The Sun. — London, England, 1833-04-19 00:00:00

to produce any great sensation, but to propose that the c'ergy should he properly remunerated for their services. I think it is desirable that it meawure of this kind should lie in the first place purely permissive, and that the parties should fairly agree as to any arrangement they may think desirable should he made. I think that a per miseive measure should have its fair trial first, although I am free to confess that I do not think that a purely permissive measure will have all the effect that is desirable. I weuli, therefore, propose, first, that the measure shall give permission to the clergyman and the tithe owner, • and the tithe payer, because, when I speak o the clergyman, I do - not • think it right to confine the Commutation simp'y to the clergyman, because I think the same measure should be applicab'e to the title owner if he he slay improprititor—(Cheers)—l would first pro. pose that pr.rmis-ion be given to the tithe payer and tithe owner, whether be be a clergi man , tr a lay impropriator, to mal.e an arrangement for the perpetual commutation of tithes into is corn rent—l mean by a perpetual corn rent, a rent varying according to the price of corn.—(Hear, hear.) In making a proposition for a perpetual commuta tion, I think you should not confine ti e relit to the valor of rwrney, hut that it should vary accordinu to the value of Corn. The Clergym in, however, should not be allowed to commute tithes in perpe uity without the consent of the patron of his living, and the Bishop of hie diocese, neither should the tenant be allowed to commute the tithes of his farm, without the consent of his landlord. (Fie r.) My first princip'e will he to give a period of 12 months from the pissing of the Bill, and perm' the tithe payer arid the tithe owner by mutual consent ni .commute tithes into a perpetual corn rent; but if after the expiration of 12 months this he not generally done, and I dare say in many instances it may nor be done, although I* believe in a vast number it will ; if after that period tt,e commutation be not ac complished, I then propose that either the tithe payer or tithe receiver, without making it necessary for a whole parish to agree—l would allow any individual tithe payer to give notice to a tithe receiver that he intends to commute the tithes —( Hear, hear.) The tithe receiver would then be required to appoint the value in the manner I shall presently state to the House. It is of great importance that valuers should be men of great respectability, and there were other reasons than this why they should not be selected merely at the option of the parties themselves.—(Hear, hear.) It is my intention, then, to propose that those valuators should be nominated partly by the Bishop of the diocese, and that an equal number shall be nomi nated by the quarter sessions. * It might thus frequently happen that the parries knowing the individuals who had been appointed as valuators, the saute individuals would be chosen to value one subject. Thus each party, either the tithe payer or the tithe owner may give notice to the other party that they intend to appoint a valuer ; and this notice b-ing given the valuation will proceed. Any person, however, who knows anything of the state of tithe property in this country, must know that, if an actual valuation were to take place for titheable property, in each parish, the effects would be to raise the tithes throughout England most enormously, and would most certainly prevent any commutation from taking place, and, although it might seem to be justice, it would really and practically be most unjust. My plan, therefore, is, that in place of being an exact valuation the valuation should pro ceed on what leis been paid for an average of previous years. The valuers, therefore, appointed will not have the duty of valueing the tithe, on the ground they wonld only have to ascertain what had been the amount paid during an average of seven years previously. I think, however, it would be desirelile to give them some degree of latitude in making that valuation, and I propose that they should have the power o altering the valuation to a certain per centage, either above cr below _ the amount of tithe actually paid to the extent or between five and seven per cent. The Noble Lord went on to say, if the valuers differed in their award, an umpire should be appointed, which umpire should be the senior judge of assize. The valuers would have to fix the amount of tithes to be paid in corn, or in money ; and the tithe receiver should have the option of taking it in kind or money, for a given number of yr-ars. If I e pref . : rred receiving his tithes in grain, the payer should decide in what grain to pry it. It would of course be desirable that, when it was feasible, a number of indi viduals should agree as to the grain,—a whole parish, for instance; but a holder of a lease might be permitted to arrange with the landlord to pay him the tithes in kind or in money; and the landlord be left to make his arrangement with the tithe proprietor. Tvere wile only one other case he had to mention—that relating to modusses. By an Act recently passed, all modusses not distributed before July next could not be questioned ; and it was not likely that this Bill could come into operation before July. Before this Bill could come into operation, all litigation would cease on the swject. His only object was to render a commutation of tithes upon equitable principles safe and easy. To effect that, he prop sed in the first instance to give per ntiseien to effect it ; and at the end of one year to en• able either party to compel the other. The corn prilsion, however, would net take place, unless one of the pirti-s insisted en it. The advantage to both parties would be so great in the commutation of tithes, that be felt confident each party having the power of com pelling the commutation of tithed, would have the affect ° i pietre cent, dy proitni i 54 a COMnintatints throughout t'•e country. That wool b a great advanteg-. The only object was to render a commutation of tithes upon equitetrie prin.-11)4:s sate an I easy. The advantage to both parties would be o great in the cotnmutatien or tithes, that he llt confident each party, having the power of compelling the commutation of tithes would have the effect of pretty generaoy pro ducing a commutation throughout the country.—( Hear. ) That would be a great advantage. He did not think it would be at this moment desirable to propose any eq.ittair e measure that would go to an metre! compulsory commute. titres He felt great difficulties in doing that ; and, after the beet consideration be could give the subject, he thought that it would be barely possible to propose any mea-ure for an actual and forcible commute tion of tithes throughout the country. Having said thus much upon the measure he intended to move this evening, he hoped it would not be understood that in proposing the present measure, Government had no °thrill JD contemplation with res t ect to the Church of England --(Hear, hear, bear.) Other measures were absolutely necessary, som e of them pressing more, some less. There was one measure which he hoped weuld be brought for ward either in this or another place. which was t h e prevention in future of pluraliies.—(Cheers.) Tha wet A measure which be considered pressed very much.-.