesting A to supply your wants from his own resources, and requesting him to supply them from the resources of B. " In the latter case I utterly disbelieve that any such reluctance can continue, and scarcely expect it even when the system is in its first newness of operation, when, if ever, we might hope for attention and economy on the part of the assessors, and for gratitude and forbearance from the applicants. And unhappily this view is borne out by experience. General Bourke, the Chairman of the Limerick Relief Committee, in 1322, states that there ap peared no indisposition to receive gratuitous relief, but the reverse (5482) ; and that in some parishes it was a cause of complaint that the Committee required labour at the price of a , sistance (5480). Mr. Barrington, the Crown Solicitor for the Alunster circuit, states that in almost every serious case provision must be made for the Crown witnesses, and ' that the moment a man has five shillings a week as a witness, he will not seek for employment. Alen who might be employed on the public works live upon their allowance, however small, and will remain idle, though they might increase their income by labour (6727). He is asked ' Are cases of this kind numerous ?" Almost as numerous as payment of witnesses. The moment they have any thing as a support, they will not seek for em ployment. I have known some in Dublin, and some in Limerick, who have remained idle until they were sent out of the country (6729)'. We know that in England, in every class of society, from the pensioner of the Crown to the pensioner of the vestry, public money is a general sub ject of spoil, not accepted with reluctance, but insolently demanded. We know that in Scotland, where assessment prevails, the reluctance to apply for charity is totally des troyed (Commons third Report of Poor Laws, ISIS). The General Assembly states, that in one case, the mere proposal to establish any assessment, a proposal afterwards abandoned, diminished by one-half the voluntary con tributions, and doubled the applicants for relief. Report p. 30. " When Dr. Doyle is pressed by reference to Scotland, he answers, that Scotland is a peculiar country, and the habits of its people very different from those of the people of Ireland (4558). We know that they are different, but the difference certainly is not to be found in any superior industry, or providence, or aversion to charity in Ireland, —lreland, the very head-quarters of mendicity. On what ground, then, are we to believe that in Ireland there always has been and always will be an aversion in the minds of the poorer classes to seek relief? " I cannot quit Dr. Doyle without remarking that his statements, both of facts and of opinions, though fortified to a very unusual degree by asseverations of sincerity, scarcely produce on the mind the impression of perfect frankness.t He begins, as the diffident advocate of a mitigated poor law, to produce, in ordinary seasons, a very trifling effect,—he ends by demanding, in lieu of it, the confiscation of all the Protestant Church property. Throushout his evidence there runs a reservation that poor laws are necessary only where the Catholic is not the established religion ; but in his pamphlet -the mask is thrown off. " ' In this country there is a crying sin—there is a loud complaint going up daily to Heaven, that the property of the poor is held captive in injustice ; that their rights are withheld ; and their title is known and recognized by all, save those who could enforce it for them ; that they daily die of want, whilst their expiring glance rests on the gor geous, the ungodly display. of ecclesiastical pride and pomp ; whilst their last sigh can scarcely fail to bring down a heavy curse on that wealth which was left for their sup port, but which so cruelly and se long has been wrested and withheld from them. I have often pleaded for the in digent; I have sometimes wept over their distress ; I never hesitated on my own account to share with them my scanty pittance; but I confess that I have not, to my recollection, solicited in their behalf the goods or money of the industrious classes, without feel ings of indignation, mingled with remorse. Were all men in Ireland in my way of thinking, they would, in or dinary times, have no charity sermons, no houses or insti tutions supported by the voluntary gifts of the industrious ; hut, in place of those, in lieu of extorting, by sermons and collections and never-ending appeals to the precepts of the Gospel, money from those who cannot afford to bestow it, and from whom it is little short of injustice to receive it, they would assail the legislature by constant petitions, and the Government by strong remonstrances on behalf of the poor. They would insist with the Apostle, ' that some should not be eased and others burdened, but that there might be an equality.' They won'd teach the poor themselves to abstain from violence, and be submissive to the law ; but also tell them that they had higher claims to relief than those arising from the exhibition of their distress. But, above all, they would proclaim from the house-top, in the bearing of the rich and the poor, of the princes and of the people, that church property was held in trust; that it was bequeathed by our ancestors in part and principally fur the education and maintenance of the poor ; and that so long as the State withheld it from them the people should not seek for rest, nor the Government enjoy repose (78-81).' “ Who can read this passage, and doubt the motive with which Ireland is represented in the teeth of almost all the evidence that we possess, as ' passing rapidly from wretchedness to ruin (61), the whole character of the people becoming worse and worse, diminishing in stature, enervated in mind, till at length you have the inhabitants of one of the finest countries in the world reduced to an effeminacy which makes them little better than the lee zaroni of Naples, or the Hindoos on the coast of Mala bar (4529) ?' " When we find Dr. Doyle indulging in such asser• dons in a mere matter of perception, we shall pause before we believe him to be well founded, or even sincere, in the opinion equally opposed (as most of his other opinions are) to almost all the evidence given before the Com mittee, that proper persons could be found in every parish of Ireland to administer his system of poor laws."