The Sun. — London, England, 1833-05-14 00:00:00

bridge to the same effect. Also a petition from the Arch deaconry of Wells against the Irish Church Bill. Mr. PRYME said the first petition from Cambridge University had not been unan imousl y a g reed to. Lord G. SOMERSET aske d the Honourable Member r Rochester (Mr. Bernal) whether he intended to icing forward his proposition relative to the borough of Hertford on Wednesday next, and what the nano e of his proposition would be? There were several other ma tt e rs in the book for that evening, and be hoped another day would be fixed. Mr. BERNAL said any day m ight be fixed for consi &ring the case of the borough of Hertford, which would suit the convenience of the House. His first proposition would be that the state of the borough of Hertford demanded the serious consideration of the House ; but as to the substantive proposition he could not give any positive information to the House, as he was not at present suffi ciently informed of the exact district of country surround ing the town of Hertford. Mr. WYNN said the question should be brought torward on the first open day, as it was, both as a ques tion of privilege and as a judicial matter, a subject of the greatest possible importance.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL said that the Hon. Member for Oldham had fixed his motion for his (Sir R. Peel's) removal from the Privy Council for Thursday, a notice day, hut there were other notices before it which he hoped Hon. Members would postpone till that of the Hon. 'Member was disposed of.—(Hear, hear.) He did not mean to say that be felt any great degree of anxiety upon the subject, but these frequent shrinkings of an address to the Crown were ludicrous, and the necessity of an im mediate attendance was irksome. The motion of the Hon. Member for Oldham would not probably take much time, and he trusted Hon. Members would allow it to take pre- eedence. Mr. O'CONNELL, as one having a motion for tl at retelling, would willingly agree to the request of the Hot.. Baronet. Mr. W. HARVEY and Lord G. SoetraseT also con tented to do the same. IRISH CHURCH TEMPORALITIES BILL. On the motion by Lord ALTHORP, that the House go into Committee on this Bill, Mr. LEFROY objected to the House legislating for the church of Ireland on any principle that would not be acted upon fur that of England. The present principle, in his opinion, would decidedly endanger the union of the two countries. He contended that before the promoters of the present measure brought it under the consideration of the House, they should have shown that the duties of the B shops could be executed by a smaller number than at present were called upon to perform those duties. In his opinion, the consolidation of the bishoprics would be attended with the very worst effects. To pass from mat ters of moment, in a national point of view, and important to the interests of religion, he should warn the Heine of the material injury, in a pecuniary point of view, which those towns would sustain in which Bishops at present resided, in the event of those valuable residents being removed from them ; and amongst other evils which would result from the proposed change, was this, that, after the passing of tie Act, if unfortunately it should pass into a law, ten see houses would become vacant, which would immediately be put up to sale, and disposed of to the highest bidder, as fast as they became vacant. It was not difficult to anticipate who would become the purchasers.—(A laugh.) Yes, Hon. Members might sneer and laugh, but he had no hesitation in saying that those houses would be purchased for the Roman Catholic Bishops. Such an alteration in the state and condition of the two religions would, in his opinion, tend greatly to the injury of Protes tantism in Ireland ; according to his apprehension, it would be injurious alike to the feelings and the rights of Protestants. Protestantism formed the link which bound the two countries together, and they might forthwith look to the dissolution of the subsisting union if that link were once broken. He objected also to the Bill on the ground that it was contrary to the articles of that union, as agreed upon in the year 1800. By the promoters of the measure it was said that it had the support of a majority of the Prelates of the Irish Church ; that assertion he altoge. ther denied. Of all the-Bishops of Ireland there were on'y live who had expressed opinions favourable to it ; and of that five three had been appointed by the present Government. Was it, then, be would a•ls, a mode 01 legislating consonant with what the Irish church had a right to expect, thus to legislate for it in such a manner es no Legislature would venture upon with regard to the English church ? It was in effect verifying the statement of an Hon. Member of that House, that they proceeded to legislate at all times for Ireland as fur a province. He did not think such had been the general conduct of suc cessive British Legislatures towards Ireland, and, there fore, was he anxious that, in the present case, they should not give a colour to the charges brought