The Sun. — London, England, 1861-07-10 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS.—(YESTERDAY.) The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Brecon and Merthyr Tydvil Junction Railwah Swansea Trust Harbour, Waveney Valley Railway, West Hartlepool Harbour and Railway (Capital, &c.), Mold and Do ne g al Junction Railway, Newcastle-upon- Tyne, Derwent, and Weardale Railway, Bristol Channel Pilotage, Lynn and Sutton-bridge Railway, Llanelly Rail way and Dock (New Lines), Swansea Vale Railway, and )30M0 other bills, were read a second time. The following bills were read a third time and passed : Middleton Estates, Great Southern and Western Railway E stension), Great Southern and Western Railway (C api tal), 'Marlborough Railway, Barnsley Coal Railway, Oswestry, Ellesmere, and Whitchurch Railway, South Yorkshire "Railway Extention), Bolton Corporation, Rathkeale and Newcastle Junction Railway, and Dublin ;Corpora tion. POOR ASSESSMENTS (SCOTLAND) BILL The Earl of CAMPERDOWN presented petitions against the bill. The Earl of AIRLIE, in moving the second reading of the bill, said that at the present time there were no less than four modes of assessment in force in Scotland, and the object of this bill was to abolish that system and in troduce a system applicable to all descriptions of assessable property. Under the existing system there were grievances which it was desirable should be redressed; and amongst these was the want of efficient representation at the paro chial boards. There was also a mode of rating ac cording to what had been called " means and substance" in practice which gave rise to a variety of ineonsistencies which necessarily impaired the efficiency of the system. In proof of the popularity of the bill, he adverted to the fact that the petitions presented to the other house in favour of the bill exceeded by a large number thosepresented on any question relative to Scotland during the present session. He went into some details in support of the alterations which the bill proposed to introduce into the existing law. The Earl of CAMPERDOWN opposed the bill. He complained that it had been introduced into the other house by a private member, a course which would not have been adopted if the bill related to England. He objected also to the want of a proper inquiry into the work ing of the poor law in Scotland preliminary to bringing forward this bill. The question to be considered was whether they should make it compulsory on persons to give up their right of local taxation, to which, for some reason or other, they appeared to be attached ? He contended that the provisions of the bill were opposed to the 35th section of the Poor-law Act. He appealed to the noble lord (Earl of Airlie) to pause before he pushed forward a measure of this importance, and to the Governm ent to enquireinto the working of the existing law in Scotland before they pro ceeded to legislate on this subject. The powers which the bill proposed to confer on an irresponsible body in Edin burgh were very wide , a nd required careful consideration. After a short discussion, the bill was read a second time, EAST INDIA COUNCIL BILL. Lord DE GREY and RIP ON, on moving the second rea ding of this bill, explained its objects, the changes it proposed, and the necessity which existed for its adoption. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH thought, as regarded the Government of India, that it was most mischievous to make great and frequent changes, and. that the provisions of this bill had gone beyond the necessity of the case, and urged that they should govern India for India, and through the people of that country. He objected altogether to the principle of the bill. The Duke of ARGYLL said that the bill made very little alteration in the Government of India, and therefore the animadversions of the noble earl were undeserved. The bill made no change in the relations between the Governor- General and his Council, except in the direction of strength ening the hands of the former, in the event of any sudden action being necessary on the part of the Government. The noble duke explained that the principle of the measure really was to simplify the governmental functions, and render the Gevenaor- General practically supreme. Lord LYVEDEN said his great objection to this bill was that it seemed to tome to this, that they had found the Legislative Council unmanageable, and they were going to make throughout India a number of small parliaments. He warned them that these local councils would lead to a sepa ration of the presidencies. There was another evil in the bill, that the Governor of Bombay or Madras would "ex necessitate" become Governor-General in case the Gover nor-General were to die. Now the governor of either of these presidencies might be a very fit man for that office, but be unfit for the governor-generalship. He thought it would be better to have a provisional Governor-General. The Earl of DERBY said he did not pretend to enter into a discussion of the important questions which were in volved in this bill, but he wished to ask for an explanation on one or two points. His noble friend (Lord Ellenborough) had made great objections to the leading principles of the bill. Any observations from his noble friend on this sub ject were deserving of great consideration ; and one of those objections he thought especially worthy of consideration, namely, as to giving increased legislative powers to the local council. There was another portion of the measure to which he did not attach the same importance that his noble friend did, viz., that of the Governor-General, in the enlarged council, being empowered by his council, because, when he looked at the mode in which the council was con stituted—one half being persons holding official situations, and the whole of them being selected by the Governor-Ge neral himself, he did not think thero was any danger of the council becoming too independent, but he agreed in the opi nion that the Legislative Council, as recently constituted, being a little mockery, was wholly unsuited to India. He did not rise to discuss these matters. With regard to the pub licity to be given to the proceedings of the council, he wished to know whether any distinction was to be drawn between the two capacities of the council, or rather the two councils, one the Executive, and the other the Legislative Council. Nothing could be more inconvenient than to have the discussions of the Executive Council carried on in public. Another point on which he wished for information was with regard to the third clause, which stated that no person shall be appointed to this office unless he has been or shall be in the service of the Crown for ten years. This was nonsense, and he presumed that the clause had been al tered in the House of Commons, and part of the old clause had been left in by mistake. Earl GRANVILLE said when the council was sitting in its executive capacity , no publicity whatever would be given; and as to the Legislative Council the matter would be left to the Governor-General. 'With regard to the other matter, no doubt the explanation of the noble earl was the right one, and the clause would be altered when they got into committee. The bill was then read a second time. COURTS OF JUSTICE BUILDING BILL. This bill was read a second time. BOUNDARIES OF BURGHS EXTENSION (SCOTLAND) BILL. This bill passed through committee. LANDED IMPROVEMENT PROPERTY BILL. This bill was re a d a thi r d ti me an d p asse d. Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS—YESTERDAY. The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock. IRREMOVABLE POOR BILL. The house went into committee on this bill, mid resumed at clause 9. Sir B. BRYDGES said he did not intend amendment d to propose the effect of om ission of the whole clause, provided h the hon. member (Mr. S. Estcourt) to the that the common fund should be based upon assessment calculated erd.tt" by adding to the annua l value of the l ands and h ments in each of the paris hes, a sum e q ual i n pounds e :ter ling to the amount of the numbers of the p o pulation of such parishes according to the last census, be acceded t o . He had considerable experience in the working of the ori ginal as well as the amended law. He felt bound to pro test against the principle of a larger area of rating than ex isted at present. He considered every inducement should be held out to landlords to make them give employment to the poor in their respective localities. But if the system of union rating were adopted it would do away with this inducement. Lord HENLEY said that although he had great respect for the proposer of this amendment, still he thought the effect would be injurious, as it would lead to the eviction of the poor from various parishes. Mr. ADDERLEY said he could wt support the amend ment of his hon. friend, as the