— Times. While a certain Honourable Assembly is whiling away its time in playing at the Reform Bill, as if it were a game of battledore and shuttlecock, and evi dently taking its slow progress with as much cool ness us if it were a miscellaneous estimate, or a ses sional vote, there is a state of things and feeling growing out of this listlessness out of doors which, ere long, we suspect, will cull for more earnest at rention—we mean the state of trade, and the state of national feeling which begins to appear, in conse quence of the great length of time which has been consumed in pretending to discuss the clauses of a Bill upon which the country has already stamped its fiat, and which, in three weeks at most, ought to have been amended, where slight amendments were necessary, and have received the sanction of the House. At the commencement of the discussion, all was liveliness, enthusiasm—joy—hope ; now the liveliness has disappeared—the joy is gone—the ‘, hope being deferred," has sickened the public of public men---and the enthusiasm has settled down into a determination to wait the issue of events, but to have Reform at all hazard-, and at all cost and -scarce! The Anti-Reform party thought that by delaying the progress of the Bill they would sicken the people of Reform, arid pave the way for their own admission to power; but to what extent have they succeeded ? Have they riot sickened the people of themselves and their conduct, instead of sickening them of Reform ? Have they not engen dered a feeling of contempt towards them, on the part of those who were formerly not altogether de ficient in respect for the Aristocracy, whether Whig or Tory ? Have they not created a deep feeling of hatred towards the upper classes eif so ciety which bodes no good to the future tranquillity of the country, and the maintenance of that order and harmony which are indispensable to the preservation of the different ranks of which seciety in this country is made up ? Are they not, in fact, by their present conduct, laying the foundation of that very tendency to revolution—and what fearful changes does not that word import ! which they falsely pretend to see in the Reform Bill, i but against which their speedy subm ission to it s their only safeguard ? Has any one of them eyer " . 1)r. Doyle is almost a St. Simonist. His beau ideal of civil society is Paraguay under the Jesuits, where the law punished. idleness and sinfulness, and the priest divided among the people the whole produce of the soil. " t I must except from this remark Dr. Doyle's opinions on education, of which I see no reason to doubt the sincerity, and whi eh arebenevolent, enlight e ned, an d liberal : touch more so, as far . AS can be collected from the questions Ad tohire, t han those ot some or hi s examiners." 1 put it to himself what would be the state of the' country—what would be the state of society— what would be the state of the Aristocracy— what would be the state of the Church—what would be the state of the metropolis and.the manu facturing districts—were the Bill either not to pass, or to be greatly crippled in its provisions ? Again, with respect to trade, what can be more deplorable than its present condition ? Is not the Money Market daily filled with Exchequer Bills ? Is not the Batik contracting its discounts ? 13 not money, on the most unexceptionable bills, most diffi cult, or rather almost impossible, to be procured ? Do not the moneyed men refuse even to advance on mortgage almost any sum, except a mere per centage? Nay, is is not a fact, that many of the most respec table banking firms of the city have actually refused to give even one per cent. for large sums of money which their customers could find no better mode of disposing of ? And has not trade been greatly in jured thereby—nay, is it cot, except in mere ne cessaries, almost at such a stand-still, as threatens, in the opinion of many men of judgment, a fearful crisis in the course of the autumn and winter ? And to what is all this mischief owing ? To no thing hut the delay in passing the Reform Bill—an unsettling of the public mind—and fears of revo lution, in consequence of the deep feeling of hatred which has been engendered towards the Aristo cracy, and the institutions which, by gross abuse, it has made its own.—Morning Advertiser. The report of the proceedings of the self-elected city committee, which, it must be remarked, pro ceeded ;from themselves, presents to our view as gross an attack upon the privileges and character of the House of Commons, and as complete an expo sure of the servility, incapacity, and baseness of the city Members, as it is possible to imagine. The Members, we beg pardon, the delegates for the city, are reminded by this junta of Liverymen that they had solemnly promised to vote with his Majesty's Ministers all through the Reform Bill ; that this was the condition of their election; and that how ever wicked or absurd any proposition proceeding from Ministers, it would be their duty to support it. In all this the delegate whose conduct was under discussion tamely acquiesced, expressed his con trition for having dared to vote agreeably to the dic tates of his own conscience, and solemnly re peated his electioneering vow never again to be guilty of the same offence. If Ministers were to propose vote by ballot and universal suffrage on the one hand, or if, on the other, they should attempt to limit the suffrage to such persons only as are not below the rank of knighthood,theslave dele gates of the city of London would, according to the doctrines and facts promulgated by this junta, be compelled to support the proposition. The absur dities committed by a host of ignorant Liverymen