The Sun. — London, England, 1825-05-21 00:00:00

THE LONDON JOURNALS. DAILY Ea tr(ictc from the-Morning Papers, May 21, 1825. . , • . . [TETE. PUBLIC LEDGER.] 'Letters were received-yesterday from Zaute, dated as late as the 427th ult., and we are happy .to,say _that they confirm our former accounts of Atte defeat of Ibrahim Pacha before Nayarit). In - his tverations agait)it that place, he lost a consi ',tlerahle part. of his troops, together with the .whale of his baggage and artillery ; and we may now regard his' expedition as having wholly failed. 13uyond this gratifying intelligence, .nothing of any importance transpired yesterday ; yet the'money market displayed the most le . w_e6sl) - symptoms, which most of our Evening Contemporaries, seeing a lack of foreign matter to account for it, ascribed it to the pecuniary transactions of ‘ 4 a great Capitalist" with the ' , French Government--a puddle in a storm! The Writer must be very blind himself, or think his - readers stone blind, to think that the operations of atiy individual, however great his means may - be,, eon seriously affect the London Market for any time. Those who impute the depression of 'our funds to this cause, have either consummate *ffrontcry, or an obliquity of understanding that distorts every object which it reflects. The .obvious cause of the panic which has seized the money market., is the hostile attitude in which the rejection of the Catholic Bill has placed the Government towards the great majority of the people of Ireland. Its rejection was marked by such irritating language, that temperate men tremble fer.the Consequences. We trust, how ever) that their fears will, prove vain ; and we must say that our confidence is wholly derived from the loyalty of the great Body, whose Claims to be admitted to the full benefits of our -excel lent Constitution, have been met with abuse and menace. We firmly believe that nothing would afford greater satisfaction to their opponents than to see them give way to their angry feelings, as this would seem to justify the hostility of the former, and give them a pretext for adopting extra constitutional measures of precaution. It is this fear which has alarmed the thinking part of the Public, who seeing a Minister, to whom they laid given credit at least for a cautious, temporizing policy, act the part of a complete agitator upon this question, are absolutely be wildered at the portentous aspect which this great question has assumed in consequence.— 'They had placed so much confidence in his - prudence and moderation, that the shock at at teeing themselves so painfully undeceived,. has. deprived them of the faculty of exa mining theiubject digpassionately. For our parts, We are glad that he has thrown off the mask, as an openienenvy is less dangerous titan an insidious friend.; and we, know at the same .titne that as' a breath bai made him, ' ' the arbiter of the des iSnies of a great Nation, the same breath can re .dtee hiii),to the rank of his fellow-sUbjects when ever:it-pleases him. We, therefore, Cannot help thinking that the Public have taken the alarm -unnecessarily, particularly as the Catholic leaders have- too much good sense to fall into the snare - that has been laid for them. The sentiments of the ,first Personage in the Kingdom, with respect to their just claims, are the same as they ever were ; and if they have not induced his Ministers to-grant them, it is only another melancholy proof of the ascendancy which a number of men, leagued together, may acquire even in a country possessing so much public spirit as this. This ascendancy was never fully disclosed before; and therefore the termination of this rnischievous•ano maly may be anticipated with something like certainly. [THE T 1,51.65.1 A` silence, little short of stupefaction, appears to, have taken - place of that restless bustle and vivacity- which reigned- among all classes of the political world before the bill for relieving the Catholics was rejected. We have yet no account of the sensation produced in Ireland by. that ominous an.: infatuated vote, nor is it at an early day that this country ought to look for its full and inevitable consequences. The vote itself was not the most unfortunate occurrence of last. Tnesday. The spirit in which it was pronounced by the leaders of the anti-Catholic majority was. such as to arm the sentence with intolerable stings. Lt was not alone an unfavourable, it had : the appearance 'of an angry vote. We say nothing of..thejl ussar officers who talked in characteristic language about fighting their countrymen, de fending positions, and so forth ; but we lament to have . heard a Bishop so intolerant as the Right Reverend Father who was loudest in his denunciation of. the Catholics ; and still more do we lament the tone of the Prime Minister, who forgot his argument, and even did . apparent violence to- the constitution of a temperate or. phlegmatic mind, for- the sake of