arbitrary check it imposed would defeat its object. He believed the more they localised the burthen of poverty the better it would be for the interest of the community. He thought, however, that the clause required amendment though not that proposed by the hon. member (Mr. Estcourt.) Mr. TOLLEMACHE said that he also had considerable experience in the working of the law, and he felt bound re , tctantly to oppose the amendment. He had paid great attenn.n to the evidence produced before the committee, and he felt ..tisfied that some alteration, such as that pro posed by the bilr, was necessary. Mr. DENT said he 'oped the house would reject the Innendment and adopt the ciawi e which was the main point bathe bill. He did not consider that poverty in a parish was Produced by mismanagement, but from the fact of the num ber of p ersons i n cer t a i n parishes being without regular employment all the year round. Mt ' 114 - 1 1 said hefeltbound to accept the bill as a whole, from conviction that it would operate beneficially. He thought the a mendment would do away with the most im portant element of the measure, namely, the equalising of the contributions throughout the country for the poor. Mr. DODSON — PPerted the bill, and said that the dimi nution of the status of i rremovability would not increase the number of irremovable poor and illustrated this asser tion by reference to Leeds, Manchester, and 3ther large towns. Mr. CA.YLEY said that the grkvanes proposed to be remedied in the present case toss -.4 exemption of close parishes. But if they altered' the tai ti cases parishes would have to pay pe r ms some ps 3s in th e peaind, though the property was b assented to e most oll unjust. If such tax, which would b 9th clause proposed, they m o lt the principle which the rely on it that they would be admitting the thin edge of the wedge, which would inevitably lead to the adoption of union rating. He also objected to the clause as conferring mane gement on an irresponsible body. Mr. PAGET supported the bill, as he thought its action would be to Make it the interest of each parish to have a rating sufficient for their wants. Mr. LYALL supported the clause. He had no doubt the effect of it would be to include in the !rating some few parishes which were exempted, and unjustly so, from con tributing their quota to the support of the pauperism of the country. Mr. WALTER could not see the justice of allowing one parish to throw its share of the relief of the poor up')n an other. Union rating must be the system ultimately to be arrived at, and he considered it most fair and just. Mr. HENLEY supported the amendment. He consi dered they were legislating prematurely and without in formation. After a few words from Lord H. VANE, Sir J. PAKINGTON said his experience, as chairman o the board of guardians, led him to entertain the same view as the hon. member for Berkshire. Mr. S. ESTCOURT said the clause introduced a new principle in rating which ought not to be admitted without the fullest consideration. It was proposed that accord • ing to the amount of a man's property he was to be rated towards the support of the poor, but he thought that the amount of population should also be taken into consi deration, and by uniting the two a fair result would be arrived at. If the principle of the clause was admitted it would be found in a few years impossible to stop at that point. Mr. VILLIERS said the clause was to remedy an injus tice that had existed for 12 years. He therefore opposed the amendment. The committee then divided, when there appeared— For the amendment lOO Against it .. .. ........ Majority.. -- - - The amendment was accordingly rejected. Sir J. PAKINGTON moved the addition of the follow ing proviso to the clause, viz. :—" Provided also that the contributions of extra parochial places to the common fund of the union in which they are eomprised shall, notwith standing anything therein contained, be calculated as here tofore." Mr. VILLIERS objected to the proposed addition to the clause. Mr. K. SEYMOUR thought the bill would press with great hardship upon parishes which had but few poor per sons residing there. After a short discussion, Sir J. PAKINGTON amended his proposition as follows • " Provided also that extra parochial places which have hitherto paid no contribution to the common fund of the unions in which they are comprised, shall, notwithstanding anything herein contained, be hereafter exempt from such contribution. Sir J. GRAHAM supported the amended proviso. Sir G. LE WIS would agree to the amendment if any very strong argument could be urged in its favour, or if the class of cases were likely to be numerous. Some further discussion took place, at the termination of which the chairman was ordered to report progress. THE NEW ATTORNEY-GENERAL. Sir W. ATHERTON, the Attorney-General, took the oaths and his seat for Durham. The sitting was then suspended. At six o'clock the house resumed. BOROUGH OF GLOUCESTER. Mr. H. BERKELEY wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it was his inten tion to move, in committee on the Election Law Amend ment Bill, a clause for the disfranchisement of Gloucester for five years, and whether that penal sentence was to date from the last election or to be prospective? Sir G. C. LEWIS said if the bill came on in the present session, which was somewhat doubtful, it was his intention to move such a clause. The time would be computed from the date of the commissioners' report. Mr. H. BERKELEY said be would withdraw his motion for the issuing of a writ for Gloucester. If the bill came before the house he should move that the writ be issued, and if not, he should feel it to bo his duty to lay the case of Gloucester before the house. MERCANTILE MARINE FUND. Mr. CRAWFORD wished to ask the President of the Board of Trade in what manner it was intended to deal with the large balance in hand and annual surplus which, as appeared by the accounts of the mercantile marine fund annually laid before Parliament, now stood to the credit of that fund ? On clause 2. Mr. GIBSON said that the revenue - from light dues in 1860 was £282,300, and taking the average of the last seven years, the expenditure was annually £207,907, leaving a surplus of £74,400. From that surplus must be deducted the expenses for lifeboats, and rewards for saving life, amounting to £6,000 a year, leaving £68,400. It was pro posed to apply that to the reduction of the light dues in this way—to take 15 per cent, off the coasting voyages, whieh would amount to £12,856, and 10 per cent. addi tional for coasting and over-sea voyages, amounting to £54,120, thus giving relief to the shipowning interest to the extent of £66.976. In other words, after these redwatione took frll effect, the shipowner who in 18M paid £lOO on a ' single ship, and who now paid for an over-sea vessel £.50, and for a coasting vessel £65, would for the future pay only £4O. In that way it was proposed to dispose cf the surplus of income over expenditure. With regard to the balance in SUP PLY. hand it was thought that that would not be more than suf- ficient for the new buildings and lights which were ren dered necessary from time to time by the requirements of the trade. INLAND REVENUE BILL. In reply to Mr. HENLEY, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he could postpone this bill till the 19th, but he did not think he could fix it for an evening sitting, as it was necessary to get forward with supply. The provisions of the bill were mostly provisions of relaxation, and if ;there were any con troverted points he would postpone them till next session. ELECTION LAW AMENDMENT BILL. In reply to Mr. HUNT, Sir G. LEWIS said it was his wish to proceed with this bill, but in consequence of the slow progress of the com mittee of supply, it was necessary to give precedence to the estimates over every other subject. He would state on an early day what it was proposed to do with the bill. BANKRUPTCY BILL. In reply to Mr. CRAWFORD, Lord J. RUSSELL said he believed it was the intention to proceed with this bill on Monday, but he could not say positively that it would come on then. IRREMOVABLE POOR BILL. In reply to Mr. HENLEY, Mr. VILLIERS said that as this bill had gone through a good deal of discussion during the day, that was a reason why it might be brought on late at night. (A laugh.) Mr. HENLEY—After what hour at night would it not be taken ? Mr. VILLIERS would not bring it on after two. (Laugbter.) THE WEDNESDAY SITTING. In reply to Mr. HENNESSY, Lord J. RUSSELL said, as the Queen was not in Lon don, it was not the intention of the Government to adjourn over to-morrow. (Hear.) NAVY RESERVED LIST OF CAPTAINS. Mr. B. COCHRANE, in rising to move that the case of the captains placed on the reserved list by order of council in 1851 be referred to the Attorney-General for his opinion, said that previous to 1851 