are not, it may be said, of much importance. The conduct of a London Alderman, to whom probably his seat in the Ifouse of Commons is in some way or other a matter of great personal consequence, is not, it may be said, of any importance whatever, and abstractedly both propositions are, no doubt, correct. But it is of importance to the character and dignity and influence of the House of Com mons that it should not connive at and sanction the publication under its eye of facts and doctrines wholly incompatible with its character, dignity, and influence. When the House of Commons permits the independence of one of its Members to be pub licly assailed—when, without reproof, it permits this Member to make a public and formal surrender of his honour and his conscience—it proclaims to the world that the House itself consists in a large pro portion of men in the same degraded and ignoble situation, and that its opinions and decisions upon any possible question are therefore not entitled to any the least degree of moral weight. We hope the House of Commons will yet rescue itself from this degradation. There cannot, we suppose, be a doubt in the mind of any rational man as to what a House of Commons worthy of the name would do in such circumstances. After the verification of the fact at their Bar, or by the examination in his place of tile culprit and degraded Member, they would send to Newgate every individual who could be proved to have taken any part in examining, insulting, and in timidating a Member of their House, and they would at once expel from among them the Member who had invited or submitted to this degradation. Nothing short of this can redeem the character and restore the wounded dignity of the House. The House of Commons of England must support its proper con stitutional character if it would wish the measures it may originate to be received with the usual respect by the other branches of the Legislature. There is no man who wishes well to the Reform Bill who ought not to rejoice if the city Members, who have proclaimed themselves slaves, were ejected from the House of Commons, and the city junta who have presumed to domineer over them were, every man of them, sent to Newgate. For should the House of Commons permit itself to be treated as an As sembly of Delegates, without any effort to maintain and protect its proper constitutional character, who can deny that this fact alone would abundantly jus tify the Upper House of Parliament, in the estima. tion of the present and all future times, in refusing to the Reform Bill even the customary courtesy of a first reading ? To claim respect from others it is necessary alike for individuals and assemblies to show that they respect themselves ; and from this univer sal law even the House of Commons is not exempt. —Morning Post. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HO USE OF COMMONS, Auausr 27. MR. HUME'S MOTION. Concluded from our Paper of Saturday. He (Sir C. WETHERELL) observed no increasing love-liking for the Ministerial measure of Reform : and on the banks of the Liffey, in the great city of Dublin, it was evident, from the return of two Anti• Reformers, that it had lost ground in public estimation. It might be said that this was only in Ireland ; but what would be said of Great Grimsby, where it Lad also retrograded, and where two Members, deeply smitten with love for the beauteous Bill, had been rejected?—(No, No.) At least the Noble Lord who spoke so ably last night could not be called one of its heartiest supporters. He would ask whether the Livery of London would pretend to say that the time of the House had been wasted by the discussion upon the Bi!l, at a time when they sent down two Members to the House to propose a clause insisting on their retaining their present privileges. His (Sir C. NVetherell's) opinion was, that the Bill had retrograded ; he had shown that to be the case in Dublin and other places where there had been new elections; it retrograded also in that printout mobile of patriotism, the Livery of London. He was sure the Noble Lord (Althorp) would not wish to defeat any other important measure by insisting on this Bill being brought forward to the exclusion of others. The Hon. Member for Middlesex had made a calculation of the number of hours occupied in the discussion of this subject, and had taken credit to himself for having occupied so few hours himself. If the Hon. Member had been abstinent on the Reform Bill, he had spoken upon all other topics quite sufficient for three fourths of the Mem bers of the House.—(Loud laughter.) He had spoken on the Army Estimates, and on the Sugar DutiesOn Wine and Windsor Castle—(Laughter)—and on the Church and Chancery.—(Loud laughter.) Those were certainly alliterations, and he would give the Hon. Member another, which was Tea and Tithes.—(Load laughter.) Although, therefore, he had been rather abstinent on the Reform question he had bestowed a very considerable Portion of his Parliamentary exuberance on all other sub jects.—(Laughter.) However, he (Sir C. Wether , l l ) must say that he was confident the alteration in the busi ness of the House, as proposed by this motion, would add delay to the Reform Bill.—(Cheers from the Op position.) A great deal had been said of the health and convenience of various persons who had spoken, but nothing was said of the health and constitution of the Speaker of the House—(Cheers)—und by the proposed arrangement the health of that Right Hon. Gentleman would materially suffer.—(Hear.) Several Members rose amidst loud cries of" Question." The SPEAKER then put the orit,inal motion, and the amendment, upon which Sir J. NEWPORT said a few words in explanation of his former statement. Lord ALTHORP said he had had frequent communi catiane with gentlemen relative to . th e slow pro gress pf the Reform Bill, and he knew that many gentlemen thought that sitting early would have the effect of expediting it. He, however, entertained many doubts upon that point.