pronouncing against- six millions of Catholics-eternal exclusion from the rights of British subjects. Lord Li verpool's speech was-not an objection to time or circumstances merely;—it was an. objection to the printipte of the measure of ernancipatioti ; and, if good ,for_aoy thing, would lie of equal force an J3ip4rpd years hence as at this moment. It vosi.fall,. besides, of. exasperating sentiments. What inference, then, is •it probable the Catho-. lids will_draw;_from an opposition. to their claims thus constructed ? We fear, this—(though God grit - that our fears may be unfounded)— that,- through, the .Legislature of the empire, xlvrougli]; the doors of- the Constitution, they cal! Ele'yechop! for access to its benefits; and, there for!,that legal possession being withheldfroin the/p i -they must•seek it by means which the Con #titution does not recognize.. Taking forcible possession-of a right refused, is far..frorn being a practice unknown, , to.lrish claimants. But is that species,of,yekev,pecoliar, to Ireland.? Iles the British -empire never experienced the effects of, stfch experiments in other ,and ,most memorable instances ? What was the nature of the quarrel with our lost and inestimable North American LT!iglapd, oppressed and.insolted-them,. and obstinately denied Ahem that. .redress ; ,of grievances which they humbly supplicated : and what followed I Her bullyings were at last met with defiance; her bayonets with bullets—fo-' reign nations joined the fray ; the grievances were reduced, and the empire dismembered ! Let no man attempt the shallow and childish answer — that England was a gainer by the Separation of those glorious provinces. If she gained by their commerce, after she had surrendered their sove reignty, more good than she had previously de rived from it, the cause was her own selfish and scandalous misgovernment. She had cramped and' shackled their trade, and done so much to cripple their resources while in bondage to her, that the instant they were free to employ their own in dustry as they pleased, the fruits of it overflowed upon their oppressors. But can such a fact be brought in proof that England lost no treasure, because when possessed of it she had not under stood its value ? The separation of the United States was a blow the most terrible, as well as dis graceful, that ever kingdom suffered ; second only to what England would sustain were Ireland to fol low their example. And what is to prevent such a fatal catastrophe ?—For what were the causes of the American war ? In one word—injustice. The people complained that they were taxed and ruled over without being represented—that is to say,. that the principles of the Constitution were violated in their persons—for that they had none of those securities for life or purse, which it is the essence of representation to afford the constituent body. Is there, then, in the whole range of history, a parallel, so far as it goes, more strik ing than this of our former North American fel low-subjects to the case of the Irish Catholics ? The Irish are taxed without being represented, for they cannot choose for their Rpresentatives those who have a common interest with them. The Irish are prosecuted and sentenced be fore Tribunals, the Officers of which are of a sect who avow themselves to have a sepa rate feeling from the Catholics, and who found the exclusion of the latter rrom the bench of justice, on the consciousness that the distinction is real. Irish Catholics are persecuted more than were the Americans, for another reason — their faith is made a tax upon them, which that of the Colonists was not. What then, let us ask once more, is to prevent the same causes from producing similar effects in Ireland as elsewhere ? Lord Liverpool, indeed, says that Ireland will still be quiet—that her disturbances have no con nexion with Catholic grievances—and that it is only from evil-minded incendiaries we have to fear an excitement of the multitude. The same language was employed towards the Americans — their leaders were nicknamed—their grievances were denied—their resistance was laughed at. Still they triumphed, still they put to shame the Ministers who had oppressed, provoked, and made war upon them. Lord Lives pool knows all this. lie ought, better than most men, to have been apprized of it—better than most men, to have gathered wisdom from that disastrous history. Lord Liverpool ought tb remember who was Secretary at War during the contest with our American colonies, and in spite of whose ob stinacy, and (political) bigotry, and subservience to Royal prejudices (we mean no personal dis respect to the Noble Lord's feelings while thus speaking of a public character), it was, that the war so wickedly excited, had an ending so dis graceful and deplorable. We are not conscious of any motives for this personal appeal to Lord Li verpool which ought to impair its force. We do not accuse Lord Liverpool of wrong or unworthy intensions ; but believing him to be an honest man, we implore him to resist that impulse which seems to push him onward, and the Bri tish empire with him, to a catastrophe only to be paralleled by those infatuated councils, and those melancholy results, which by common con sent form the most disgraceful page in our histo ry. Let not that terrible example of the loss of America have happened in vain ; let it be ever present to the mind of every Statesman, as a warning against the infatuated indulgence of pre judices, however ancient—against the obstinate adherence to opinions, however backed by po pular passion or popular bigotry. [MORNING HERALD.] All idea of repealing the sanitary laws against the plague seems to be abandoned, and very justly. It is surprising that the question should, for a moment, be seriously entertained—even supposing the doctrine of contagion to be shaken by the arguments or the facts adduced against it. Where error would be so fatal, so horrible, no thing but positive scientific certainty should be proceeded upon. Now this certainty cannot be attained in the particular question. It is true that medical knowledge is, like other branches of natural science, established by experiment and induction ; but the history of medicine, as well as the reason of the thing, proves that here the induction is full of uncertainty and danger. Is there not a new revolution in the practice of physic every twenty or thirty years— introducing the most diversified and even oplposed modes of treatment ? If there, be any one career of investigation in which men lay down theories and build systems with more confidence and absurdity than another, it is medicine. There is this wide and fatal difference between the in ductions in medicine and in other branches of - experimental science. In the latter—take chemis try for instance—the Professor tells you that he has made certain experiments which produced uni formly certain results, and instead of trusting to his report, he instructs you how to repeat these ex periments for yourself, and thus obtain the evidence of your own observation. But the Professor of me dicine who records the results of his experiments upon his patients, does not, and cannot do this. In judging the value of his inductions or cases, we must take into account his personal veracity and the accuracy of his observations. But what a source is here of uncertainty and error —even admitting perfect good faith. How liable is , the judgment to be hoodwinked and misled by self love and zeal for a favourite doctrine f—persons witnessing, the, same,case—or it may be called the same, experiment, frequently insist upon.oppo_ site premises, and draw opposite conclusions.-- The French : physicians---men of , unquestioned honour and competency, who weat.to Barcelona for the special purpose of investigating the yellow fever, who went through the hospitals, and saw the same cases, were divided in opinion as to I the contag ious or non-contagious quality of the disease. It is not impossible that the accumu lation of evidence, and new lights of knowledge, collateral and direct, may in process 'of distant time settle this question. But this is mere spe culation. The necessary basis of certainty seems at present unattainable. It is, however, incum bent upon the Government to give every en couragement and facility to the inquiry, and to obtain and preserve all the evidence that can be procured—not for the purpose of legislating, but for the promotion of knowledge, and more for the use of posterity than our own. [MORNING CHRONICLE.] An interesting discussion took place last night, on the proposition for raising the salaries of the Judges. The Chancellor of the Exchequer took something from the salaries of the Puisne Judges, on the Bench, and added to the amount of the retiring salaries. Mr. Scarlett thought the re tiring salaries still too small, and instanced the ease of ,Baron Wood, who remained on the Bench longer, after he was unfit to discharge his judicial duties from motives of economy. Mr. Brougham thought too much was given to the Puisne Judges, and too little to the Chiefs. He objected too that the proportion between the Master of the Rolls, the Vice-Chancellor, and the Puisne Judges, had been departed from. Ile paid a high compliment to the present Vice-Chancellor, who, he said, " was really the ornament of the Equity Courts, was no political partisan, and did nothing but decide causes. He sat from ten o'clock in the morning until four in the afternoon, when in health, and he did not, like a political Judge, delay his entrance till eleven, and leave at two." His ob servations on the power of promoting the Puisne Judges to the Chief Justiceships, were met by the Attorney-General, who said that promotions from one Chief Justiceship to another had always been practised. But one evil does not form a justification of another. [BRITISH PRESS.] The Jury Laws Bill was re-committed last night, in order