there was promotion by brevet, and when that was discontinued it was felt to be a great hardship on the officers of the navy. They asked therefore to obtain permission for a certain number of captains to have their names placed not on the retired list but on the re served list; that was to say they were to be considered on the active list as regarded scale of pay and promotion, but were not to be expected to peform active duties except in time of war. As a proof that this was the understanding several of them received the GroAnwich out-pension. Now, when 13 oftheseofficers would receive 18s. a d a y h a lf pay on t h at u nderstanding of the t ransac ti on , an or d er came from the Board of Admiralty stating that they were officers on the retired list, and were not c to expect the additional pay. uncilwaseranothstea.mbigucus, and the Board of Ad- His noble friend (Lord order in so i, m ri i v r i a n l g ty 7 h 7 had tremhozdeiflleara a Paget) had admitted that the injusticeta done by that order by pittance of sixpence or a shilling a day. He asked the house to justice to those merito rious men. Here had some of them° and they were engaged in all the hi lr u eat actions of the to accept the terms proposed been serving since 1803, ced the repre war with France. They had been hope s s pr w o e posed to sentations of the Admiralty them, and they were now told that their disappointed. An eminent Queen's counsel (Mr. Lushe)tohabde been consulted upon their case, and had given an opinion that if the contract were within the cognisance of the courts of law the claims of the captains would be held to be well founded, and would be enforced. Under these circum stances he hoped the noble lord would agree to his proposi tion, and refer the case to the Attorney-General. Admiral WALCOTT seconded themotion. He had always held that these officers had been treated with injustice. He would not repeat the statement of the many gallant actions in which they had been engaged, and they now only asked for a moderate requital of their services. Sir J. ELPHINSTONE thought it reasonable that the noble lord should agree to his hon. friend's proposition. These gentlemen were astonished and horrified at finding what was the Admiralty version of the contract with them, and they had referred their case to eminent Queen's counsel. He thought the Admiralty would do well to accede to their demands, which appeared to him to be founded upon jus tice. If a violation of good faith were perpetrated in their case, no man would henceforth come into the navy without taking the opinion of counsel upon the terms offered by the Admiralty. Lord C. PAGET said he did not think it was advisable that her Majesty's order in council should be referred to a legal opinion. He denied that he had said that the order in council was ambiguous. What he stated was that these officers considered that it was open to doubt. The intention of the Admiralty of that day was that these officers were not to rise paripassu with other officers. It could never hive been their intention to place these officers upon the same footing as officers on the active list. With any such a regu lation it would be impossible to conduct the business of the navy, The general question of the promotion of active and TEE SUN,' LONDON, retired officers was now under the consideration of the com mittee—the case of these officers was under the considera tion of that committee, and he would not therefore make any observation as to the justice of their claims. The house then divided. The numbers were : For the motion 33 Against it .. ....... 6O Majority —27 Sir G. C. LEWIS obtained leave to bring in a bill for the amendment of the acts relating to the payment of the expenses of prosecutions ; also a bill to continue an act of the 11 and 12 of her Majesty relating to the collection of county cess in Ireland. On the motion of Sir G. C. LEWIS, Mr. Buxton and Mr. Cubitt were added to the select committee on the Courts of Justice Building Act (Money) Biil. THE DEALERS IN OLD METALS BILL. This bill passed through committee with verbal amend ments. THE COUNTY VOTERS (SCOTLAND) BILL. The house went again late committee on this bill. On clause 23, having reference to the time of holding the registration courts. Mr. BLACKBURN suggested that as the list of claims would be made up to and published on the 14th October. no list should be revised earlier than the 15th October, but after some discussion the clause was, without amendment agreed to. Clauses 24 to 32 were agreed to. On clause 33, Sir J. FERGUSSON moved an addition to the clause, to the effect that no person whose name should appear on the register of any county should be entitled to vote in the election of members if he should have become divested of and ceased to hold that qualification in respect of which he was registered. The - LORD ADVOCATE objected to the proviso, be lieving that it would be wholly unnecessary. The person whose name would be on the roll would vote in respect of the rates which he would have to pay. Sir J. FERGUSSON submitted that the voter ought to be entitled to the franchise in respect of the possession, and not because he paid rates and taxes. Sir E. COLEBROOKE said the principle of this bill had been in force in Scotland for several years in boroughs, and he saw no reason why it should not be applied to the counties. Mr. MURE urged the adoption of the amendment. After some conversation the hon. baronet withdrew his amendment. Clauses to 40 inclusive was agreed to. Clause 42. Sir J. FERGUSSON moved the omission of the clause, The committee divided— Ayes Noes l6 Majority The clause was then agreed to, as were the remaining clauses, and the bill was reported to the house. QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. Mr. MARSH said the bill proposed to give the magis trates by order in council the right to alter the boundaries of the existing colony of New South Wales, and to make roads. He proposed to enlarge those powers, leaving them unrestricted by any Act of Parliament. Under the present system there was no local government, but all matters usually dealt with by local governments were under the control of the central authorities at Sydney. He thought that by separating these colonies, and making them into smaller communities, would have the effect of doing away with many of the existing evils. He hoped the amend • ment would be agreed to. Mr. FORTE SCUE said the issue raised by his hon. friend was an important, though a simple one. The pro position of his hon. friend was, that the Crown should dis tribute amongst the existing colonies the unoccupied terri tories lying to the south of a certain line. There was a good deal to be said in giving sucfi a power to the Crown ; but the fact was, no such demand was made by any Australian governor or legislature, or by any body of the population. Under these circumstances it was thought better to leave well alone. The only difference between the proposal in the bill and that of his hon. friend was this, that if his hon. friend's amendment were adopted the Secretary for the Colonies would have power to detach any portions of these territories from one colony for the purpose of attaching them to another, whereas as the bill stood he would be obliged to ask Parliament for any such power. lie thought it better not to make divorce in this matter, as in unions of another kind, too easy. Mr. CHILDERS was of opinion that the colonies should be left to govern themselves, and if there was to be any ex ception to that rule it was in defining the size of the several colonies, and the extent of their territories. For this reason he hoped the committee would agree to the amendment of his hon. friend. The amendment was negatived and the clause was agreed to, as were the remaining clauses. The report on supply was brought up and agreed to, after which the house went into committee of supply. Thu following votes were wgreoa to , —Z72,2 , 67 for the expenses of the Mint ; £21,305 inspectors of factories ; £6,284 Queen's and Lord Treasurer's Remembrancer in the Exchequer and offices of Scotland. On the vote of £6,431 for the household of the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Mr. WILLIAMS complained of some of the offices as useless. There was a sum of £257175. for "two gentlemen at large." (Laughter.) Mr. VANCE defended the vote, and submitted that none of the offices of which the expenses were defrayed by it were unnecessary, and that the amount was extremely moderate. Mr. W. WILLIAMS said there was no such office as that of gentleman at large in the Queen's household, and there were many others in the Lord-Lieutenant's household equally unnecessary and inexplicable. Mr. WHITE said that if the office of the Lord-Lieutenant was to be maintained it was useless to squabble about the items in the vote. He stated that he had been told