—(Loud cries of hear.) He did not think the House could do more with the Bill by sit- ting in the morning than by sitting eight continuous hours in the evening.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) With respect to one objection to this motion, be must say that he never contemplated - the exclusion of all other subjects from diseussions4:o-lear)—indeed, it had generally hap pened•vthat subjects had taken precedence. The'strason ,why theY bad not been able to devote eight7.hours ?every day to this Bill was, that such long , discussiOns upon petitions took plaee.—(Cheers.) If that could be avoided in future (and it was only to be avoided, by the discretion of Hon. Members), they could proceed with the Reform Bill by tire o'clock. He thought that, looking at what had already been done by sitting early on Saturdly, it afforded no evidence of being able to get through business more expeditiously by sitting miller every day. Having stated that he wished to be guided by the opinion of the House (for he was not guided by the pressure out of doors), because he did not wish to put forward his own opinion first, he now begged to state that he thought it better to commence the Reform Bill, in future, at five o'clock ; he, therefore, would suggest to his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hume) to with draw the motion, upon the understanding that, in the dis cretion of Hon. Members, they would, in presenting peti tions, enable them to proceed at five o'clock with the Re form Bill.—(Cheers.) Sir R. PEEL felt highly gratified at the course pursued by the Noble Lord—(Cheers) —and he begged that Hon. Members would, as far as was consistent with their duty, avoid pressing forward any other business.—(Hear.) Not personal inconvenience alone, but a sense of public duty should induce the House to go on with the business, to enable Members to return to their seats in the country in order to perform the duties attached to them there, He hoped, that in future the debates on petitions would he as short as possible; he for one would nut object to sitting at twelve o'clock, but it was an innovation on old habits, and as they could only sit eight hours a day, he could see no be nefit that would accrue from the proposed alteration. He hoped the Noble Lord and other lion. Members would adopt the suggestions now thrown out, and that they would proceed in the same amicable manner to the discussion of the Reform Bill.—(Cheers.) Sir F. BURDETT was happy in the course pursued by the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel). His Sir F. Burdett's mind had been made up to vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for Middlesex; but after what had fallen from the Noble Lord (Althorp), he hoped his lion. Friend would withdraw his motion, and allow the Reform Bill to be immediately proceeded in. —(Hear.) Mr. BRISCOE rose amidst load cries of " Question," which continued for a long period to prevent his speak ing. At last he was heard to ask if the Hon. Member for Middlesex would withdraw his motiop ? Mr. HUME being loudly called for, said he would have felt very great pleasure in acceding to the proposition of the Noble Lord ; but when lie found that the only real objections to his motion were made by that party who opposed the meeting of the House on Saturdays—a party who had caused all the delay in the progress of the Bill— he felt great pain to be obliged to refuse the Noble Lord's request. It was because that party thought that his proposition would accelerate the Bill that they opposed his motion, the carrying of which he was convinced would be the means of expediting the meaure. Mr. BRISCOE rose again, and was loudly assailed with cries of " Spoke," " Question." At length, amidst much noise, he said he had come prepared to support the mo tion, though from what had fallen from the Noble Lord, he wished that it should he withdrawn. He contended, however, that after the experience they bad had of leaving the discussion upon petitions to the discretion of the Hon. Members, they should not leave any thing to their future discretion, but that at five o'clock every afternoon the Bill should be proceeded in. He begged the House to bear in mind that all the objections to the motion came from the opposite party, which was a proof that they thought the proposition would expedite the measure. Colonel WOOD hoped that if the motion were carried, the Hon. Member himself (Mr. Hume) would always be in his place, for, during many of the discussions he had been absent ; as to the• [lon. Member occupying so short a time of the House in discussions upon the Bill, he (Co lonel Wood) believed that had arisen from some parts of the Bill affecting materially a part of the Hon. Member's constituents.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME denied that what the Gallant Officer had spoken was the fact, for he had been in every division of the House except one ; and he had only been absent three days, and that was solely from indisposition. As to the Bill affecting his constituents, he was instructed on the hustings to do all he could to press the Bill on, even as now, when the Ministers themselves were slackening. Lord ALTHORP thought it due to his character to re but a charge made by the Hon. Member, that he had exhi bited any slackness in the progress of this Bill. He ap pealed to the House—be appealed to the public—whether he had ever exhibited any alsckness.--(Cheers.) If ha could not agree with the Hon. Member's motion, it was not because he was slackening, but because lie did not think it would have the effect the Hon. Member anticipated. —(Cheers.) Entertaining that opinion, and as the Hon. Member would not withdraw the motion, he (Lord Al thorp) should be obliged to vote against it.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) • Mr. W. WYNN bore testimony to the moderation and temper, and, at the same time, perseverance displayed by the Noble Lord—conduct which was the most efficient way of expediting the Bill. Mr. LABOUCHERE spoke to a similar effect, and de clared if the public only knew how much the Noble Lord's conduct had tended towards expediting the measure, it would be properly appreciated.