that it might undergo some verbal amendments. This important and excellent measure is now completed. The principal change made in it since it was printed relates to the qualifications of Jurors. Landholders assessed at 201. or persons possessing personal property to the amount of 4001., are now competent to serve on Juries. Several absurdities and anomalies of the statute law are repealed ; and the whole sys tem rendered as perfect as possible. No Minis ter of England ever performed a greater service to his country than Mr. Peel has accomplished in this instance. ' Mr. Scarlett and Mr. Brougham warmly expressed their commendations of the Bill, and their sense of the laborious exer tions of the Right Hon. Secretary in maturing it. The subject of the Judges' Salaries after wards came before the House. The Chancel lor of the Exchequer stated, that on further consideration he was disposed to decrease the sa laries of the Puisne Judges to 5,500!., in order that their retiring pension might be raised from 2,300!. to 2,800/. With respect to the promo tion of Puisne Judges, the Right Hon. Gentle man observed, that though nothing could be more unconstitutional than to hold it. out as the reward of political services, yet it would be wrong to deprive the Crown absolutely of the power of promotion. Mr. Brougham brought forward the motion of which lie had given notice on this subject ; but it was negatived by a majo rity of 83, the numbers being—against it 112, and in its favour only 29. [MORNING POST.] The House of Peers adjourned last night for the Holidays to Wednesday, and the Commons to Thursday next. Much business was trans acted by the latter in the course of the evening. The Leith Docks' Bill was thrown out on a Se cond Reading by a majority of 41 to 14.—The House then decided that Richard le Poer Trench Pilkington, who had confessed himself the sole author of the Petition imposed some time since on Sir John Newport, in favour of the Catholic Claims, should be brought to the Bar in the cus tody of the Sergeant at Arms for the pur pose of being taken to Newgate as guilty of a gross breach of privilege.—Mr. Brougham afterwards gave notice that, he should submit a proposition next week to the House for founding an University in the City of Lon don.—Mr. Secretary Peel's excellent Bill for securing the complete independence of Juries went through a Committee and brought once more upon its author the just and universal ap plause of all parties.---The last business was re ceiving the Report of the Bill for raising the Judges' Salaries. Mr. Brougham moved a Reso lution tending to deprive Puisne Judges of the respectability of being promoted to the Chief Justiceship; but his proposition was rejected by a majority of 83, the numbers being, for it, 29 against it, 112 ; and, after some discussion the farther consideration of the Report, was post poned to Friday next. [NEW TIMES.] In the House of Commons, last night, the Leith Docks' Bill was thrown out by a majority of 27. Mr. Brougham gave notice of his intention to bring in a Bill for incorporating a University in the metropolis ; thus seeking to realise the scheme lately brought before the public, and which few persons at the time considered to be practicable. We believe that several com mercial men of education and influence have been induced to countenance the plan. Mr. Peel moved the commitment of the Juries Bill, and stated the objects lie proposed to accomplish by this most praiseworthy measure, by the in troduction of which the Right Honourable Gentleman has secured to himself imperisha ble fame, and the gratitude not merely of his own countrymen, but the approbation and praise of all enlightened foreigners.--The Continen tal papers have been eager in expressing their admiration of his conduct. He stated last night that he meant to remove what had hitherto been a fertile ground of complaint, the Master of the Crown Office having had the power, in all case's, to select the Special Jury from the list in his hand. FOR THE SUN. THE QUARANTINE LAWS AND THE PLAGUE. Ma. EDITOR,—Mr. BOYLE attributes the Plague to the exhalations breathed into the at mosphere from noxious minerals; this, added to uncleanliness, appears a probable reason; others attribute it to swarms of minute insects ; its ori gin, however, is a mere matter of speculation, and of no consequence to us; but what does ma. terially concern us is, that the Plague is disse minated by means of the effluvia, or emission of subtile . corpuscles from infected bodies, and which taint the very air ; but the air, in that state, cannot reach these shores, for the reason assigned in a letter on this subject, which ap peared in the Herald of the 12th inst. It only remains then to be proved, that these corpuscles actually do taint the air. The scent of the rose, for instance, is not caused by a dormant and in active principle in the flower; but by the emis sion of effluvia, which act upon our olfactory