-(Near.) There were other measures perhaps equally as important, which were beset with difficulties, that he hoped woul I soon be overcome. Though the present measure might not appear of so very great m agnitude, he thought that the House would a d• nit to him, that if it succeeded in causing a gee; rat commu atiun of titres, it would b. of the best effects. The proprietors o• proouctive land and those generally interested in agricultural persuits generally' would reap the very greatest advantage from the measure, Ls they would have the power of em ploying their cattle on their land for their own advantage. On the other hand, I do not think the Church ought make any resistance whatever. I will say Ido not think it will.—(Heir, hew.) Sir, Ido not think it necessary to trouble the House furl her ; and I move for leave to bring in the Bill.—(Cheers.) In reply to a question put by Mr. Baring, Lord AL THORP was understood to state, that compositions for tithes had been made, excluding the liability of the clergy to pay the poor -rates; and, in censequence of that, the composition was generally lower than it would be if the ale •gy were liable. It would be necessary to take that circumstance into consideration in settling the commu tation; and be must say that be thought it of essential importance that the clew should remain liable, so that they might have an interest in keeping down the amount of the poor-rates. Sir ROBERT INGLIS thought the permission of the Noble Lord was like a cove d dire ; it was permissi n for a year, and compulsion at the end of it. The measure kept the word of promise to the ear, but " broke it to the hope". He would not then enter into the subject; be would only notice the declaration of the Noble Lord, that the sam e ruse was to be applied both to the clergy and the lay improprieties; and he would express a hope, that that principle might he extended to all parts of the Empire. Mr. HUME objected to the mode of appointing valua tors, because it threw almost the whole power of meninx jeg them into the Lands o, the Gle e y, one series of them being appointed entirely by denied persons an another by the Sessions, of whom one.half was also composed of clergymen. In his opinion, the best method would be lon the Government to take upon themselves the appointment of these functionaties. Another very strong obj -ction which he had against the system proposed by the Noble Lord arose from the injustice of appointing the sutur e payments of tithes upon the basis of the present p., men , , the consequence of which would be, that the clergy in those parishes where the incumbents had been sc•ewing up the tithes to the utmost possible ext nt would continue to derive a benefit from these orations, wiele the mole conscientious portion of the clergy, who bad pursued a dif ferent course, were only to 'levee continuance of that hicotne which they at present enjoyed. The plan would thus ope- rate as a reward for former oppreealon soda punlahmea or former leniency. At the same time he was not ini mical to the proposed changes ; but he considered that the details of the plan of the Noble Lord required very crnsi • derable modifieatione before they could answer the object for which they were intended. The N-ble Lord did not seem to be aware of the difference which at present existed in different parts of England with respect to the amount of tithes paid —a difference which prevailed to such an extent, that any plan which did not embrace the considera tion of it must be essentially defective. He did not appear to be aware of the immense advantage which would arise from the adoption of some system of greater simplicity. He hoped, therefore, that the Noble Lord would be per suaded to simplify the details of his measure, and also t* at Commissioners 'should be appointed to fix a motley value on the tithes instead of a fluctuating value in corn, and 'hat these Commissioners should derive their authority directly from the Exchequer or from that House. He thought the Government, in short, ought to take the whol e into their own hands. If such a course had been adopted 40 years ago, the Church would at present be in a much bett-r situation in every respect. Sir R. PEEL said he was by no means averse to t ge neral plan for the commutation of tithes on any principle which could he considered equitable to all parties whose interests were concerned. He could not, however, at present say whether he should oppose or advocate the system of the Noble Lord ; for it frequently happened that a measure wore a very different cemplexion when stated in all its particulars from th it which it assumed tin its first announcement. His (Sir Robert'e)experience in that House had suffici , ntly convinced him of that fact ; and the p-obabi ity of the success of the plan in that House d vended entirely upon the details, which were not yet before the House. He, therefore, intended to re serve his opinions upon the subject until he should see the whole plan upon paper, when he should be aisle to say whether the scheme was likely to succeed in that House, mil whether it would he just in its operation with respect to the clergy. He had heard with great pleasure one re mark of the Hon Member for Middlesex, that any income under 3001 a year would not he sufficient for any gentle man who had received an expensive education—for a man of education and a scholar. He, therefore, hoped that when they carte to consider the Bill with regard to the Irish Clergy, he should have the concurrence of the Hon. Membrr for Middlesex in a proposition for exernwing ail livings of 2001. or 300/ a year from taxation : because it 300/. were not too much for an English clergyman, residing in a country where he was exposed to no risk, how much stronger were the reasons for exempting an Irish clergy man from any deductions from his annual income, when it was only of the same amount, considering that he lived in a country where he was exposed to so much greater risks?—(Hear, hear.) He hoped, as a matter of course, that the Hen. Member would support him in moving that all incomes of Irish clergymen, under 3001., should he exempt from annual taxation. As for the alterations proposed by the Hon. Member for Middle sex, in order to simplify the system of tithes, he (Sir Ro bert Peel) preerred the plan of the Noble Lord, by which the collection of the money was to be entrusted to the pa rochial authorities, instead of the amount being paid into the Exchequer. At the same time, he was of opinion, that the success of any plan of this nature would mainly depend on its simplicity; and he was inclined to think that some part of it admitted of simplification. He did not exactly comprehend the reasons of the Noble Lord for pro posing that, after the lapse of a year, either the tithe payer or the tithe receiver should have it in his power, if the opposite party had taken no means for the commutation of the tithe, to enter into a compulsory arrangement; he thought that the period was rather short, and that it would be much better that the arrangement should be vo luntary on both sides. Considering the extent and com plication of the change, be thought a year much too little. As to the part of the plan which proposed to make the commutation compulsory, at the instance either of the tithe payer or the tithe receiver, it was all very well with respect to the tithe receiver, but if the Noble Lord per sisted in extending it to the tithe-payer, it would give rise to a great deal of difficulty. Supposing, for instance, that these were forty rate-payers, and only a few refused their consent to the commutation, it was easy to ob serve what a complicated system would arise, and how extensive a field fer litigation would he opened. If one person out of forty were to oppose the introduction of the new system, did the Noble Lord in tend that the 39 should be compelled to retain the old system ? There was another part of the Noble Lord's