that the duty ea gentleman at large was to water the camelias of the Lady-Lieutenant. (Laughter.) The vote was agreed to. _ _ The votes of £10,339 for the expenses of the office of the Chief Secretary; of £2,585 for the office of the Inspector of Lunatic Asylums in Ireland; of £24,570 for the Board of Public Works, Ireland ; of £33,091 for the Commissioners of Audit; of £20,022 for the Copyhold Enclosure and Tithe Commission ; of £12,190 for the expenses of the Enclosure and Drainage Acts; of £47,163 for the General Register offices ; of £14,482 for the National Debt-office ; of £4,120 for the Public Works Loan Commission and West India Islands Relief Commission; and of £1,222 for the General Superintendent of County Roads in South Wales were agreed to. The following votes were also agreed to:— £2,275 for office of Registrar of Friendly Societies. £17,398 for Charity Commission. £7,055 for Local Government Act office and inspection of burial grounds. £1,192 for agricultural and emigration statistics (Ireland). £2,113 for General Register offices. £1,644 for Quarantine. On the vote of £33,000 for secret service money. Mr. A. SMITH moved that it be reduced by £lO,OOO, the balance remaining from the vote of last year. After a short discussion the amendment was negatived without a division, and the vote agreed to. A vote of £266,218 was then proposed for the Stationery office, making, together with the sum already voted on ac count, a total of £416,218. Mr. PEASE complained of the great waste of money upon the printing of the house, and inquired whether any attempt had been made to reduce the amount. (Hear, hear.) Sir G. C. LEWIS said the comptroller of the Stationery office was very attentive to the reduction of the expenditure in all branches of that department. The chief expense arose from the printing for both Houses of Parliament, and any reduction in it depended more on the discretion of members than vu the gt.tionciy-uMee. (Hear, near.) it was, m casionally the duty of members of the executive Government to remonstrate against very voluminous returns which were moved for to meet the tastes or wishes of individual mem bers rather than for the general use of the house, to which they were uninteresting. But that was a matter on which the house was quite competent to form a judgment, and it was only by the discretion of the house that this item could be brought within moderate limits. During the last session on the suggestion of the Stationery-office, the practice had been introduced of printing the evidence taken before com mittees in double columns and in smaller type, and it had been attended by considerable economy. The Government had endeavoured to diminish the bulk of appendices to re ports of commissions, but it often happened that after reports had been presented, some supplemental papers which the commissioners in their discretion had omitted were moved for. There was consequently very great difficulty in keep ing the expenditure for printing within moderate bounds. Mr. A. SMITH denied that the great bulk of the vote was for the printing of the Houses of Parliament, and ad verted to the largeness of the item for the printing of the War Department. Mr. F. PEEL said that Mr. M'Culloch, the comptroller of the Stationery-office, exercised a the most rigid economy in that departme n t. note t department appended to the estimates Mr. M'Culloch said that them for the War Department expected, considering the was less than might have been gre at extension which that had recently tt orely on h under gone. Sir T. TRELAWNY said the house ough execut i ve government reducing the charge for uFßsEcEomLAmNunDicsaateidd,thiant the e lao fi n r . s member s ehismbtearn printing.s w Mr. rn instance, with the departments which p re p ared thew, they could o moved for returns materially diminish their bulk, and consequently the expense. Mr. W. WILLIAMS thought there was a great deal o f unnecessay printing for the house. The charge of £1,550 for the ecclesiastical department was objectionable, and un less he received some satisfactory explanation on the subject he should move that the vote be reduced by that amount. Mr. WMAHON believed that if there was only one uni form edition of acts of Parliament, instead of three as at present, much expense might be saved. Mr. BLACK bore testimony to the valuable services of Mr. M'Culloch in reducing the expenditure of the Sta tionery-office. Sir F, SMITH suggested as a remedy that the Uovern- WEDNESDAY EVENING, JULY 10, 1861. ment should prepare a return of the cost of each return, with the name of the member who moved for it. Mr. A. SMITH said the cost of printing for the Houses of Parliament was really small compared with the other items. Mr.W. ILLIAM S 'moved that the sum of £1,550, being the amount required for the ecclesiastical department, should be omitted from the vote. The motion was negatived without a division. On the question that the vote be reduced by £2lB, on the motion of the hon. member for Edinburgh, Sir J. TRELAWNY and Mr. BARROW complained of the great and unnecessary amount of printing done in the shape of blue books that were never read, and in pur suance of forms of the house, which . might be dispensed with advantageously. Mr. F. PEEL explained that printingfor public purposes was executed at ordinary rates, but what was termed Par liamentary printing was done at higher rates, though they had been greatly reduced a year or two ago. He could not concur in the statement of the hon. member for Edinburgh with regard to the item for pens. Sir H. WILLOU GHBY said that nothing could be more clear than that there was no control over that expenditure. The expenditure in the War-office was £70,000, in the Ad miralty £24,000, and in the Patent-office as much. The estimates were increasing too, and the whole was £BO,OOO more than in the previous year. The amount of unneces sary printing was most extravagant, in illustration of which he might only mention that no waggon could carry the number of Parliamentary publications on the slave trade. The motion to reduce the vote by £2lB was then put and negatived. Lord PALMERSTON said it was impossible to control the expenditure for stationery in the departments, except through the hads of them. It was true, for instance, that there was a large increase for the War-office, but the com mittee should remember that, great as was the increase, there was a large economy in printing the forms and docu ments of the department, instead of having them written. As regarded the share of the house in the reproach due to the increased expenditure, the proportion was stated on au thority, and did not depend upon the assertion of his hon. friend ; but every one must be struck with the number of unnecessary returns which were ordered, and he thought many hon. gentlemen would do well to imitate the example of the hon. member for Lambeth, and avoid motions for re turns when they had the opportunity of doing so. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY complained that the right hon. gentleman the Secretary of the Treasury had not answered his question. If the heads of departments could have as much printing and stationery as they liked, he was only surprised that the vote was not £600,000 instead of £416,000. Mr. NEWDEGATE said he thought in this matter they might take a useful lesson from the practice of the House of Representatives at Washington. (Oh, and laughter.) It was well known that he was no admirer of the institutions of the United States—(hear, hear)—but in this instance they offered them an example which they might do well to copy. He did not admire the institutions of the United States in many respects, but he thought they might be imi tated usefully on this point. At the very 'commencement of the sessions full returns were presented with regard to taxation and other matters, and that prevented the neces• sity far moving for returns. The absence of that informa tion greatly enhanced the expenses under that head. Mr. BLACK said that the cost of the blue books was greatly increased by having them printed upon large paper with lines running across the whole page, whereas if smaller paper was used, and a smaller type with double columns, the cost would be reduced nearly one-half. The vote was then agreed to. Votes of sums to defray the salaries and expenses of the Metropolitan Police, the Queen's Prison, the Revising Bar risters of England and Wales, the Lord Advocate and Soli citor-General of Scotland, the Courts of Session, the Judi ciary Courts, Criminal Prosecutions in Scotland, and other legal and administrative establishments, were agreed to without discussion. Votes for the legal and administratives charges in Ireland were next proceeded with and agreed to up to £696,947 for the constabulary force in Ireland, upon which Mr. CHILDERS moved that the item of £3,400 for stationery and postage be omitted. The committee then divided, when the numbers were— For the amendment • 44 Against Majority —32 On the vote being then put, Mr. AUGUSTUS SMITH said the identical sums for stationery- and postage had been already voted, and he should therefore move that the Chairman should report progress. Mr. CARDWELL said before the report was brought up inquiry should be made whether the hon. member was right, and if it appeared that any mistake had been com mitted the error should be rectified. Mr. W. 