nerves ; these are evidently conveyed through the medium of the air ; for the effect is sensibly felt at some distance from the object: the human frame, likewise, is perpetually emitting an ef fluvium, by means of an invisible transpiration, •which becomes, however, visible at a certain temperament. This may be proved by 6 s t4oplalc, or visible perspiration, which is the effluvia em bodied : and the existence of effluvia may be proved thus : if a body be immersed 'in water, a number of bubbles arise, which are the ef fluvia escaping. Now, when these effluvia are in jurious to the human frame, it is certain, that by passing from the infected body into the atmosphere; and thence, into any other body which that atmosphere acts upon, they must cause the same disease in the previously healthy body. Hence, I conclude, that cotton and other goods, being impregnated with a considerable proportion of these corpuscles, the plague, is• thus imported to England, and other countries, where it is not indiginous. This is equally applicable to all other infectious disorders. Against this, it is urged, that there have been instances of people escaping the infection, when actually at the place where the plague was raging. That a few may have escaped the contagion is possible; for the epidermis, or outermost covering of the body, or the culls, or true skin, might, in those subjects, be so formed, as not to admit the infected corpus cles : or, when we consider, that a single grain of sand will cover 125,000 pores, through which issue perspiration, it cannot be deemed surprising that they should, occasionally, be so far disordered, as not to admit the infection : moreover, that they are of different sizes, or differently formed, I think, is quite certain; because, every one per spires insensibly, but all do not sensibly ; and this I imagine to be caused by the size or formation of the pores of the skin ; and hence, we may ac count for a few persons escaping infection, whilst others must infallibly receive it. Ramsgate, May 19, 1825. P. V. K. P. S. Who, then, but a madman, can desire an alteration in our excellent and salutary Qua rantine Laws. They are accused, too., of being ridiculous. If a man, whilst hunting, was in the art of leaping over a hedge, on the other side of which there was a precipice, and he was prevented by some one telling him of the danger,_ would he turn round and call the friendly adviser a ridicu lous fellow for his kindness ? MEETING AT LEITH. EDINBURGH, MAT 14.—Yesterday a Meeting of the In habitants of Leith was held in the Exchange Coffee Room, called for the purpose of petitioning the House of Lords against the proposed Dock Bill. WlLLtax AuLn, Esquire, in the Chair. _ _ The CHAIRMAN stated the object and purport of the meet ing. He said, that although great amendments had been made in the Committee, yet the town of Leith ought not to relax in its efforts to obtain the total repeal of the bill. The measure proposed was one of the vilest and grossest jobs that was ever published. The. town of Leith had, no doubt, spent a consi derable sum in defending altat they conceived to be their just rights, but it had cost their opponents a great deal more. Of the result, he.had still sanguine hopes, the conviction of several Members of Parliament were decidedly hostile to the proposed measure ; and to one in the Committee they were deeply in debted for the interest lie had taken—lie alluded to their towns man, Mr. Gladstone, who, had been one of the mightiest chain pions, and who deservedly was entitled to some mark of their estimation. Some of the gentlemen present would inform them what had been done by those in London. Mr. Seawrit'read the following Report of the Committee : " Your Committee had hoped that it would have been in their power now to report their complete success in Parliament, by throwing out the Dock Company's Bill; hut they have been disappointed in this expectation by the operation of circum stances which they could not controul. Although, however, they cannot report complete success, they have the satisfaction to state, that' the exertions of Leith in the cause have not been altogether fruitless. Previously to the Easter Holidays,' an offer of compromise was made through Mr. Gladstone, a' gentleman who has devoted the greatest attention to the Bill, and for whose zeal the inhabitants of Leith can never be sufficiently grateful ; but, on considering the terms of the compromise, and taking the opinion of Counsel on the subject, the Committee came to the resolution respectfully to decline the same, giving their reasons, which satisfied Mr. Gladstone that they acted properly in doing so. That you may judge of the terms of the compromise, and its result had it been gone into, an appendix to the Parliamentary state is herewith produced, which shows the matter in the clearest light. Although they did refuse this compromise, they have lost nothing that that would have gained