plait which appeared to him also to be liable to very con siderable ohjections—that by which the tithe-receiver was to receive his tithe either in money or grain. It was then left, of course, to the payer to determine in what species of grain he Aduld pay it—whether oats, barley, or wheat ; that is to say, whether fifty bushels of wheat, or a larger quantity of oats or barley. The Noble Lord would see how many questions, if this scheme were adopted, would arise respecting the value of the grain, and for determining whether the corn is of good quality or not. He would not venture to say that he had rightly understood the Noble Lord's meaning, but, as he conceived it, the plan would lead to these consequences. L-rd ALTHORP said a few words in explanation, which we did not catch precisely. Sir ROBERT PEEL observed, that it would be im possible to determine what would be the standard of value. The valuers would have to determine what was the pre• sent value of the tithe 01 certain parishes in corn. Conse. quently, if they determined that va'ne at a hundred bush le, he apprehended that the tithe would he variable with the pric, of corn He shauld think it preferable to s e nd down a single valuer, and leave the matter safer wards to the quarter sessions, because the expense would he extremely great. The only objection was, tnat in parishes in which tithes had been previously exacted with riaour, the present rate vvou'd he taken as the standard, while in others, where the incumbents had been more lenient, the Church would be deprived of its due. Thus it became necessary to call in a mhiri party, this were to have the power of increasing he tithes by five per cent., or of diminishing it by five per cent., according to the lenity or rigour with which it had previously be• n exacted. He had, therefore, considerable dou••ts respecting the measure; hut he intended to give no opinion at present. All he had to say was—let justice be dime to all parties. Mr. C. FERG USSON made a few remarks relative to the system of tithes in Scotland. Dr. LUSHINGTON observed, that the brig ation which had taken place for 500 years alone justified tae introduc tion of some measure like the present. The system had gone on from century to century; had become complicated by so many minute and difficult questions, that it was im possible for any one to expect that a plan could be devised by which the numberless points which have hitherto per plexed the subject should be reduced to one simple method. If any obseivations of his Noble Friend had excited his surprise, it was his remark, that the measure was one which was not calcula.ed to excite a great sensation. It was a question in which almost every individual in the kingdom was interest d. He was persuaded that the esti mates of hay Noble Friend respecting the amount of paro chial burdens would turn out to I e perfectly correct, and thet they did not exceed 3,250,0001. ; but it was a great obj-ct to diminish them! burdens fo the greatest possible extent. Now, with respect to the proposition of the Ho n , urable Member for Middlesex, that the new tithe system should be managed by the Exchequer, he objected to it on every ground; he objected to it, first, on grounds 01 principle, because he thought the Government ought not to possess such a power. He objected to it, secondly, on grounds of practice, on account of the enormous expense into which it would lead the State; and, thirdly, he oh. jetted to it on account of the dissatisfaction which it would cause in every part of the country. It had been also stated that inconveniences would arise from the greater lenity with which tithes bad been exacted in one parish than in others; but the Noble Lumd had himself pro vided against that obj-ction by entrusting the valuers with the powers of increasing or diminishing the tithes by 5 per cent. or 10 per cent. Ftr his own part he thought JO per cent. should be the extent of this discre tionary power, rather than 5 per cent. For his part he thought the sooner the very name of tithes became extinct the better it mead be for all parties ; for if we look to the history of the Church for the last 30 or 40 years, it would be seen that these had been the principal cause 01 alienating the fetlinas of the people from the establish ment. With respect to the mode of payment, the Hon. and Learned Memb,r defended the course proposed by the Noble Lord (Al burp). Mr. BARING thought it extremely desirable that the proposition of the Noble Lord should come fully before the public, in order that the general opinion with respect to it might be ascertained. It certainly comprehended no spoliation of any kind, nor was it,at all a party question. At the same time be thought that the ohjections made by the Hon. Member for Middlesex and others, against making the present payrni nts the Weis of the measure, were almost insurmountable. When the injustice of taking as data in one case payments in paris• es where tithes had been screwed up by the clergyman to the greatest poss We ex tent, and in another case payments he parishes where lithe, hail been liberally suffered to remain much belo the real amount, was considered, lie thought that jhis would be obvious. The general valuation would be preferable to such a system. Adverting to the poor's :ate, the Hon. Gentleman observed, that no one could read the melan choly report which had recently been made upon that subject, and deny that that was a (potion which ought not to he permitted to remala lu Its present state. some parishes in the south of England the rates were 275. and in one as high as 325. in the Fund ! Wbat was to be come of the clergymen in those p irishes ? There might be rent there, but there would be no tithes. Another evil was, that in some parishes it was dile constant custom to work, as it was called, the clergyman by means of a poor's rate. There was one point which it wou'd be in dispensable to consider in the proposed measure.— He adverted to land which was in a state of garden culti vation; and to land where hops and other valuable pro. duce were grown. On some land of that description the tithes amounted to forty shillings an acre, which was more than the rent. If that tithe were perpetuated, a charge would he perpetuated on land which, at some tu ture period, it might not be able ro meet. All these and other difficulties ought to be looked at carefully, and with out bias or prejudice There must be some provision in th e Bill for existing con.racts ; an alteration in the corn 1 • we, or some other legislative measure, nsigiat have the • ffect of entirely throwing out of cultivation land which was at present in tillage. Some regulation must be intro duced in the Bill with respect to such land ; for, if i t were suisjected in perpetuity to the tithe which it at pre sent paid, the landholder might, at some future period, be deprived. of the whole of his property. At all events, it was exceedingly desirable that the question should be set tled, for the greatest misappr•hentrions were at prseent entertained in the country with respect to it ; even to the extent that no clergyman was to have more than 400/. a year, and that the surplus of tithes, which would be Bawd to the nation, was four millions ! Lord JOHN RUSSELL perfectly concurred with his Hon. Ft isnd that it was desirable the question should he settled. In answer to the observations of t e Hon. Mem ber for E-sex, that if the present payments were taken as the basis of the future arrangement, the pat ishes where the tithes were now screwed up to the highest pitch would benc•forward have to pay too much, and the p a riches where the tithes were now less than the fair