—(Cheers.) He, as a Re , former, felt grateful for the manner in which the Noble Lord had conducted those proceedings. Lord EBRINGTON said no one in that House, or in the country at large, could say with a shadow of justice that the N, ble Lord had in his conduct relative to the Reform Bill—pushing and supporting it through good report and evil report—shown himself to be slack, as the Hun. Member for Middlesex had insinuated.—Ofear.) His conduA exonerated him from such an imputation most triumphantly.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. HUME was anxious to correct what certainly was to he considered a mere lapses linyux—(l-lear, hear,) — he could see a wrong co nstruction had been put upon what he had stated.—(Hear, hear, bear.) He would, however, say, that all he meant by the expression was, that an impression, as he understood, was abroad that Government were slack in their support of the Bill, and that that was the proper opportunity of trying it. He could assure the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exche quer, and the Noble Lord who had just sat down, that no one was ever on any occasion more ready than himself to give testimony to the good tem per, moderation, and zeal, and perseverance with which the Reform Bill bad been pursued by him, and he meant nothing at all personal in the remark he had perhaps un advisedly thrown out.—(Hear, hear.) He could not but think, when he saw the course that was taken against him e u r p r o o n r ? ahnisd,octiciaesrieofon re, however Is le . i en ( r Mr uriw l i l i t l t i t t n lg e) b sa e v ws has, imself lin f saw sufficient reason in what the Noble Lord had said, to in duce hint to withdraw his motion.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Ile did so, however, with considerable regret, because upon the discussion of it two hours of the time of the house had already been consunsed. At the same time if the statements made on that (the Opposition) side of the Ilouse were at all to be depended upon—and he did hope they were to be depended upon—the time would not have been altogether lost.—(llear, hear.) The motion was then withdrawn. Mr. HENRY GRATTAN then took the oaths and his seat for Meath. REFORM BILL. Lord ALTHORP moved the order of the day fur the House resolving into a Committee on the Reform Bill, and the Speaker having left the Chair, Mr. BERNAL read the 9 2d clause, and two amend ments having been disposed of, Mr. ESTCOURT moved that all the present rights of voting in elections of cit'zens and burgesses to serve in Parliament (except such rights as appertain to boroughs enumerated in schedule A) be permanently preserved. Sir C. 'WETHERELL wished to propose an amend ment on this clause. The first question to be considered was, whether the rights referred to were to be preserved as they now stood ; and secondly, were they to be pre served with the qualification of requiring residence within the walls of the borough ? He bad alsvays grounded his objections to the present Bill on the principle of disfran chisement, and upon the same principle he now objected to the disfranchisement of a voter who happened to be a non resident. The Noble Lord opposite had lately had a gold box resented to him by the city of London, on which were the words " Magna Charta and Reform ;" but he (Sir C. Wetherell) felt confident, if that Noble Lord allowed the present clause to form part of the Bill, he would be obliged to drop the words Magna Charts, if he did not that of Reform. It had been said that this was an extremely popular Bill, he denied in toto such a pro position, to his mind it was extremely unpopular, for it extended the privileges of the higher orders, and took them away from the lower. He considered the pre sent clause a most obnoxious one, and he should therefore vote against it. The amendment, however, of his lion. Friend he would most cordially support, with the excep tion of the latter part. Lord J. RUSSELL observed that there was nothing he admired more in the conduct of the opponents of this great measure than their versatility. After opposing one clause on the ground of the Bill being obnoxious, they turned round and opposed another upon a totally different ground. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman opposite now stood up for the freemen, and complained that the Bill gave privileges to the higher classes, whist it destroyed those of the mercantile man. The Hon. Member, when he made that statement, must himself have forgot what be had said a few night: ago, when he deprecated the flood of democracy with which he said the Bill would deluge the country. One or other of the grounds taken by the Hon. Member must be indefensible, which, he should leave to the Honourable Member to decide. The Ho• nourable Member who proposed the present amendment bad treated it as if it was altogether an Act of disfran chisement, and in consequence of that he (Lord John Russell) begged to call the attention of the Committee to the distincticns which had been made between this part of the Reform Bill, and the former part of it ; namely, the boroughs contained in schedule A. With regard to nomination boroughs, his Majesty's Ministers had thought in certain instances that there was no medium here to be taken, and that if it were wished to destroy nomination those boroughs must be destroyed alto gether ; but with regard to the persons having at present the right of voting, it was to be observed that, according to this clause, there was no person having at the present mo ment the right of voting, or any freeman now alive, whose rights would be seriously injured by the present Bill. The question therefore was whether, having established by the 21st clause a new right of voting for all cities and boroughs in England, we should extend that right to persons who are not now in existence, combining with them the present existing rights. The objection to that