for you, for in the Committee of the House of Commons the Bill has been modified in almost every respect, as was then proposed. It may be satisfactory to know what good you have already achieved by your opposition to. the Bill, the knowledge of which,. far from slackening the exertions of the community, should tend to in crease them, seeing that much has yet to be gained, which can only be obtained by a steady perseverance and continuance of those exertions which have hitherto been made. By this Bill, as originally printed, it was proposed by doing away the exemp tion in favour of vessels making more than eight voyages; as to payment of dock dues, to burden the trade with an annual tax of - £lsoo '0 0 And a sum proposed to be had under the name of entry dues, was equal to, per annum 300 0 0 £1,600 0 0 This annual burden was given up on the first show of serious opposition to the Bill, and calculating this sum at twenty-five years purchase, the public has been relieved of a burden equal to - . - - £40,000 0 0 • The Bill was then introduced into Parliament, constituting the Company, with a capital of - - - £300,000 0 0 This has been reduced to 265,000 0 0 Making a difference of X 35,000 0 0 61 per cent. per annum on which is - -f £2,187 10 0 And by a clause introduced at the suggestion of the opponents to the measure, the feu-duties are to be sold, which will make an annual difference of Together which at 25 years. purchase is 1,800 0 0 £3,087 10 0 99,575 0 0 £139,575 - O . 0 Showing a reduetion.of the pmpo.ed• burdens: of &capital sum of about 140,000/. Nor is this City of Edinburgh are moreover bound to expend the sum of 20,000/. nn extending the Pier, without having the privilege of resorting to the ob. noxious tax on the luggage of passengers, from which they ha calculated they would derive a revenue of 18001. per annum.-- They are not without hopes, besides, that another sum of 25,0001. will be deducted from the capital, which will, fie a very material s a ving. All efForts, however; to reduce the dividend have been unavailing, and the Joint stocx Company are still to be allowed to pocket the large turn of 6i per cent. for Their money, besides paying all ex pences, while the whole debt, it is proved by the Officers of the City of Edinburgh themselves, can be borrowed at 3i.. It is unnecessary to spew how injurious this will be to the port of Leith. The debt will be perpetuated, and the clock dues, which would, at no distant day, have been removed to the great advantage of our trade, will now be an everlasting burden to our most material prejudice. Your Sub-Committee have received assurances from high quarters, that the principle of the Bill is so obnoxious, and the illegal transactions of the Council, in the sale of shares, so apparent, that it never can receive the sanc tion of the House of Lords, and that there it will, in all pro bability, nay almost to a certainty, be thrown out. The Sub- Committee would, therefore, again press on, the attention of the Committee the absolute necessity of unanimity . and further persevering exertions, that the cause in which they have all embarked may finally be brought to a successful termination. Mr. WADDELL moved a series of resolutions against the measure, which was seconded by Mr. Dudgeon, sen., and una• nimously agreed to. Mr. ScsitTn proceeded to read a statement of the shares subscribed for, bought, sold, and retained by the Members of the Town Council, from which it appeared that 18,5001.. had been the original amount of their subscriptions, that they had bought 38,4001. of stock in addition, that they had .sold 44,3001.. and now only retained 12,600/. Of this sum the' Lord Provost holds 6,300/., Sir Wm. Arbuthnot 1,000/., Archibald M'Kinlay 300/., and Mr. Carlyle Bell 5,0001: In' this statement Mr. Turnbull, the City Chamberlain, is said to have subscribed, 2,6001.—t0 have bought 9,oool.—and to . have sold the whole. A letter from Mr. Turnbull to Mr. Goddart, explanatory of his share of this transaction, was read; it stated that the 9,000/. referred, was held by him for a friend, and that with regard to his own shares,. he sold out whenever he saw they became a matter of speculation. On another analysis, it appears that there was subscribed fin , the city, and for persons members of the Council at the' ime - - £63,001 By persons formerly in the Council - - 13y bankers to the city, and by persons in its employ- 29,500 _ _ _ ment - - - - - - -- 42,1 00- By persons nearly related to the above three classes - 17,700' By persons on mandatesaboversonsinthe- classes for others of their friends - By persons subscribing " for self and others," it being declared in prospectus, that no persons signing as mandatories are in no way responsible for such sub scriptions - - - 7,200' 13,000 . £172,500 Of the remaining sum, there was subscribed by one merchant in Leith, the sum of - . - 1,000 By merchants and dealers in Edinburgh, 14 in num ber, to the