amount, would henceforward have to pay too little, he shservee that the objection had struck hie Majesty's Government ; but that, after meet s consideration, it appeared to them. that any other course would he still more liah e to animal version. If the whole of the tithes were taken, and an average estimated from every parish, the result would still be hard and unecpial. A provision however, might no doubt be introduced into the Bill, in some degree to meet the objection of the Hon. Gentleman. He consider•d tithes to be one of the greatest grievances in the country, whether they sy,re, in lay or ecclesiastical hands; more especially the latter, as they constantly tended to produce ill-will, where only good will ought to exist Colonel TORRENS congratulated the House and the country on the proposition for a commutation of tithes ; the effect of which would be, that the revenue of the Church would no longer be, as it now was, a tax on ca pital. He trusted the proposition would give general satisfaction; as be was convinced that, with some modify cations, it would be an admirable improvement on the pre sent system. An Host. MEMBER, whose name we could not learn, begged strongly to press on the atsention of the Ho Ise the recommendation of the Hon. Member for Essex with re spect to the poors' rate. At present they were a tax on industry and frugality, and a bounty on idleness and im providence. Sir M. W. RIDLEY gave his most hearty assent to the measure, and wished it could be carried further. He considered tithes as neither more nor less than a direct tax on land. He was prepared to make it compulsory on the landlord to commute with the clergyman, taking the amount of the commutation as part payment of the rent front the tenant. There were many Minor pints which, however, might be lost considered in the Committee. Sir S. RICE approved of the measure, but thought great difficulties would arise with respect to its details. All that could be done upon the subject, however, was to enter upon it with an earnest desire to conquer those diffi • cuitiss if possible. One of the greatest of those difficult es would be to simplify e measure, toad at the same time to do equal justice to all parties. Sensible as he was, how ever, of the great importance of the proposition, he was not disposed at present to dwell on the objections to it. Lord SANDON did not think that it would he de sirab!e to make acy alteration in the present rate of pay ment, whether that rate might be considered a little too high, or a little too low. In his opinion, the hest tootle of proceeding was that proposed by the Noble Lord (Althorp.) Mr. HA LCOM B represented the difficulty which would attend a commutation of tithes in kind. With respect to the proposition for allowing paries to purchase tit es in perpetuity, lie suggested that it might he preferable to have tithes re-valued periodically ; and he would recom mend 21 years as the best period for that purpose. Before sitting down, he wished to ask the Noble Lord (Althorp) whether any application had been made to the clergy upon this measure, or whether the heads of the Church had given their sanction to it ? Mr. H. CURTEIS said a few words, which were in audible in the eallety. Lord ALTHORP begged to state, in reply to the ques tion of the Hon. Member for Dover (Holcomb), that the measure had been communicated to the heads of the Church, though he was certainly not authorized to state that :hey lad given their consent to it; and he should say that it was scarcely possible for the Bishops to give a distinct opinisn, either one way or the other, on a Bill which was to aff-ct the parochial clergy. He should say a word or two on some of the objections—if objectoons he could call them—which h,d been made to the ruersute in the course of the debate. He certainlyffelt there would be considertible difficulty at times in enforcing the pro visions of ti e Bill, from the different modes of col lecting tithes. But it must be plain to every Hon. Member, that no measure whatever could be introduce d upon the cut jest without being met by serious and prac tical difficulties. The proper way to treat the question was to balance difficulties one against another. The only other mode they could adopt was by an actual valuition of the tithes throughout the kingdom, and he was satis fied that if this were done, so far from giving satisfaction, it would excite great and general discontent. As to the objection made by the Hon. Member for Altddlesex (Mr. Hume), to the valuers of tithes being appointed by the Sessions, he would only say that he admitted its force, and if any less off.nsive mode could he devised he should most cheerfully adopt it. If the objection of the Hon. Member for Tnowm th (Sir R. Peel), that some parties in a district would not consent to a commutation whilst others did consent—if that objection, he said did prove a substantial one—what then? We pihnuA only be in the same situation as before. One part of the land would, as now, be tithe-free, and another part would not. He con sidered, to anew one party to compel ancrher to commute, would be giving a power, the consequences of w.,ich might prove very inconvenient. As to the propositian to commute the tithes generally by giving land in lieu of them though he could see no very decided objectiun to it, he must say he did not think it desirable the clergy should hold any very great extent of landed property. In con clusion, he must say he was sincerely rejoiced at the man ner in which his proposition had been received by the House; the difficulties attending it might be hereafter discussed and overcome, and he trusted the result would he, a measure that would prove substantially beneficial to every class of his /tLjesty's suhjects.—(Cheers.) Leave was then given to b• mg in the Bill. OFFICES UNDER THE CROWN. Mr. fIUME said, in rising to make the no ion of which he bad given no•ice, he was exceedingly anxious that he .should not be misunderstood by the House. He hail al ready, upon two occasion., called their attention to those te llers under the Crown in which no duties were performed. Objections had been taken to the manner in which he had introduced his former motions —some alleging he did not fully explain what he had in view ; others that an im proper time had been selected for them. On reviewing his conduct, he could not find that he had been guilty of any error, although he was sorry he was not able to make himself as well understood as he could have wished. He had received several communications from persons in the country, giving the explanations of Honourable Members in expressions of regret that they did not take a right view of the question. He would recall the attention of the House to a period-1808 9 when there was a great pressure made by the p.iople on the House of Commons for a diminution of the oppres sive burthens under which they laboured. A Finance Committee was app,inted, au l after a laborious inquiry, a Report was published, in which were detailed the various sinecures and offices whose du'irs were performed by deputy. The sinecures, in the segregate, amounted to 195,000/ , exclusive of 30,0001. for those in Scotland, and 51,000/. for those in the Irish Courts of law, and 31,0001. out of 'hem. He hoped the period had at length arrived, when there would be no payment without previous sub stantial services. He was sorry h e h a d not t h e returns lie moved for last session, as he could not correctly state the present amount paid for sinecures ; and be was the more sorry, because the most extravagant ideas hail been promulgated in the country in reference to them—iifeas which he was very atixioue