was, that rights of this description were liable to the greatest abuse, and that if they were permitted to exist, it would be combining with the ten-pound householders a set of voters who would be created for the purpose of influencing elec tions, and would take from the rights of the fair electors, The Honourable Member had proposed that those rights should be retained, if so the right of burgage tenures, of splitting freeholds, and every kind of abuse would be held out. He (Lord John Russell) was one who looked with great regard to the scot and lot right of voting. but that right was exercised very diffe rently in different places. In large towns, however, it was exercised very usefully, but with respect to them the 10/. right of voting was of a very similar nature to the scot and lot. With regard to the smaller boroughs, however, he could not look upon the scot and lot right of voting in the same light, for it was notorious there were no places where corruption existed more than in those small bo roughs. Ministers had been accused'of looking after the flies and disregarding the vultures, he denied that statement, for the object of their present measure was to destroy those vultures who were anxious to feed on the rights of the community.—(Hear.) He thought when the present measure became law, there would not be found any of the degrading practices to exist to which he referred. Ile could not sit down without alluding to what the Hon. Member had stated with respect to the box, which had been pre sented to him by the City of London with the words Magna Charta and Reform upon it. What could induce the - Hon. Member to introduce that topic, at the present moment, or what it bad to do with the present debate, he was at a loss to conceive. Part of the privileges, however, of the city of London were pre served by Magna Charts, and he trusted those rights would still be preserved for ages. Though one of the intentions of Magna Ciliate was to preserve the privileges and liberties of the city of London, yet there were greater objects intended to be accomplished by it. It was most undoubtedly intended to accomplish the freedom of this country as regarded the King and the Nobles, who saw the necessity of the times, and saw also what Englishmen deserved, and what they ought to have, to esta blish their freedom, namely, a great written record, which might be handed down to all future generations. He did not mean to say that the measures which were now introduced, would last as long as that great document, but nobody could doubt that this measure effected a change, a change greatly to the advantage of the freedom of the country, namely, turning that which had been monopoly and usurpation into common ight and common enjoyment. In those respects, therefore, it resembled Alagna Charta. He felt proud that the citizens of London had discovered that resemblance, and he would always cherish the present with which they had honoured him, for he must be allowed to tell the Hon. Member opposite that all his reasoning had not convinced him that it was totally valueless. Sir J. MALCOLM would never consent, except on the greatest emergency, to an alteration in a system by which this country had been so long governed ; and he contended that no such necessity bad been shown to justify the present measure. He begged to remind the House that all the benefits promised by this Bill were but conjecture, while all those who objected to it, did so on a comparison with great periods of history, and upon a conviction of what benefits the country had hitherto de rived.—(Hear, hear.) He was confident that there was nothing more inconsistent with the principle of the Bill itself than the 101. clause.-.—(Hear.) Ile was confident that this Bill would not be considered a fired measure. Would not the children of freemen hereafter look for the restoration of their privilege? If they did not, they would not be Englishmen.—(Hear, hear.)—This House might look with contempt on the bit of ermine that trimmed a Mayor's gown, and also with contempt at small corporations, but if the existence of all such institutions, and the privileges attached to them, had been, they ought still to continue as affording objects of honourable ambi tion. He should, therefore, support the motion of the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford, and he im plored Ministers to examine with attention every proposie tion that might have the effect of securing the peace and tranquillity of the country.—(Hear.) Mr. BAYNTUN entirely concurred in that part of the measure which went to disfranchise non-resident voters; but lie could not understand, nor could his consti tuents, why Government proposed to disfranchise the future freemen of the large towns, a body of persons who were interested in the prosperity of those towns.—(Hear.) The number of resident electors who were to be disfran chised was two hundred thousand. It was true that the present voters were to retain the right of voting during their lives, but he contended that there was no necessity shown for disfranchising so large a number of future freemen. He asked whether the freemen of large towns were not as respectable as the low class of 101. house holders?