against them by the Hon. Member to whom he had been alluding. It was often said the Reform Bill had been introduced for tl,e purpose of abolishing an oligarchy in the state. Let not the Reformers of the present day permit it to he said of them that, in removing it from the state, they established it in the church. He would ask this plain question ; would not the effect of this Bill be to place in the hands of twelve Bishops the patronage heretof ere dispensed by two and twenty ? That certainly would place the patronage to which he referred within the grasp of the Government. --(Hear, hear. ) In his opinion it would be much better to diminish the incomes than reduce the number of the Bishops. It might be that four Archbishops were too much ; perhaps it would be better to reduce the number still lower than was proposed, and strike off three instead of two, and also to reduce the larger sees. Thus as great a pecuniary reduction might be effected as the Noble Lord required, without any diminution of the number of the Bishops. As to the power of converting Bishops' leases into perpetuity, that presented itself in two points of view; rst, as regarded the Bishops, secondly, as regarded the tenants. He considered this part of the measure as fraught with great danger to the Bishops, for it would be quite as easy to offer passive resistance to the payment of their rents, as it bad been to resist the payment of tithes.—(Hear.) Then as to the Bishops tenants, it was not a boon they desired. He looked upon the whole of this part of the Bail as an infringement of private rights, and as calculated to throw the whole of the Irish church prop .sty into confusion—he thought the remedy worse than the disease. He condemned, too, the appro priation of the money expected to be derived front this conversion—it should not be applied to any other than re ligious purposes. It was said that by this change a new 'species of property was given to the church which it had not before. That he altogether denied ; it. in fact, drove the Bishop out of the property they had previously pos sessed—it was doing what in Ireland was called improving a gentlemen out of his estate.—(Hear, hear.) He chal lenged any man acquainted with the law of the land, to dispute the statement he had made, that there was no re version of church property to the state. What, he begged to ask, was the value of the charter of the Crown, if thus the fee simple of the church, secured to it by charter, could be invaded ? In the same way the state had not even the pretence of right to any improvement of church property, for the improvement belonged, as in the cases of private individuals, to the owner of the property. He ellnstrated this point by reference to the endow "latst. of Dissenting places of worship, where if a Court of Equity would allow Leases in perpetuity, she advantage belonged to the trustees of the chapel, and not to the state. Why then, he inquired, was the church of England and Ireland to be placed on a diae rent footing? Surely, to say the least of it, the church of Ireland should have as much protection as a dissenting chapel. A moire injurious change was contemplated in the Bill with respect to the building and repair of churches and glebe-houses in Ireland. The proposition for a lay commissioner was most oppressive and unjust, eepec ally as the Board of Commissioners was intended to be con stituted. Ile objected most strongly to the constitution of that Board, consisting of four Bishops and five laymen, all to be appointed and removed at the pleasure of the Lord Lieutenant. He more than feared that the influ ence of the Board would be employed for election pur poses, and that the church of Ireland would then be placed under the direct political control of the Government. Under the new system, it was only the poor parishes which were to be deprived of assistance in the building and repair of their churches. He called the attention of the House to what the Board of First Fruits had accomplished for the benefit of the Church of Ireland since the Union. It had expended 1,192,0001. in the con struction of 746 new churches, of 552 glebe-houses, in the purchase of 202 gleb es an d o f i m p ro p t i a t e tithes to be added t o small vicarages, while all this vast improvement bad cost the church only 006/. He contended that such a measur e as that now proposed ought not to have been brought forward until the report of the Commissioners of Inquiry into the Ante of the Church in Ireland had been made, pnd the true rta , on .or hurrying the Bill forward was, that it might be taken ae a set-off to the Coercion Act. He entreated the House to remember that the first sacrifice to the French Revolution was the church ; and that the downfall of the aristocracy and of the monarchy s oon follow , d as a necessary constquence. If Ministers and Parliament thus proceeded in giving way to popular clamour, the only choice left would soon be between Bell gion, the Monarchy, and the Aiistocracy, or Democracy and an Agrarian Law.