to see corrected. He looked upon it more as a matter of principle than a question of re li e f. Still, although by doiLg away with all sinecures they could give hut little alleviation to the burthens of the country, it was their duty to show they would sympa thize with the people when they could. It was their duty to do the utmost they could for them—to economize in all things, and to retrench where they could. Do, h o w ever , i what they would, be still knew there must ha heavy fires- sures....the expenditure must still, were it only on the ground of the debt, he very great—the people must still endure; but these reflections should only the more strongly urge them to act in all things on just and intelligible principles. Let them resolve that henceforth no por tion of the public money—how small, how minute weever —should be paid to any person who had not an unan swerable claim on the ground of public services. He should, perhaps, astonish the House when he alleged that one half the debt of this country had arisen from sinecures and pensions. Those sinecures and pensions had been the means of keeping up a corrupt Government —of maintain ing an undue influence in both Houses—of perpetuating earl. ivagancies in every shap- and every quarter, and had thus accumul ited a load of debt, which, under honest courses of Government, won d never have been permitted. The Hon. Member here entered into a variety of figure statements, extracted hoin a Parliamentary return, dated the 3d of April, 1816, to show the monstrous uses which bad been made of tie public money, and detailed an in stance where seven individuals enjoying sinecures had, from the petiud of their appointment to them (1763) to the (late of that document, drawn upwards of one million six hundred and twenty thousand pounds of the public money. But he should return to the year 1809, when the Committee he had alluded to had come to a resolution "That all sinecure offices w, re unnecessary, and inexpedient as a means of reward." A motion made in the House, in conformity with that resolution,' had been negatived, and rem that time the subject had never been brought before the House. All these sinecures were not paid out of the Treasury, and th it was the worst part of the matter— they were raised in the most objectionable manner, by the payment of fees. They were impediments to business— they were clogs upon justice—and, in many cam they were levied upon proceedings in courts of justice. In one of the schedules affixed to the report on this subject, he found the Auditor of the Land Revenue—an Office lie believ e d now - ebout to be abolished—received 3 3001 then there was an office held by Loid Grenville of 4,0001. Then there was the office of the Teller of the Exchequer, with regard to which he could not let the opportunity piss without observing, that there was an individual who had, oe one occasion, stood forward to meet the call of the country—Lord Camd. m_( Hear, hear)—who had resigned fees which he then received, to the amount of 23,115/. a yeir. Where was the justification for any of these sinecure offices ? Every device had been employed to establish offices of this kind, and to impose fees, se that those who had influence enough •0 get the offices created, might erijey the emoluments. In 1782 many of those fees were regul ited by Act of Parliament, but many of them remained. He had always desired to put an end to the exist ence of these fees, arel he thought it was a reproach to any liberal Government, that the country should now be pey log 33,0001. for paying our own money to our own men The objection was not the loss of the money alone, but the delay that was needlessly occasioned —many days were lost in attendance at offices to pay public money, and pass public accounts. In the Court of Chancery, here there were several useless offices. There was one office held by Lord Bathurst, who received 1,6101. a year ; the clerk of the patents received 9001. a year; the clerk of the pipe 9681. a year. Then there was the clerk of the teere was such an office in the Ho :se of Com mons, to punish them for allowing such a system, it would not be very obj ctionable—(A laugh)—there was a clerk of idiots, an office held by Lord Thurlow, who received 9631. ; and then there was a secretary to the Bankruptcy Office, who received 5,7204 a sear, an office hell also by Lord Thuriow. Again in the Chancery offices, there was an office held by Mr. Buller, who received the fees, 7931. a year; there were 21 cursitors, all of whom per formed their duties by deputy, and who received 6,4041. a year; the clerk of the hanaper, an office held by two young lad ies—( Hear, heer)—the daughters of a Noble Earl, who rec. ived 2,0701. a year ; the messenger of the great seal, who rece , ved 994/. ; and then there was Lord Ellenborough, the Chief Clerk of the Court of King's Bench, who rec-ived 7,9051, ; then there was an office held by Lord Ken e on, who received 4,986/. ; and the officer of the Seal office in the Common Pleas (the Duke of Grafton) received 2.286/.—(Hear, hear.) It was his candid opinion that all these offices should cease forthwith. The Chancery in Scotland was in a similar state. The Earl of Roselyn held an office th re, and i eceived 1,7121. a year ; there was the clerk of the Ch ornery, who held the office as trustee for the children of the Noble Earl, and who re ceived 9251. Tnere was the Comptroller of Customs (Lord Leven), receiving 405/. ; and there was a Sir S. Grant, holding an office whittle brought him in 3,208/. a year. He should nut trouble the House further now, but he should move his first Resolution, " That in all future vacancies of sinecure offices, civil, military, naval, or colonial, no new appointment shall be made, with any salary, tee, or emolument thereto attached." if it was necessary to give a precedent for this, it is to be found in the case of the Admiral of Scotland, whose salary had been reduced by that House, while the office itself, as an honorary distinction, still remained. It had been sug gested to him that after the discussions which had taken place on military and naval pensions, he had better omit that part of his resolution. To avoid all objection, he should adopt the suggestion. The second resolution lie should move was, " That no person shall receive any salary, fee, or other emolument, from any office to which he may be hereafter appointed, the ditties of which may or shall be performed by deputy." The principle of that r solution was adopted by the House, in 1822, as to the Receiv rs- General an I their deputies, and a saving of 170,0001. a year was effected, and that case was a prec, dent, it any pre cedent wave wanted, for the adoption of the same course now. The first resolution was then teed. Lord ALTHORP said, that with respect to the sub stance of the minion of the Hon. Member, he had no ob jection to it. The ominciple, indeed, had not only been reeo nized in that House, but acted urn in a great many ins antes. Indeed in saying this, lie must take the oppor tunity of observing, that several of the offices mentioned by the Hon. M •either were offices taken from the report made in 1816, and had been entirely abolished since that time. He could not at this moment follow the Hon. Member through all the instances to which he bad re ferred, but he would mention one or two. He was sur prised at the ref, rence to the office told by Lord Thurlow in the 13anktuptcy- office, for in the Bill of the year before last it had been atiolislied.—(Hear ) It was nearly the same with the case of one of the offices quoted from ti e Courts in Scotland, the office said to be held by Lord F. Campbell. That Nobleman had been dead for a great number of years.