'WILLIAMS hoped the hon. member would persist in his motion to report progress. The vote was, however, put and agreed to, the motion to report progress not being pressed. The following votes were also agreed t0:—£2,217 to de fray the expenses of the Four Courts, Maraholacsi- Frisian, Dublin. On the vote for £17,005 to defray the expense and super vision over all the prisons in the United Kingdom, An Hon. Member said, owing to the report of the Com mittee on Transportation, and the decrease of the number of persons sentenced to penal servitude, he proposed to re duce the vote by £15,000. (Hear, hear.) Mr. CHILDERS expressed his approval of the course taken by the Government, and rejoiced to see such a spirit of economy prevailing. Sir G. C. LEWIS said that it was not economy. The expenses would be the same—this was only a reduction of the margin. The vote was then agreed to. The next vote was £191,976 for the maintenance of the prisoners in county gaols, reformatory institutions, and lunatic asylums, which was agreed to. On the vote of £15,776 to defray the charges and expenses connected with the transportation of prisoners, Mr. CHILDERS moved a reduction in this vote to the extent of £6,000. He referred to the committee which had sat on the subject, who found that, in the last three years the numbers received into the convict prisons had been less by 1,300 than the number of those discharged. The result was, it had been,' and would be impossible to continue transportation unless they altered the length of the sen tences, and the arrangements in the convict colonies. He thought they had better abandon transportation altogether; but'the majority of the committee thought that, out of 500 or 600 long-sentenced men, one ship load, say from 200 to 300, might be sent out annually to Western Australia, Ber muda, or Gibraltar. The number of convicts decreasing, they could not keep up all three of these establishments unless they altered their whole system. If transportation should be continued, it should be to Western Australia, as the colonists did not object to it, with sufficient safeguards as respects the neighbouring colonies. The number tran sported being thus reduced, ho proposed a reduction in the the vote. This was quite consistent with the report of the committee ; and he believed that this proposition would receive the support of all the members of that committee, who had gone minutely into the question. Mr. F. PEEL said the Government had had under their consideration the propriety of discontinuing the transpor tation of convicts to Bermuda this 3 ear. He had been as• sured in the course of that day that the full number of con victs would be transported this year, so that whether to Bermuda, Gibraltar, or Western Australia, would not, as there would be no diminution of numbers, lessen the ex pense. It would be impossible therefore to reduce the vote. Lord ALFRED CHURCHILL would, with very great pleasure, second the motion. They had it on authority that there was, and would be, a very great diminution of convicts. The report of the committee as to transporta tion to Bermuda or Gibraltar was not to be considered in the same light as transportation to Western Australia. Looking at all the circumstances, it appeared monstrous that so costly an establishment should beuurrled _ _ The committee divided and the numbers were— For the reduction of the vote .... 26 Against it Majority —76 The vote was then agreed. The CHAIRMAN was then ordered to report progress, and the house resumed. Lord PALMERSTON stated that the education esti mates would be brought forward on Thursday. EAST INDIA CIVIL SERVICE BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. APPROPRIATION OF SEATS (SUDBURY AND ST. ALBANS) BILL. This bill was also read a third time and passed. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ACT AMEND MENT (No. 2) BILL. The committee on this bill was resumed. On clause 2, Mr. NEWDEGATE moved that the clause be expunged. _ Mr. SCIIOLEFIELD defended the clause. It was a mistake to suppose that the investigation of police cases was the only duty of the mayor. Mr. ADDERLEY hoped his hon. friend would persist in taking the sense of the house. The committee divided — For the clause Against it Majority _ 69 The clause was then agreed to. Mr. NEWDEGATE gave notice that he would move the omission of this clause on the bringing up the report. (Oh, oh.) Clauses 3,4, and 5 were agreed to. . . Clause 6, after acme discussion, was agreed to, with the understanding that certain a mendments should be brought up on the report. The remaining clauses were agreed to and the house resumed. TURNPIKE ACTS CONTINUANCE BILL. This bill passed through committee. TURNPIKE TRUSTS ARRANGEMENT BILL. This bill passed through committee. LOCAL G OVERNMENT ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The house \wilt into committee on this bill. Mr. CLIVE moved after clause 4 (page 1,255). Agreed to. The bill passed through commit tee and the house resumed. COUNTY SURVEYORS (IRELAND) BILL. This bill, after a few words from Mr. CARDWELL, was read a third time and passed. COPYRIGHT OF DESIGNS BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. LANDED ESTATES (IRELAND) ACT (1848) AMENDMENT BILL. The house went into committee on this bill, which, as amended, passed through that stage. LANDLORD AND TENANT LAW AMENDMENT (IRELAND) BILL. This bill also passed through committee. DRUNKENNESS (IRELAND) BILL. This bill passed through committee. The other orders having been disposed of, the house ad journed at 20 minutes past one o'clock. LAW IIV TELLIG ENCE.-July 9. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS. (Sittings at Nisi Prius, in London, before Lord Chief-Justice Erie and a Special Jury.) ___ TURNBULL V. BIRD.-MR. TURNBULL AND THE PROTESTANT ALLIANCE. The hearing of this case was resumed this morning. Mr. Karslake, Mr. Prideaux, and Mr. Folkard, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Bovill, Mr. Lush, Mr. C. Evans, and Mr. White for the de fendant. Mr. Turnbull was examined in reference to the letter from the Queen Dowager to M. d'Oyzell, which had been calendered by Mr. Thorpe in 1858, and which he stated he had not been able to find. All he knew was that it was not to be found in the volume in which it should be. Mr. Bovill then addressed the jury for the de fence, stating that he had the honour to appear for Mr. Bird, the secretary of the Protestant Alliance, who stood charged upon the record with having ' circulated a libel imputing to Mr. Turnbull most unworthy and improper conduct, and with having done this from a system of bigotry, intolerance, and persecution, which influenced Mr. Bird and the Protestant Alliance. Until yesterday Mr. Turnbull and Mr. Bird were unknown to each other personally, therefore there was no personal feeling ; and indeed, according to his instructions, he now stated that he be lieved that Mr. Turnbull was a gentleman of the highest honour and character, of great :literary attainments, and possessing an amount of learning that was an honour to himself and a credit to his country ; but that learning might have taken a direction which had warped his mind in reference to certain subjects. He had not, in any shape or way, attempted to insinuate anything against Mr. Turnbull's character or attainments, and, indeed, one was rejoiced to hear the progress which he had made, and the distinction which he had attained; and could only regret that no more substantial reward was to be obtained by a gentleman in his position than the pittance awarded by the Govern ment of £2lB for 18 months' work. Mr. Turnbull, however, it must be borne in mind, had published his opinions to the world. He had held a position in the pay of the public, and every public servant, from the highest to the lowest, was amenable to the expression of opinion, and indeed it was only by the practice of such expression that confidence was maintained. It must be borne in mind that Mr. Turnbull had commenced the correspondence in the Daily News ; he had chosen the tribunal of public opinion ; the public had read, and formed an opinion upon hearing all that could be said on both sides; and yet, after this, Mr. Turnbull selected two let ters from the series and brought them into court, asserting that they were libels. He (Mr. Bovill) submitted that the whole matter was a fair