extent of - - - 32,000 The remaining sum of - - - - 94,590 is held by a number of ladies, clergymen, country gentlemen, and gentlemen in the law, the medical profession, and the army £300,000 Mr. CassELs - said he had returned from London-that fore.. noon, he had carefully attended the whole proceedings of the Committee, and had private conversation with several members of Parliament on the matter, and they were convinced that their cause did not rest on the question as to who were.or were not sharehol;lers • and if it depended only on th a t, th e y wou ld b e sure to lose their cause. The real question was whether there should be ajoint stock company. There was no difference in the opinion of the Committee as to the right of the.MeMbers of Council in becoming shareholders. That subject had been frequently before the Committee, and had been fully argued by council, and after a strict investigation, the Committee had almost unanimously agreed on this point. The question before the meeting rested on very narrow grounds. The. great ques tion they ought to rest upon and press should be, whether the Town of Edinburgh had the pow.et to- make a sale of this property to a joint stock company: The question.rested .-on very narrow ground, and should be urged with all, ingeniiity ; it was whether the property should be disposed of,to a joint stock company, and whether it would not be oppressive or injurious to trade. Mr. C. proceeded to state the bad ' , acts that might be expected to Leith, from the disposalef the Docks to a third party. He allowed that the Town Council taking shares was disgraceful, but still that was not the only and the most powerful objection, it was that the measure would be op pressive and prejudicial to trade. The Edinburgh committee had been very attentive to their interest, and had .stisa . . in the handsomest manner given every information to him when he was in London. The committee was not secret, it was open: for the admission of every one. He concluded by pressing : on the attention of the meeting, the necessity of urging the op pressiveness it would create on the trade of the port. It had been held out in London in some printed papers, that should the measure be lost, that the Council would increase the har bour and dock dues. But, said he, let them, for his own part, rather than there should be a joint stock company, he would . submit to the imposition of any additional dues, knowing that they would go to the reduction of the debt. Mr. lidacriE said that the Magistrates had not the power to raise dock dues without the permission of the Leith Dock Committee. Mr. SCARTH said that Mr. Cassels wished them only to confine themselves to one point, but they ought to argue all the points of their cause. There was good reason to believe, froru a recent decision iu the Court of Chancery, that the job would not succeed in the House of Lords, as the decision went directly - ' against the city of Edinburgh's right to dispose of the docks, they being trustees. He then read a comparative statement of the proceeds of the docks under the present system, and under the Joint Stock Company, which stated that under the present system with the state of trade, that if money were borrowed at WI per cent. the surplus would be 4,190, while-under a Joint Stock Company paying 61- per cent. the annual deficit would be 541/. • _ _ _ _ _ _ Mr. PIIILIP said a few words in support of the resolutions. Mr. SCAIIT/I then read the petition to the House of Lords, which was unaniptously agreed to ; after which, the meeting separated. A great number of gentlemen subscribed the petition.-- (Edinburgh Courant, May 14. ) COAL MARKET, MAY 20. Ships sold 161. Ships at Market. Newcastle - 15. Sunderland - Price. 1298 Od to 38s ad 28s 6d to 39s Oa COURSE OF EXCHANGE, May 20. Amsteitlaw Ditto, at. Sight l2 19 Hof terdmo l2 3 \ntwelti l2 3 • Handmigh Altotia 36 9 di Us. 36 10 017E1 Paris,3 liziy's sight Ditto ...„. ' Boni demix, ditto Berlin 7' 0 Frankforhiii the Main Pete! slitirgh . 9+' Vienwt 9 - 52 Trieste- 9 52 Madrid Cadiz • 36* • Effective !Whoa Barcelona cvillr Gibraltat Leghorn 49i, Getwo ... 458 -Venice, Ital. Liv. 47 Malta ---Naples Palermo . l22b pet O. Lisbon Oporto ItioJatteiro BalliA • . 56 Dublin .... 93 Curls qii pet Cent. BULLION Portugal Golll,i n Coin I n 0 0 per Og. Foreign Cold, in Bars 3l; 9 6 New Doubloons New 'Dollars 0 4 1 Silver Standard in Hats..... BIRTH. Yesterday morning, the 20th instant, at his house in York place, Portman-square, the Lady of Henry Charles Hoare, Esq. of a son. MARRIED. On the 18th inst., at st. Ueorge's, John Bishop, of Bernard street, Russel-square, Esq. to Elizabeth, youngest daughter of the late Richard Daston, of the County of Lincoln, Esq. DIED. -- • On Friday, May 20, at her house in Bedford-square, Mrs. Everett, widow of the late Thoinas Everett, Esq. M.P. Printed and Published for the PROPRIETORS, at the SUN. OFFICIi, No. 112, Strand, by J. B. CARSTAIRS I