---( Hear, hear.) H hoped, therefore, that the House would not think that .ii the offices referred to by the Hon. Member yet remained in existence.— (Ile:r.) Sole few indeed did se, but most of those were to be abolished at the death of the present holders. A• to the second resolution which the Hon. Memlier had read, now that it was confined to civil and colonial offices, he had no objection to it; but he wi bed to ob serve to the Hon. Member, that as his Noble Friend be hind him (Liiid Ebtington) had given notice of a motion fur a committee to inquire into military offices, the Hon. Member had perhaps better not include them in his mo tion, the mile especially as he believed that the committee would not be opposed by the G .vernment. He should, indeed, suggest to his Noble Friend to add naval offices to these respecting which he was about to move for a Com mittee of Inquiry.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HUME said, that as the Noble Lord had treated his proposition so very fairly, he should certainly adopt the suggestion now tnaile of omitting naval and military officers trout his motion. The motiion was then amended thus—" That in all future vacancies of sinecure offices in the civil and colo nial service of the country, no new appointment shall be made with any salary, fee,or emolument thereto attached." Celenel DAVIES observed, that the very fair manner in which the Nettle Lord had met this motion would tend most powerfully to restore and increase the confidence of the country in the present Government.—(Heer, hear.) H e thought there was one point which hail been over looked by both parties, and that was an Act of Parlia ment ( the io 2 p 2 re d ve G n e t o. ih l e ll., future e. 75) grant by o f w a h n I p ' i t e was nt in ten ded offices longer time titan they sh ou ld d i scharge the dut i es thereof person, and b e h ave well therein. Yet, not. withstanding this Act, there were the cases o f Mr. Wit kins in one colony, of Mr. Su livan at Demerara, of Mr for en n Gr e ville at another colo n y, an I of Lord Chath am , a s Governor of Gibraltar, wh o , t h oug h h e never went neat the place, received 3.4004 a year. Lord ALTHORP, with reference to the observations of the Gallant Colonel, remarked, that in the first case to which he had alluded—that of Mr. Wilkihs— , he appoint ment was made before the Aut was p ivied, and therekre was not affected by it. In the next—that 01 Mr. Sullivan, at Demerara—the office hail been abolished by thepreeent Administration ; and as to Mr. Greville, that gentleman had held two offices —one of these had the salary paid in London, the Government, acting on the principle re !erred to by the Hon. Member for Middlesex, and on that of the Act in question, had stopped the payment of the salary. It was true that the gentleman had been absent r ea m the personal discharge of the duties of the other ~ffiee, but then he was absent on leave regularly obtained. Sir J. HOPE complained of the injustice of confound ng naval and military men, who had earned a title to re wards, to these sinecuri-ts. The sinecures given to naval end military men might be well defended on the ground of past services, and on that alone did such men wish them to be continued. An HoN. Mxxxxx expressed the pleasure be felt at the mode 14 which the Government had met the preaemt question. Lord EBRINGTON said, that after the statement made by the Noble Lord, and the very fair manner in which he had met the motion--a manner which must give general satisfaction to the country—he should adopt the suggestion which had been thrown out. Lord SANDON said that all sinecures in Scotland had been abolished by Act of Parliament already. Captain YORKE (we believe), with reference to Naval appointment's, said that all the members of that profession desired nothing more than their case should be fairly and impartially stated to the public; they would stand upon their merits. All he wished was, that Naval appointments and sinecures should be dealt with precisely the same as others. The House of Commons were too generally more influenced by a case set out in strong language than by a strong case. Mr. KENNEDY differed with the Right Hon. Member for Liverpool, with respect to the total abolition of Scotch sinecures. It was true that the Legislature had done away with a certain portion, but Scotland was not yet so for tunate as to be entirely free from such plagues as sinecure offices. He hoped, however, that, after the intimation given by this House on the subject, Government would not venture to fill up any more sinecure vacancies. The motion was then put and carried. Mr. HUME then addressed the House with reference to colonial appointments, most of which were served by d-puty, and were thus sinecure offices. Besides this, no Person in this country knew any thing about even the vacancies in the Colonial Department till he heard of their being filled up, and most generally it turned out that the persons appointed were so totally unfit or unworthy, that had sufficient time been allowed, by previous notice of the intended appointment, N consider its propriety, the ap pointment would infallibly have been negatived. It ap peared to him (Mr. Hume) that the intended appoint ment ought to be Gazetted, so that every opportunity might be given for examining into the claimant's efficiency. Toe Hon. Member, after some further observations on the system of colonial appointments, moved his second reso lotion, " That no person should receive salary or molt's me•.ts from any place which he fills by deputy." Lord SANDON agreed with the Hon. Member for Middlesex on this point. Sir George Murray's opinion ale I fully confirmed that lion. Member's statement, and he hoped that the resolution would be adopted. Lord ALTHORP was not desirous of objecting to the resolution ; h e would only say, that he did not decidedly pledge himself to adopt the Hon. Member's suggestion as it stoo I. The resolution was then carried. Mr. HUM E said that he was anxious to understand from the Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer whether all future appointments were to be subjected to such modifications and deductions as might be thought advisable by his Majesty's Ministers; that is, whether they were to un dergo the same modifications as the offices held by the Ministry and others, which had already been considered and subjected to deduction. He believed that at present offizes were not generally liable to these modifications; and he was desirous that vested rights, as be believed they were called, should not militate against due inquiry and improvement or the public benefit. This question he was very desirous of having settled, anti he should, there fore move " That all aifficest filled up after this date, in any department under the Crown—civil, military, naval, or colonial— shall be subject to such alterations as to duties, and deductions and a.teretions as to salary and ernolu mennts, as his Majesty's Minister., or the heads of the &pater - lents, under the sanction of the House, s •all make, without the persons so appointed having any claim lot compensation or allowance for such alierations." The motion heing put, Lord ALTHORP entirely objected to this motion, be cause he considered it not only unnecessary, but as calling into question the existent powers of Government, who, as it was, had power to make every deduction and modi fication they thought advisable; and he himself had acted upon this power in several important instances. The Hon. Member's suggestion assumed that Government hail not that power with respect to offices now in existence. Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON objected to the sugges tion. If the powers were now exi-tent it was unneces sary; and, if not, he ohjec ed to giving such en arbitrary new power to the House. It would be impossible to say to what extent this reductive power might be carried. In either case he hoped his Hon. Friend would withdraw his motion. Mr. MUME was happy to hear the statement of the Nobl- Lord. He would just put one question to him, and if the answer were squally satisfactory, the resolution should he readily withdrawn. This was with respect to the Patent offices. Suppose one of the judges was, by Act of Parliament, allowed a sale.) , of 5,0001. a year, would the Nehl • Lord siy that this could be influenced o . her than by Act of Parliament ? If the answer were in the affirmative, he would gladly withdraw his motion, perfectly satisfied, with the Hon. Member, that it would then be unnecessary. Lord ALTHORP made some further explanation with respect to patent offices and the judges' salary, which we did not catch the exact tenor of; it waa, however, so far satisfactory, that Mr. Hume withdrew hie motion. The Bribery at Elections' Bill, on the motion of Lord J. RUSSELL, was read a first time, and the second read ing was appointed for Tuesd iy next. THE BUDGET. Lord ALTHORP gave notice that, if the Hon. Member for Whirehaven (Mr. M. Atwood) would postpone his motion, standing.for to-morrow, he (Lord Althorp) was prepared, and desired to bring forward the Budget on that day, without !umber delay.—Mr. M. Attwood not farina in the House, no answer was given. Mr. STANLEY said that he had to intreat the indul gence of the House, with reference to the motion on Co lonial Slavery. He was placed in a state of great diffi culty; and, therefore, though well aware of the great interest existing on this subject, and most anxious t a have time question put at rest satisfactorily and speedily, and he had to beg the H. so far to indulge him as to postpone it to Tuesday, the 14th of May.—Leave given. TRIAL OF OFFENCES' (IRELAND) BILL. On the question being put, of the House going into Cornelia , e on this Bill, Mr O'CONNELL objected, that neither the principles of the Bill, nor the grounds on which it was brought for ward, had yet been discussed, though the Ministers had fully given the House to understand that this should be done. Sir J. C. HOBHOUSE acknowledged the justice of the Hon. Member's remonstrance, and expressed his rea diness to state, at once, the reasons why the Government thought this Bill was advisable. The Bill had been passed by the Upper House on precisely the same principle which had led this House to pass the ate Irish Disturbance's Bill —that of effecting the due course of justice in Ireland; and in both cases he considered that circumstances fully justified the respective Bills. The principle of the Bill was unfortunately by no means a new one; for an Act precisely similar in its preamble and leading clauses was passed in the reign of George 111. The Right Hon. Se cretary then proceeded to detail many cases of intimiaa tion of jurors, &c., which had been repeatedly given in this House on former occasions. He also mentioned several cases of intimidation practised with refer ence to prisoners at the present Kilkenny Assizes. The Right Honourable Member proceeded to read ex tracts received recently from different parties in Ire land, giving cases where numbers of people had been com pelled either to pay money in aid of prisoners, to abstain from lodging informations or giving evidence against, and compelled to give evidence in favour of persons under pin secution. The Han. Secretary also instanced the case of Maurice Read, EN., a most active magistrate.--(Mr. O'Connell : Hear, hear.) Yes, a most active and meri torious magistrate, who had been obliged to leave Ireland in dread of the consequences of having done his duty. Jurors were invari bly necessitated to carry fire arms ; and in a late instance thirty-one persons having been appre hended for disturbances, a nuinher of respectable farmers were compelled to come forward and become surety for tie prisoners. Here was a state of things. (The Right Hon. Secretary proceeded in detail of several other similar communications, amidst repeated inter ruptions, from ti e great confusion in the House.) He thought no one could deny the for, that the ends of jus tice coul i not be effec ed in Ireland lay the ordinary forms of the law. As an additional proof that it could not, he hail read the extracts from those levers. He held in has hand certain clauses, which, if the Bill were allowed to go into Committee, would effect vie defraying of the ex. tenses that might be incurred by the removal of the trial of prisoners. The right of having the trials removed . ould belong to the c our t, an d no t t o the plaintiff or de fendant, or any parties concerned. Mr. ID CONNEI,L said that he would move that " t e resolutions be referred to a Select Conninitt,e, Who would report to the House whether the facts justified their necessity by sityor t n au ot n .;: ng T h he im ßig o h i t r. H ( 3l4 . . lo S n ee ne r io Secretary b, hisp ex ploits. He should be gla.l to know what were the exploits achieved by the Right Hun. Secretary, of which lie could boast. He would make no attack upon the Right Hon. Gentleman, but would repudiate his personal obser vations' as they deserved. If the grossest prejudice ~gainet the people of Ireland did not exist in that House, there would not have been made such an attempt to trample upon them as had been made that evening. By this Bill, the peasant would be taken from that part of the county where he was known, and the very fact of his removal cbs Wers u i would tend to prejudice the winds of s llol° being ttli - try him. Why should the right of yo r in his own county he taken way ? Had al solid injured ? He would ask Engli sh Noblemen jOsie men how ti ey could consent to have this right moo when no jurior had been ever intimidated uP ee; r o of August, 1832 ? The evidence of Afr• .01, 1) proved this. Oh, if he had to plead the n nu dolte l Irish before those who sympathised with their . 0 he would not despair of seeing justice done to t bt i begged to refer to the report of the Irish Ce 710,11 August last, of which Sir 11. Parnell WO CM'. to b? prove his assertion, that up to that time . .0,0„0, been injured or menaced. He challenged soYII4. nut a single failure of justice in Ireland, or . 'VI which a single guilty Whitefoot bad escapee h o t o . o history of the last assizes be consulted. It " u f dr trd that out of fifty trials in the Qaeen's County , s, boo l stitution was atte —hP mp en ted P fullest attendance of jurors and witnesses upon On) a c n o y nv f i a c e t t i s on h s a h v a in d g been obtained, and that there b `.' And yet, without any cause having been s i p s day it was stated, that no juror had been intim' f at today it was asserted that juries and witnesses. 