discus sion of a public question : and that so far from there being any malice on the part of Mr. Bird, he had only done what it was his duty to do, occupying the position which he did. It was said that Mr. Turnbull had resigned his situation in consequence of these letters of Mr. Bird ; but it was clear that he had offered to resign long before these letters were published, and that because he found public opinion was against him, and because he was unwilling to imperil confidence in these pub lic records. Mr. Bovill then proceeded to read extracts from the " Legendaa Catholicx, a lytle boke of Seyntlie Gestes," which was published by Mr. Turnbull, as he said, as a mere jeu d'esprit, and which was said to be " Imprinted at Edin burgh, in the year of the Incarnation 1840." The author said, " And these legends were fabricated for the promotion of fanaticism.' Is fanaticism ex tinct now that monachism seems no more ? Look at the vile and pestilently rampant heresies from Calvinism downwards, and are any redeeming qualities to be found in all their vagaries ? Are not the fabrications issued by the evangelical can ters of the tract societies most fulsome and im pertinently profane ? Is not the stuff which they put into the mouths of the subjects of these memoirs.' making the creature cry, as it were, Hail, good fellow, well met I' to its Creator, not merely devoid of grace and merit, but brimfull of hypocrisy and intolerant familiarity ?" " Although I advocate the revival of monastic institutions and apologise for the pious fictions of the early ages, I am not pleading for the growth of Romanism. I am a firm adherent of the Anglican section of the Catholic Church—that beautiful structure whose banner is so richly blazoned with the names of the mighty dead, and which yet can boast of such or naments as a Philpotts, a Pusey, a Newman, a Palmer, a Hook, and by that Church I shall stand or fall." "I am no Romanist. I object to the Pope; he has been the curse of the Church Catholic." Within two years, however, from this time Mr. Turnbull became a Catholic. In 1854, also, Mr. Turnbull published a transla tion of a " Life of Luther," in which he alluded to the "so-called Reformation," which he designated " that most mischievous event ;" and in 1856 he edited the poetical works of Father Southwell, a Jesuit priest. In the preface he ex pressed his regret that no complete edition of the works of Southwell had been published, and said "and these sentiments have been induced not by a mere national bias or respect towards the illustrious society of which he was a member, and which I hold in the highest veneration, honour, and esteem," but by an appreciation of the poems. In the memoir of Southwell he said " the same dauntless devotion to duty is expressed in another letter to his spiritual superior," when Southwell was on the way to per form certain functions, " together with Father Henry Garnett, the well-known subsequent martyr," Garnett having suffered martyrdom for his part in the Gunpowder Plot. He talked of the "Advent of these distinguished men" to England during a " reign of terror" over the Catholics, 70 priests hav ing been banished and two executed, whilst " that gallant conspiracy of Babington and his friends was rapidly leading them to a similar fate," Babington . and his friends being engaged in a plot to assassi nate Queen Elizabeth, to seat Mary of Scotland upon the throne, and to establish the Roman Catho lic religion, and destroy the Protestants. These being the antecedents of Mr. Turnbull, which were well known, he was no sooner appointed to his posi tion at the Record Office than the Athenceunz drew attention to the matter, saying that they could not believe the statement of his appointment, and added that the papers " describe the wars of the Armada the War of Independence in Holland, the Thirty' Years' War, in all which events Mr. Turnbull be lieves the action of this country to have been de plorable, undutiful, and false. They abound in par ticulars of those writings and treasons of the Jesuits, which made them formidable to the peace of the family and that of the State. They preserve for us multifarious information relative to those priestly plots which the Government of Elizabeth crushed with a strong hand. Mr. Turnbull thinks the Queen, Council, Parliament, and people of England barbarous and malignant in the use they made of this preservative power. They contain many allu sions to the miracle impostures by which the Roman priests preserved their ascendancy over ignorant and fanatical minds." Under these circumstances, no matter how impartial Mr. Turnbull might have been in preparing his calender, it would still have been said that it was prepared by a violent Roman Catholic, and the book would never have a reputa tion for impartiality. The learned gentleman pro ceeded to read extracts from some books referred to in the alleged libels to show that the principles of the Jesuits were to mutilate books and documents in the interests of their Church, and that this prin ciple had been acted on, and he was about to refer to other books not mentioned in the alleged libels, and which had not been before referred to in the course of the trial, but his lordship, upon objection by the plaintiff's counsel, held that the books could not be put in evidence. It was also proposed to read copies of several newspapers to show that ar ticles had appeared in reference to Mr. Turnbull's appointment before the date of Mr. Bird's letters, but his lordship expressed his opinion against their admissibility. The learned gentleman also com mented at great length upou the correspondence which had been published, and concluded a speech, which occupied four hours, by submitting to the jury that the appointment of Mr. Turnbull to the office of calender was a public event which Mr. Bird had a right to comment upon, that he had not exceeded the fair limits of discussion, and that therefore he was entitled to a verdict. Mr. Bird, the defendant, said—l am a member of the Chancery bar. I have never seen Mr. Turn bull until yesterday. I know nothing of him ex cept from his writings. My attention was first called to the appointment of Mr. Turnbull by a paragraph in the Athenceum of the 24th September, 1859. I had nothing to do with that par agraph, or any of the articles which appeared in the public journals. The Protestant Alliance first notio . Fd the matter by printing the paragraph frora„ lne iithen(auna in October, 1859, and tho mem011.44 to Lord Palmerston was drawn up with great delibe ration, and was approved in May, 1860. The wit ness then gave a detail of what took place when the deputation went up to Lord Palmerston, and a long letter from the Master of the Rolls to Lord Pal merston, dated Nov. 1,1859, was also read, it having been read in the presence of the deputation. It was in answer to a letter from Lord Palmerston, and de tailed the duties of Mr. Turnbull, discussed the question of the safety of the State papers in his hands, and defended his appointment. The witness continued—Previous to this matter I was aware of the constitution of the Jesuits, and that they were bound to render implicit and unquestioning obe dience to the orders of the superior. The extracts from various works in my letters are correct, and it is true, as stated there, that I have in my posses sion " a long list of papers in the Record-office re ferring to various plots by the Jesuits." Cross-examined—l had made no inquiries about Mr. Turnbull when I sent out a circular saying of him, " It is more than probable that he is a Jesuit;" but I had read his!' Legen dm" and his' Southwell ;" and his excessive admiration of Garnet, Southwell, and Babington led me to this conclusion. Ido not know as a matter of history that on a man being charged before Lord Mansfield with being a Catho lic priest and saying mass and acquitted, the zealous Protestants were much scandalised, and his lord ship was charged by many with being" a Jacobite, and some even supposed he was a Jesuit." (A laugh.) . . . _ Sir.'Karslake—That statement is made in the " Lives of the Chief Justices," by Lord Campbell. (Laughter.) Witness—l have many books in reference to the Jesuits, but I do not know that I have any in praise of them. (Laughter.) Before I prepared the me morial to Lord Palmerston, Mr. Nugent, a very able record scholar, who had frequented the Record office for 20 years, had made statements to me; but nobody had been sent on behalf of the Protestant Alliance to examine the foreign records. Re-examined—l circulated the memorial by order of the committee of the Protestant Alliance, and previous to this I had read articles in the Morning Advertiser of the 7th October, 1859, and in the St. James's Chronicle of the 13th October, strongly condemning the appointment of Mr. Turnbull, on account of his bias in favour of the Jesuits. Mr. Bovill