--(Cheers ) Wishing, as he did, to see the principles of the Bill carried into effect without delay, Ile still felt it due to his constituents to call the atten tion of the Government to so large a portion of respectable voters, whose rights ought to be held sacred, and not be destroyed by any measure of this kind. He declared himself opposed to the system of nomina tion, but he was equally opposed to a system of spoliation —(Cheers. ) lie should, therefore, willingly oppose the intoduction of that clause into the Bill. Mr. TREVOR expressed hie intention of concurring in the motion of the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford. He conceived it unjust to deprive freemen of a privilege they had obtained wholly by the sweat of their brows—(Hear, hear)—a privilege which created an honourable spirit of emulation, and by obtaining which they not only secured a right of voting to themselves, but handed it down to their posterity. A right so ob tained was as much the property of the freeman as was the coronet of the Peer. He conceived, therefore, the clause would afford a most dangerous and obnoxious precedent. Mr. B CLIVE. felt such a debt of gratitude towards the Ministers fur having brought fotward the Reform Bill, that they might safely reckon upon his support, though he begged to say that he was not pledged to any set of Ministers. One of the great objects of the Bill was to save expence at elections, and this would be beet effected by excluding the outvotets ; and lie was only sorry that they were to be admitted to vote at county elections. He wished to know in what way the seven miles, within which a man tvas to be deemed resident, were to be measured ? Lord ALTHORP said, it had been decided in Courts of Law, that the way to settle a distance was, to take the nearest road by sr hich a man could ride from any one place to any other. Colonel SIBTHORPE fully concurred in what had been said by the Hon. Members for Oxford and Durham. Expence had been talked of : that was true—his pockets— or rather his empty pockets, could tell that ; but still, lie trusted that he had encountered no expence that was not authorized by Acts of Parliament. Mr. HODGSON denied that householders were, as a body, less corrupt than freemen. Mr. J. CAMPBELL said that no one could vote for the amendment of the Hon. Member for Oxford, with out voting for the continuance of every absurd and fan tastic mode of obtaining freedom. Mr. CRESSET PELHAM rose amidst loud cries o " Question." lie said the native freemen of towns re tained an affection for the place of their birth, and ought not to be deprived of their franchise. The Committee divided... For the amendment s 17 Against the amendment Majority The CHAIRMAN then obtained leave to report progress, and sit again on Tuesday. The House adjourned at a Quarter to Seven o'clock. COUNTRY CORN MARICETS. DURING LAST WEER:. Wheat. I Barley. I Oats. Per Quarter. s. to a. s. to s. S. to S. Carlisle 57 37 26 36 Hexham 52 78 33 31 22 •29 44 Morpeth 62 66 38 40 '22 3) Penrith 54 39 Skeltield 633 '2B 26 —• 64 Winchester 60 70 34 41 23 30 42 ,1 A „6 Per Bushel. s.d. s.d. s.d. s.d. s. d. s.d. s. 01 !70Carmarthen BO 40 43 20 24 0 66 Coventry 70 90 48 54 1 3 6 40 56, 1 Newcastle (Staff.) 9 0 9 6 6 0 661 3 9 4 4 sr, 61 Northallerton 7 0 93 3 6 46, 3 3 4 0 5 ' 1 96 10 0 59 6 2 4 0 46 76 01 Swansea '7 6 8 0 4 2 4 6 2 4 2 8 0 0 Warwick I 9 0 100 46 50 22 2 6 7 3 Per 8011. Barnardeastle ; 15 6 18 010 0 00 80: 9 0 l id Durham. l id Durham 6 17 6 90 10 0 50 7 6 10 0 Richmond 115 0 19 0 10 0 10 6 74 94 10 6 0 Stockton Xl6 0 17 6 9 0 10 0 6(1 7 6 0 WAKEFIELD CORN MARKET.—Aug. '2 6 . c olii There was a vet y short supply of Wheat this morning, an crq best qualities were 3e. per quarter higher, and inferior des 01 Lions were held at higher prices. Good hard Beans were in demand, and quite as dear. Oats unaltered. 69& Wheat, Red, Norfolk and Suffolk 4Ss. 545. to 645. fine , Lin. and Cam. 4°s. 525. to 605. fine r,,ii: Yofkshire 505. 545. to 60s fine'''. White 545. 605. to 675 . . fine 73g. Foreign, Red White 4 5 ( 1. 11. 5 5 2 8: .. t t o o 58 65:: fi fi n n e e 6 1.„ 1 . Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk Lincolnshire 235. to 30s. fine „‹ Yorkshire Wold '295. to 30s. fine f:,;: - Foreign Beans, Small 175 to 30s. fin e c2i - Tick 3Bs. to Sys. fine 4,A. Oats, Potato 22.5. to 0 6s. fine •'-- Poland —s. 9.15. to 9.48. fine Friezland and Small — s. 195. to 235. fin e --- Healing I Id. to I3d. per s l ° e d: Shelling 'Vs. to 365. Od. per 1 -1,1. Malt 365. 425. fine 465. per 1 ,0 , Rapeseed ..., 20/. Os. 22/. Os. 241. Os. Per co , S 'CH M RKETS. Wheat. 1 Barley Oats. Beans . 2:2 24 21 23 :3(1 3'2 19 22 30 31 28 29 38 40 28 al 34 20 26 19 21 122 2h 34 35 Aberdeen Berwick,..,,.. Coldstream L'upar Dundee - Elgin nverness- 44 62 40 44 40 44 40 70 48 60 50 58 40 52 ~.--16 34 4 1 40 „ 49 Kelso '42 46 26 27 20 23 29 32 —,„ 44 Kirkaltly— 4. 42 49 27 39 25 32 45 48 Perth 46 58 2t 27 21 23 22 24 The size of the measure varies throughout the coin EDINBURGH MEAL MARKET. —Aug. a __.4ei. We had a middling supply of Oatmeal at this day's ws',, t i . is hich met with a dull sale, at a reduction of Is. on the 1 10 Barley and Peasemeal also fell Is. on the sack. Retail pri ce ' same as last week. Per Sack of 2801 b. Imp. I'er Stone of 141 b. 10 1 P, First Oatmeal Second ditto 1 IS 0 Second ditto ii I Barleymeal 1 10 0 Barleymeal Peaserstoal I() 0 I'easemel Pot Earley—No. 1, per cwt. 145.-2 d. 16.5. a -3d,'.!05.—Pt 5 2 1 / 41. EDINBURGH CORN MARKET.—Aug. 24 „ep , We had a middling supply of all kinds of Grain to-day, e % 1 Pease -„,i,e Pease and Beans ; New heat sold readily, but the sale °C.', tpt articles was dull. Wheat down 2s. on the top, and `2s. a ° o r average. Oats down Is. on the top, and Is. sd. on the ace, lit Pease and Beans were also down Is. on the top, and 6d. °I average. Wheat. Barley. Oats. Pease. 6 ,1 First 74s Od 35s Od 31)S (Al 42s Od 4 ' 0,1 Second , 64s Od 1.3.4 s Od '2,6s Sd 41s Od 41$ 0 Third PRICES OF PROVISIONS, ite. , 0 1 * Beef, per lb. .M Os. 30. to Os. 641. Fresh Butter, lb.& 101 o.l'o I Mutton—. 0 4 0 6 Salt Ditt0........... 010 0 1 0 Veal 0 5 Pork--- 0 0 Lamb, per qr. 0 8 Tallow, cwt.... 36 0 Quartern Loaf 0 8 l'otatoeg, 1741 b. 0 4 0; O 0 • 6 3s 0 O 0 O 6 Ditto, per es% t. 84 6 Eggs, per doz. 0 9 l a OatStraw(kpl.) 9 0 Wheat Ditto... 7 0 Barley Ditto 6 0 Hay, per 1 0 ' M A lIKET—Aug. 24. o lescription of Gtain. NC rites. I. Oats, per 2641 b. I. a• ql' , Irish l6 0 0 0 1 British lB 0 Beans, per 2601 b. I sl English Scottish I'ease, Scottish Oatmeal, per 1401 b 16 0 4 0 Flour, per 2:901b 4B 0 GLASGOW CORN There is little change in any are not plentiful, and support pi Wheat, per '2 401 b. s. d. s. d. British, old 25 0 to 30 0 X 3 0 341 0 .31r) 290 240 280 -•••••••••-••—• Dew Canada, free Irish Barley, per 3201 b. English — 0 Scottish 9.5 0 Irish CORNWALL MARKETS. a „ 0 TRußo—Wheat (average) m.otl.