4 terred from forwarding the ends of justie. Let . n ic i mittee he moved for be appointed, and if they iii t o facts existed requiring die enactment of the pre ee ,,, n would remain silent. The Hon. and Learned u' a n g p a p i o n s s i t ng the th ß e i a ll in o e n n i d y ment concluded by moving that the Bill be referred to Committee. Mg to the Court of Kin g's The Question having been put, 1, ts° pro d uce d-- rok a e n n oth th e a r t li n n i k e h o .td t .: l o4 , i The SOLICITOR-GENERAL felt no 'i' es . o ll, tion. The tremendous complaint that bed be rp changed, and prisoners, when they could oa t or tried in one county should be tried in anadjoiniogroo" uo i m smt i i : er e c t . : qt than aa f nl, e p h flo n a re e wi rbeein.,. iiii 0 , i w n thoerae intended l the ahwe than , c i r m re e , in the city of Dublin ? The complain t W i . si c atoK curious one, since this same law, so ranch airi against, existed in Scotland, which he supposed Rai country, and not only was in force there, ti nt vr ,,, 51i k, 4 0 1 law in England ; for when a fair trial could n et t — lV cour ° I 0 0 0 a amo unted nd ß g en i t j o P a r tl , r iis-- 1 theingwtvhb e e e n ti r e : shbe l GO: Bench was applied to, it might Uuthorise th e tei; 00 0! place in the next county. ' By this Bill notlono 11 e u same footing • with Scotland and England. to 4.1 Mr. ' CU fLAR FERGUSSON did not ole al : e, of f ose the Bill, though lie thought it would Pla cel- p e t ioPl . ,i thelreland in a wor.e condition than any ol her h or i r word. Ti.ough it might be necessary to e' ll e venue to the adjoining county, he did not tbink ub l o be T necessary to allow prisoners to be tried in I ) b e O i The gallery was then cleared fora cl • ." - . IV'S' the committee flog took place. On our re-admission d we found committee on the Bill. ' 01/ Mr. FITZGERALD n lhe loved an amendinco t . AO wouldi was deridnocgo nnj •sti" d of which was to limit the power of the vernment in Ireland to the mere change of the ;;:l t adjoining county, and not to permit its red be T county of the city of Dublin ; for this purpestobefi polled to leave out the words " or to the countY or Dublin, or the county of Dublin." d 9 The Home thin divided, wo e n th ere appe a r , l- For the Amendment ..................... Against it ..... ......................................... Majority agliinst the Amendment . ..... When strangers o ere re-adini,ttli into We ~. go Mr. 0 CONNELL was re q u e sting Alini' de ioli° pone 'he consideration of th e rema inder of th e W I count of t. e lateness of the hour, and it Was agreed to reco mm it it r,his day. re,, BUDGET. to consider the causes to the distress of the eeu ° l oe le spe A et f i t n e g r the te H pe o s u t s p e en b e a m d e r n e t su o m f e t d h , e a m co o n ti v u e u rs f a u t r ion co o:: ' Mr. M. ATT‘IOOD rewsed to postre e e :i 0 0 ground that he hal already repeatedly poscPen iIS request of L rd , Althorp. fl* A 4, Mr. STANLEY said it w ou ld be desira b ' e 01P - 1 motion for the C o mmit tee shquld not take pv e tne financial statement. o see ar Mr. ATT WOOD s a id, th e reverse would b e the cie o ll sirafile, as the discu ss ion cou ld mater i l ily alte r t u ttir e of Government r e sp ec t ing fi nance , an d the I t - tPN per haps be to upset the budget. see ° • tre Gee Mr. STANLEY said, th a t f or the same re 04 ought, a fortiori, t o p os tp o n e i t t ill a fter the "" - e e Il i ' had finishtd .ts lahour-, so that they wo uld h e Atsi ie chance of seeing it thi s s es si on . ite , -. hr, Mr. ATTWbOD ind Mr. S. RICE then el t ; er a conversation respettng a letter which th e ' 4 : L i r a l written to the former yesterday, urging him to e ri ,ole, motion on different ground s , names } , 9 for the P u ;e bringing forward th e 0 finance Estima te, f t to, for the oak was a pressing necessity fur the purposes service. EMANCIPATION OF THE JEWS' o f I S Mr. WARBURTON brought up the repor,l 1 - a Committee on th e E manc ip at i on o f th e Jews- D iu o f The resolutions were read and agreed to; and ordered to b e b roug h t in pursu a nce of the oar" Adjourned at half-past one o'clock this morning' LIST OF TH. WHO VOTED FOR MR. LENNARD' CLAUSE IN THE GAME BILL EMI. ON THE LAND THEY OCCUPY. Aglionhy, A.—Cockermouth Barnard, E. J.—Greenwich Blamire, W.—East Cumberland Brougham, W. -.Southwark Clay, W.—Tower Hamlets Childers, J. W.—Cambridgesh. l)uncannon, Vis.—Nottingham Ewart, W.—Liverpool Hawes, B.—Lambeth Hawkins, J. H.—Newport, 14( of Wight Heathcoat, J —Tiverton Hughes, Hughes—Oxford Jervis, J.—Chester Moreton, H. G. F.—East Glou cestershire 'E MINORITY .. : 0 11 7 'S MOTION Fog B EgTOP opr .OWERING TENANTS T° Philips, Mark-I% IOC be ef Ricardo,_ D . —Stroud Rolfe, R. 31 --YenrhYn fb Rotch, 13.—Kraire sbOr .7 Ruthven, K Rut hvcn, Strurr. E —Derby _bury ancred, W.—DT:Oc Warburton, H.-"D ri-r Wason, R.—lpswich oh Young, G. F..._syuelae TEusitg. n Campbell, Sir J.--.. 41,011 Lennard, T. B. f - 0 " - CIF . PAIRED f. sco Tynte, C. J. K.--‘4' O'Dwyer, A. C.—Drogheda Pease, Joseph—South Durham KING'S THEATRE. t:4 The operatic part of the entertainment sv", -h }, tee U'l have come on on S a t ur d ay n i g h t was per formed " Ao pe; night. It consisted o f an act o f II Barbiere an Ini0; 11 Pirata. Madame de Ahem took the part of t 7 e bel l ! Donna in both, and gave unequivocal proof tb a ,",:ol/' l l, been lately quite herself. Her acting in Rost ra eq lli deed, spir ted and playful, but her voice was very i t o ot and not unfrequently out of tune, so that it co ol rat sP e j smoothly and effectual! through Rosstra's eleg" jet elaborate melody. DONZELLI, in the Count, digiPlo,ll:l us in his singing of " E-co ridente." 1 1 11° 0 4 . lif t ° Figaro is in every aespect admirable ll. fr , .. he Pi,ll, easy, and well sustained. Itwurri aPP ea 7rsti sll° ,:f ata, and renewed those sensations of high r d per tion which his former delicate and expressive o * . fen performing BELLINI'S music excited in us, on d L e t , siy in all who heard him. The ballet was ,La bole, in which the ELSLERS resumed the chief Far—. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. TAT TER SALL' S. DERBY. • 6 to 1 agst Mr. -'s Prince Llewellyn 8 to 1 agst Mr. Ridsdale's Glaucus (taken) 8 to 1 agst Mr. Rawlinson's Revenge 10 to 1 agst Mr. Hunter's Forester n) 14 to 1 agst Mr. Wo .d' s Titi an g 14 to 1 agst Duke of Rutland's Moses's darn 18 to 1 agst Mr. Cooper's l'watty colt (taken) 20 to I egst Lord Verulam's Tredrille colt 22 to 1 agst Lord Exeter's Emmeline colt 25 to 1 agst Colonel Peel's Nonsense 25 to 1 agst Colonel Cosby's Bravo BTH RACES. - WEDNESDAY.— Half -b red Stakes tor .yr,o,u- r 600° each. 4 subs. 1 Mr. C. Codrington's Doddington (Mr. Peyton) 2 le Mr. J. Codrington's b. g. by Zealot ''''''''. Otle The Lanstlown Stakes of 15 aovs. each, 10 It' S wee Mr. J. Day's ch. c. by Lusborough, quarter. cFuniv, 225yrss.ub(Gs.ibbert) a 1 2 yrs.••• i O es ut s ne il r y s e s r ta c rt u ed. Won in a canter • to Theadd .„0 Cup, value 30 sovs.,'o " pstakes of 5 soya. eat+, 22 subs., vi ,,,, w ' or heats by Mr. Pryer's Dandina, heating Mr. UaY I Y II p, rtor, Mr. Burton's sister to the Admiral, and 8 oth er- viof I, The Hack Stakes were won by Mt. Peyton's Poo ' eating Mr. Sadie, 'a L &drat in two heats. ) beat Ma ch, 50 cove. Mr ' • Harold 0 • D'Y . Hadd s• Yd Mr. Hawkins, The Lion. li • ft• ii° TH • U RSDA Y. --1 . he Bath Stakes of 20 sous. each, • 30 added. Mule and a half and a dis. 10 sae. Mr. J. Day's Liston, aged, Sst. 101 b. ......... . 1 , Sir L. Glyn's Bryan, 5 years, 9st. 21b .......... ,: Mr. Elliott's Sinbad, 4 years, Sst. lib .......... U Three others started. ppo l‘ L fr a . dl ßawij a :s .' o d n a, s b. The Dodington Palk Stakes of 20 sovs. each, b. ft. mile., 6 subs. 1 Mr, H. Peyton's Gr ove Cutter, 4 years ...... a Mr. Piercefield, the Mayor, 4 years ......•• Mr. Burton's sister to the Admiral, 4 years••• 9 MO The York Stakes of 5 .ovs. a ech, and 20 arbied. heat., 10 .übs. Mr. Harris's Dictator , 4 y ears, 6st. 51h. 1 1 Mr. Peyton's Don Juan, aged, Bst. 121 b. 2 9 , t• •'/ The Scrub Stakes were nut decide d when the pot et Tire spurt was exceileut. l aAk I p" 1 3 4 41 ' Dirt !ag: 11110 i Bet; Br fti 1,,1.Xt ins D A ry~ ~ '~ \ 1 ) jj~ i t, sttt ,'Pity' i ne tti %t , 114 , 1 t I , oi tite Ye ar , et P 4ti ec ur t y, b i e f as 41 1 14te