summed up on behalf of the defen dant, and Mr. Karslake replied upon the whole of the case. The further hearing was then postponed until to-morrow. CEN2RAL CRIMINAL COURT, July 9. OLD COURT. David Basset, who surrendered to take his trial, was charged with unlawfully obtaining goods three months before he was adjudicated a bankrupt, under the false colour and pretence of carrying on bis busi ness, and with intent to defraud his creditors of the property that was so obtained. The indictment also contained counts charging the prisoner with obtain ing money by false pretences. Mr. Metcalfe and Mr. Carter conducted the pro secution. Mr. Ribton and Mr. Hume Williams appeared for the prisoner. Mr. Metcalfe, in opening the case to the jury, said that the prosecution was instituted by the direc tion of Mr. Goulburn, one of the commissioners of the Court of Bankruptcy, in consequence of certain disclosures that were made in that court in refer ence to the bankruptcy of the prisoner, and the offence that was imputed to him was that he had obtained a large quantity of property, and also money to a very considerable amount, under the pretence that he was carrying out a legitimate trans action in trade, whereas, in point of fact, the pro perty was not obtained for that purpose, and the real object of the prisoner was to defraud his credi tors of their property. The learned :counsel then proceeded to give a narrative of the circumstances under which the charge was preferred, and it ap peared that the prisoner resided at Uxbridge, and for many years carried on an extensive business as a corn merchant at that place and at Mark-lane, and the greatest confidence appeared to have been re posed on him. The prisoner signed a declaration of insolvency in the month of November last year, and the amount of his debts was £15,000, upon which a dividend of 3s. GEL in the pound only has been paid. It appeared that in the months of August, September, and October the prisoner sold a large 'quantity of corn, by samples, to a miller named Dives, who gave him cheques fo r more th an £4,000 for the wheat so purchased. The prisoner had represented to Mr. Dives that the whole of the wheat he so sold to Mr. Dives was in his possession, or in his control; but it turned out that this was not the case, and, shortly before his bankruptcy, the prisoner, who had only sent a portion of the wheat, admitted to Mr. Dives that he could not send him any more, and at this time it appeared Mr. Dives was entitled to receive twelve hundred more quar ters of wheat, for which the money had been paid, It also appeared that the prisoner had purchased large quantities of wheat of Mr. Nash, a farmer living near Uxbridge, and also of a gentleman named Way, residing in the same neighbourbead, for some of which he agreed to pay 68s. per quarter, and for other portions 725. per quarter, and that the moment the wheat came into his possession he sent it to Mr. Dives, in order to supply the con tracts he had entered into with him, each transac tion being attended with very serious loss, as the price at which the prisoner was to have supplied the wheat to this gentleman, under his contract, was only 595. per quarter. The prisoner, when under examination in the Bankruptcy Court, ap peared to have admitted nearly the whole of the above facts ; and, as already stated, directions were given by the Court that the present prosecution should be preferred against him, A good deal of formal and documentary evidence was gone into in support of the charge, and the case occupied a great many hours. It was elicited in the course of the inquiry that the prisoner had carried on a very extensive and respectable business for a number of years, and that he was regarded as an honourable and respectable man. It also appeared that the official assignee had reported that the pri soner's books were well kept, and that there did not appear to be any evidence of concealment of stock or anything irregular in the mode in which the pri soner had conducted his business, and it was also admitted that during the last year, owing to the unfavourable season that prevailed, there was a great rise in the price of wheat, and that it had gone up from 525., the price at which it stood in April, to 78s. in November. Mr. Justice Wightman, at the close of the case for the prosecution, expressed his opinion that the counts in the indictment charging the prisoner with obtaining money from Mr. Dives by false pretences were not supported by the evidence, and they were therefore withdrawn from the consideration of the jury. icir. Ribton made a long and able address to the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and he contended that the case was one that had never been contem plated by the act of Parliament under which the in dictments had been preferred, and that there was not a title of evidence to show that the prisoner had been actuated by any intention to defraud his cre ditors or any one else. He said there could be no doubt that the prisoner had carried on a most ex tensive business until last year, when in consequence of the bad season it appeared that he had got into difficulties, and all that he seemed to have done was to make a desperate struggle to retrieve his po sition. This might have been an i m p ru d en t ac t on his part, but the question was whether, by acting in the man ner he had done, he had brought himself within the scope of the law; and he submitted to the jury with great confidence that he had not done so. The learned counsel then urged upon the attention of the jury the facts that the official assignee had re ported that the prisoner's books were well kept, that his expenditure had been moderate, and that at the end of the year 1859 he was solvent; and he also said that there was nothing to show that the pri soner had personally gained the slightest benefit from these transactions. A great number of highly-respectable witnesses, some of whom had known the prisoner for more than 20 years, were called to speak to his character and they stated that he was always looked upon as a man of the strictest honour and integrity. Mr. Justice Wightman having summed up, the jury retired to consider their verdict, and in about three-quarters of an hour they returned into court, and found the prisoner not guilty. There was some applause when the verdict was given. Mr. Metcalfe said there were several other indict ments against the prisoner, but as they involved the same facts he did not think, after the decision the jury had arrived at, that he ought to proceed with them. Verdicts of not guilty were consequently taken upon all these charges, and the prisoner was' dis charged from custody. Thomas John Smith, 19, a Post-office letter car rier, was charged with stealing two letters, one of which ' contained a bill of exchange for £22. another for £l5, and a cheque for £2 4s. 4d., and the other a cheque for £ 32 155., the p ro p er ty f the Postmaster-General. Mr. Clark and Mr. Metcalfe conducted the pro secution. It appeared that on the 19th of June the letters in question were posted at Manchester by the clerks of two mercantile firms in that city addressed to Mr. John Pater son, 104, Wood-street, e and in due course they would have arrived at the , about 5 G ener al post-office, St. 111 artin's-le- Grand o'calsoacklertetrh-cearmrojerrniinagthoef Wood tiThe.2? th district,h e pr i o andne r w street it would kayo been his duty to have delivered those letters, but they never came to hand, and nothing was heard of them or their contents until the morn ing of the 24th of June. On that day the prisoner went to a man named Fitzgi bbon and asked him to go to Messrs. Prescott's bank and get a bill cashed, and he handed him the bill for £22, and also the £32 15s. cheque, which he asked him to present at Messrs. Smith, Payne, and Smiths', who are the London agents of the Manchester National Provin cial Bank, upon which bank it was drawn, and asked him to get that cashed also. Fitzgibbon at first made some objection to do what the prisoner requested, but he at length consented, and received £22 in gold for the bill of exchange, but was unable to obtain the amount of the cheque, as it was made payable in Manchester, and he went to the prisoner and gave him the money, and got half-a-crown for his trouble. It seemed that immediately after the robbery the prisoner left his employment in the Post-office, and was not heard of until several days afterwards, when he returned to his lodging and was taken into custody. The prisoner at first denied all knowledge of Fitzgibbon, but subsequently he admitted that he had given him the bill of exchange, and accounted for having it in his possession by telling a very extraordinary tale, to the effect that a person, who was an entire stranger to him, had accosted him in Wood street on the morning of the 22d June, and told him that