—Barley, lls.—Oata.' ° W l, ST. AUSTELL—Wheat, —a. to n;.—Barley, —9. to Hs."'" Os. to Si. Od. ',Y' BoomiN—Wileat (average) 2ls. Ott.— • I Is. 6,1.--OW - —Barley, . _ HELwroar—Wheat, 235. ud.—Barley, 10s. 6d. PENZANCE—Wheat, 21s. to 23s.—Barley, —s. to 135! v 03.• Os. to Os. Od.—Beef and Mutton, 51. to 6d.—Pork, 40. 10 Butter, Ild. per lb. 0 Ltskeano—Wheat, —S. 0(1. to 25s.—Barley, Ils. 641.-•• Oath to Os. Od. _l3ll Sr. Cotumn—Wheat, 248. to 2.ss.—Barley, 113. to and Mutton. 4d. to sd.—Veal, 4d.—Lamb, sd. LAUNCESTON—Wheat (average) 273.0d.—Barley,11s. 10s. 6d.—Beef, sd.—Mutton, sd. MINING INTELLIGENCE. Tons. Quantity of Copper Ore sold at Itestruth last Thurday 3,26 6 V Quantity of fine Average Produce -- nr-J Amouut of Sale, 19,6191. 164.0d.—Average Standard. THE SCOTTISH CHIEFS.—We are requesP, to state that the next number of the " Standard Nnee ) o to be published with the Magazines ou the first of r month, will contain Miss JANE PORTER'S celeb° Romance of " The Scottish Chiefs," with a new I n t l; duction and Notes written expressly for this publics t, and with illustrations from drawings, by 11PCLtset . graved by ROLLS. l 1 LORDS CHANCELLOR.—WOLSEY'S loi r 'i pageantry was on all occasions singularly ostentationev jars wonderfully with our modern notions of the der y ment truly becoming a Judge. Those who have bee t :io customed to observe the exceedingly plain attire aed, V plicity of beiring of Lord BROUGHAM, as he wenn° ? way on foot to Westminster-hall, might well att'l themselves by contrasting in their " mind's eye" tb e o (herons pomp of the ancient Cardinal. When be i e li out of his house for Westminster-hall he was apparell li° in fiery crimson satin, wearing upon his head a roan A 4 lion, lle had also a tippet of fine sables about lii° ''' l f holding in his hand a large orange, the meat of w hich . , taken out, and filled up again with a sponge sou G „! „ vinegar. There was also borne before him, first, the ' 4 Seal of England ; and then hi. hat, by a Nobleman , b4 .' headed ! Then followed his Pursuivant-at-Arms °l t. .? great mace of silv e r, gilt; half a dozen footmen wi ty li poll-axes in their hands ; and, when arrived near the ,/ of the Court, his Gentlemen Ushers used to roar a rl it " On, my Lords and Masters; on before ; make 0 / my Lord's Grace !" 0 / 1 4 PORTRAIT PAINTING IN ENGLA%,(' DANIEL MY TENS, when he painted " The Spinster a'', ELIZABETH," then vain, fantistic, wrinkled, and oldie charged by her MAJESTY, on his allegiance, to be 0., not to put any shadows in her face. The obad l i painter obeyed, and got largess. It would almost ef' o r tl.at Sir THOMAS LAWRENCE had received a like ii i) tion ; for the last portrait of his illustrious patron t iiii presented with a fa ce th a t might suit one of the ej Kings in Macbeth, whilst his royal dandy wig is corir/ visible, and the most prominent feature of the elegan t ,/ position. The renowned Lord CHESTERFIELD har, v to have a very large h e ad. Ile was sitting to a tyro l'ii picture. Few Noblemen possessed a finer understa t y or a more refined taste than his Lordship ; but vanitY r ,/ dominated over his judgm en t in this affair of liinn itir llf " Mr. Gusxo," said his Lordship, "is it n ot I V strange, and indeed worthy your notice, that all but tl' sy very celebrated portrait-painters, should have drawt l ,, e figures with preternaturally large heads ? Now, S''',j, ate a rising artist, and 1 would advise you as a frier o f you wish to obtain patronage, to err the other 11 3 0 l design your heads rather too small than too large. sv Mister GUSTO bore his wits about him, and inst e e el giving the proportion of the head of an ox, substitnt, co; size of that of a full grown calf. "If wise men an,1.,j,,0 noisseurs play the fool on these occasions," said u,orh noßoucit, " it may be asked of critic declaimers, 'to; the portrait-painter, if he wish to live, to li ve a honest ?"—Library of the Fine Arts. IRTHS. r On the tl2d inst at the R B ectory, Carlton, the lady 0- f the , Ott ' C. Eyre, of a son. ~ On the 27th inst the lady of %V. Hughes, Esq. n' ii• square, Bloomsbury, of a daughter. ro On the 22d inst. at Spring-grove, Hounslow, Mrs. 1-h of a son. On the 21st inst. at Sidmouth, the lady of Lieut. ‘-'• ley, R.N., of a daughter. , oci MARRIED. On the 27th inst. at Hornsey, R. B. Brander, Esq., '. ° ,, i i ,, ,' late Wm. Brander, Esq., of Morden.hall, Surrey, 1 "„v,:' youngest daughter of Henry St. John, Esq., of H orn %i l grand-daughter of the late Hon. and Very Rev. St. An' Jo Onhn, th D.D. Dean of Worcester. al" ' , ncl'; e 2.3,1 instant, at the Collegiate Church, 1 63 4, by the Rev. Richard Hall Thorpe, Mr. Henry S Ann's-square, to Miss Plicebe Shaw, of the same pla ce. , cop On the 27th inst. at St. Martin-in.the-Fields, M r. 15 10 Clement's-lane, to Charlotte, second daughter of Mr. f Wel, of Charing-cross. : IttleP On the 25th inst. at Hayling Island, Hants, W. H. --'„f to Mary, only daughter of the late Rev. Dr. Rogers , " comb-house, Wilts. l { DI e ' On the 23d inst. at Bath, Lady E Gledstanes, widow of ~, Lieut.-General Sir A. Gledstanes. ~1 1 ,0 1 On the 25th inst. at Bores, A. Hamilton, Esq. o f Cu- ~,,j street, aged h 3. p le On the 2tith inst. of a decline, Joshua, fifth son of .• Esq., aged 25. ire On the 27th inst. Mr. Edw. Ca•sar, of Fore-street, Cr , aged 59. 's:," l On the 18th inst. W. 31. Forster, Esq. of Lincoln Jane, his wife. They were among the sufferers on Rothsay Castle. --------- I f .-- PaINTED AND PUBLISHED BY MI.14.1)0 YOU,s' ,(I. . 1‘ SUN OFFICE, STRAND, 112, LONDOYi "0-2, otir F l s s il H E GA ork P"D aily,from Adi 14tAlO ROTH I E ' 1 1 1 1 ENE N.OTION THE CE otri fly view Eight in tt r Payment C iltlwa • le lighted d int is by a sa A Putt Bvo. v Gull Br um JOHN 1418°10• wilt and TH r, Guide I In E tli ttetiono In Ei vo. A Coin 14 lih no. wit, AN,,, ..ocK,s 14 181110 • with B ) , Queti FlE 13 Y R. s Aiui F 1 " ), Travellers' Phrases as French 1 QVER ST C —4 l , ital Live a b cklied Carr T( In ]