he had by mistake opened some letters belonging to Mr. Paterson, and that he had found the bill of exch ange an d cheque in them, and he wished him to got them cashed, and told him that if he did not do so he should lose his situation, He said that upon this he took the bill and gave it to the messenger Fitz gibbon, and when he received the gold from him he took it back to the person who gave him the cheque' and he gave him £5 for his trouble. After the prisoner had been taken into custody, and was about to be conveyed to the police-station he said that if he had known what w as go i ng to be done he would not have been there, and he added that there were three of them in it, and that he was very mise rable where he had been, and he thought he would come back and "chance it." The officer then in quired of him who the other two were, and the pri soner replied that he would not tell him then, but he would let him know before his trial. The jury found the prisoner guilty. There were two other cases of a similar kind in which the prisoners had pleaded guilty, and The learned judge said he would look at the de positions in those cases before he passed sentence. NEW COURT. (Before Mr. Baron Bramwell). John Durdin and James Holcroft, who were last session tried for frauds upon the Commercial Bank, were indicted for stealing the sums of £142 55., £l6O, and £6O Bs. 6d., the moneys of Mark Evan Hunter. At the conclusion of the case for the prosecution, Mr. Besley, upon the part of Durdin, said that he should not address the jury, but rest upon the point of law raised upon the former trial. Mr. Sleigh having made a most powerful appeal to the jury, His lordship summed up most impartially, sever ing the evidence as affecting the prisoner Ho'croft. The jury was then locked up, and in about an hour and a half came into court and said they could not agree. His lordship directed that they should again be locked up. At twenty minutes past ten they again came into court, and said there was no chance of their agreeing: After a long discussion, the jury were discharged without giving a verdict. The jury were then re-sworn, when Mr. Giffard said, that as upon a former trial the jury acquitted Ho'croft, and now they were in doubt about his guilt, the prosecution would not offer any further evidence, and an acquittal was taken upon all the other indictments against him. COUNTRY MARKETS. LIVERPOOL--Juvir 9. There was a good attendance of the town and country trade at this morning's market; and we had a fine healthy business doing in wheat ; sales for best sorts at id to 2d per cental over Friday's rates. Flour was a fair sale at 6d per barrel and sack improvement. Oats and oatmeal slow of sale, but at late quotations. Beans attracted more atten tion, and were at 6d advance on the week. Barley and peas maintained their former values. Indian corn is still offered quite sparingly. BRISTOL--JuLv 9. At our market to-day there was a very fair attendance of millers, who were buyers of wheat to a moderate extent, at 2s reduction upon last week's prices. Oats firm ; stocks seem fast working out. LEEDSJULY 9. - - - Our market to-day was fairly attended by millers, but the trade in wheat was of a dull character, at about last Friday's rates, Banns and oats in limited request. Barley nominal. Other articles unaltered, SLEAFOIiD—JuLY 8. The attendance was moderate to-day, with a very fair supply of wheat. Trade slow, but firm, at former rates. White wheat ruled at 58s to 625, red 48s to 56s per qr • Barley was in limited s u ppl y , and dull, at 36s to 40s ; oats in dull demand, at l ower prices,' 25s to 28s; beans from 44s to 48s ; peas, —s to —s. NE WCASTLE - UNDER-LYNE—JULY 9. At this corn market there was a limited supply of wheat. The trade was steady, and prices were at is improvement on last week's rates—white making 60s to 68s, red 485 to 565. The supply of barley was small, and not much changed in value. Oats were in limited request, with slow sale, from 24s to 30s per 24 stone. Beans met with a dull sale, hem 44s to 48s per qr. NORWICH CATTLE. --- The show of store cattle to-day was small, but equal to the demand. The sales were dull throughout the day, and without a clearance being effected, at barely late rates. Scots, 4s Od to 4s 6d ; shorthorns, 3s 6d to 4s ; Irish, 3s Od to 3s 6d ; Devons, 4s to 5s 6d (estimated weight when fat). Fat beasts a poor show, and sales brisk, at 8s Od to 8s 6d pet 141 b. Sheep--There was a tolerable supply of sheep in the pens, with a dull trade. Fat sheep, 8s Od to 8s 6d per stone ; prime, Os Od. Pigs—A fair supply. Store pigs, Ms to 20s ; fat pork, 7s 6d to 7s 9d per stone. [ADVERTISEMENT.] --Medicine always aggravates chronic diseases, but Du Barry's delicious Revalenta Arabica Food invariably cures them in a very short time. We extract a few out of many thousands of gratitude from invalids. Cure 36,418. Rev. Dr. Minster of cramps, spasms, and daily vomitings. Cure 26,418. Dr. Harvey of diarrhoea and debility. Cure 39,628. Dr. Wurtzer of consumption , Cure 46,270. Mr James Roberts, timber-merchant, of Friir ley, of 30 years diseased lungs, spitting of blood, liver -le" rangement, partial deafness. Cure No. 47,121. Miss Eliza beth Jacobs, of extreme nervousne ss , i n di ges ti on , gather ings, low spirits, and nervous fancies. Cure NC% 48,314, Miss Elizabeth Yeoman, Gateacre, near Liverpcol,a cure of 10 years dyspepsia, and all thehorrors of nervous irritability. Avoid Pills and Medicines: they invariablyaggravate and perpetuate diseases ; their annoyance, disappointment, and expense may be avoided by using Du Barry's Food which, at a few pence per day, saves 50 tipies its cost in other remedies, removing effectually, without purging, constipation, indigestion (dyspepsia) nervous, bili ous an d liver complaints and all their consequences. Certificate No. 36,418. We find it the safest remedy. Andrew Ure„ MD., F.R.S., Dr Harvey, Dr. Wurzer, Dr. Shorland, Dr. Campell. Let invalids avoid the fearful dangers of spu rious and injurious imitations offered under a variety of false pretences. Nevill's imitations are prohibited by the high Court of Chancery under a penalty of £5,000 against Alfred Hooper Nevill and his agents; and the pretences that Nevill has a patent for Arabica Food and that Du Barry's are connected with such patent are utterly false. No csnister is genuine without the name Barry Du Barry and Co., 71, itege , A-street, in full, ontheseal and wrapper! Shopkeepers who attempt imposition in one article must expect to be distrusted in all others. Packed in tins 11b. 2s. 9d.; 21b. 4s. 63. ; 51b. lls. ; 121 b. 225. ; 241 b. 40s. The 121 b. and 241 b. canisters are sent carriage free on receipt of Post-office order by Barry Du Barry and Co., 77, Re gent-street, London; Fortnum Mason, and Co. ;__ n, 60, Gracechurch-street ; 4, Cheapside ; 63 Ox bard-street ; 330 and 451, Strand; 49 and 60, .1118flopsgato.. street ; Batty, 16, Finsbury Pavement.; Phillips. and Co aad . . 150, Ox.. e te i a ty -d ; ea a le t r l s , l 7 Petty, Wood, Wlloolobod,rnan:danCdolllil gr in oce g William -street BIRTHS. en, Gloucestershire, BA th ß e E w u j i e o of n w th . e 1. th inst., at Brookfield' CAMPBELL.—On the 7 _ . Greenock, N. 8., Mrs. Campll, of Ardpatrick, of a daughter. H B . th ßa i k n e s r t , " E a s t q C ., a oT ixi a son. JOHNSON.—On the 4th inst., at Britwell Rectory, Oxon, the wife of the Rev. James T. Johnson, of a daughter. MARTIN. —On. the Bth inst., at Colchester, tha wife of Mr. London and County Bank, of a daughter. G091'.13 Edward Martin,. of the MARRIAGES. SELBY—Ross. — On the Gth inst., at Lewisham Church, Edward, youngest son of the late George Selby, Esq., of Ravensbeurne-park, Lewisham, and 33, Mark-lane, city, to Grace, youngest (laughter of the late W. F. Ross, Esq., also of Ravensbourne-park. SHERWOOD—JoN'Es—On the Gth inst., at St. George's, Hanover-square, Thomas Jones Sherwood, Esq., to Tlary Cynthia, youngest daughter of the late J. Jones, Esq., formerly of the 2d Life Guards. DEPFELL.— On the 3 D d 14Jultnel,' RS at Calcutta,. John Deffell, Esq, FUL LERTON.—On the sth inst., in London, George F. Fullerton, Madras Civil Service, second son of the late Lord Fullerton, Edinburgh, N.B. HOBSON.—On the Bth inst., in London, Edward Hobson, Esq., of Stoke-park, Gloucestershire, aged 61. HOWARD.—On the Bth inst., at Arundel Castle, Charles Bernard, the son of Lord and Lady Edward Fitzalan Howard, aged 10 yefirs. . _ IBBETSON.—On the 6th inst., at Denton-park, Otley, Sir Charles Ibbetson, Bart., aged 46. PALGRAVE.—On the 6th inst., at Hampstead, Sir Francis Pa'grave, K,H., Deputy Keeper of the Public Records, aged 73. LONDON : Printed and Published by MIIRDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at TUE SUN Office, No. 112,S trane • in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the County 01 Madinat Weduesclay, July 10, mi.