—(Cheers.) Mr. FRENCH was disposed to admit, and witluatt pledging himself to the details of tl:e plan, that as a whole, with one exception, the measure was wise, compreLeusivr, and manly. Perhaps he should prefer a diminution of the s alaries to a reduction of the number of the Bishop s ; but even that was not comparatively of great importance. The exception to which he referred related to the tenure of the tenants of the Bishops; and this part of the Wine held an invasion of the sacred rights of property. He app.-et:ended that Ministers would find themselves totally mistaken in their calculation of the sum to be obtained by this scheme; for it was his conviction, that a tenancy, under a lease for 20 years, renewahle on payment of a fixed fine, was as va luable as the perpetuity proposed to he allowed by the Bill. The power of Bishops to grant leases for twenty.one years was given by the 10th and llth of Charles I. ; and the usage of nearly two centuries showed the cor rectness of what he had advanced. The instinces where leases were allowed to expire were few indeed• He contended that the value of Bishops' lands was much overrated, and that it would he lessened instead of increased by the present measure. Nothing was more erroneous than the impres•ion that tenants would be benefitted it. They would soon find out to their cost, that the measure—particularly that part of it to which be more immediately alluded—was anything like advantageous to then - . The precedent about to be established was a fearful one—it was one that tended to shake the security of property in England as well as in Ireland. That part of the measure would particularly affect the property of a class of persons in Ireland, to promote the welfare of whom it was the interest of England to tt y in every possible way. Ile hoped that the originators of the measure would abandon that part of it; but if they had not good sense enough to do so, he felt confident that the House would reject it. An Hose. MEMBER was understood to say, that the measure had his general support, but that he objected to part of it, because that part of it w as inconsistent with the main principles of the Bill. The part be objected to was that which sanctioned an alienation of church pro perty; for, notwithstanding the denial of the Right Hon. Secretary for the Colonies, there was in the measure a sanctioning of the alienation of church property. Whilst he admitted the power of • that House with respect to church property, he thought that it should be especially applied to church purposes. One of the purposes to which it ought to be applied, and for which it was originally destined, was education ; and few countries more than Ireland required that education should be encouraged. It was the ignorance of the people of that country that gave so much hold to agitation ; and no one could read the report of the Irish Commissioners without being con vinced, that the cause of the increase of crime in Ireland was the ignorance of the people. Even the Hon. Member for Dublin would allow, that the crimes of a population were generally proportionate with their ignorance. Mr. O'CONNELL said, that he was not quite so sure of the ignorance of the people of Ireland. Whether ig norance did or did not prevail there, it was certain that it did to a very large extent elsewhere, and he seldom saw so many proofs of it as he did when he heard Hon. Members talk about Ireland. He denied that the crimes 1 of a country were in proportion with the ignorance of its population, and be was supported in his opinion by the authority of a late number of the Edinburgh Review. He saw in a statistical calculation published in that journal, stating that there were more poor children i enjoy ing the blessing of e ducation in Ireland, than n that country so vaunted, and so favoured as to education— Scotland. Besides, if the statistical accounts of crimes in the French departments, drawn up by the desire of the Government of that country, were consulted, the Hon. Member who had last spoken would find that the progress of crime (lid not tally with the ignorance of the depart ments; for that the proportion of crime with the inhabi tants was greater in those departments which were con sidered the most enlightened. With respect to the present measure, as he said on a former occasion that it had his approbation, he would now state why he approved of it no longer, lest he should be accused of incon-istency and of changing his sentiments without a sufficient reason. The fact was, the Noble Lord opposite had practised a de lusion upon him when he said that the vestry cess was to be entirely abolished. The Noble Lord might have done so unwittingly, but the Noble Lord must still be aware that he (Mr. O'Connell) spoke sincerely when he mentioned that lie laboured under a delusion upon that point. The amount of the cess was stated to be between 60,000/. and 80,000/. ; in the newspaper reports he saw it to be 69,000/. This was to he done away with ; and when the Noble Lord stated the yearly value of Bishops' property to be 700,0001., lie (Mr. O'Connell) asked the Noble Lord whether it was too much to expect that the people of Ireland should be relieved of their burdens at the rate of about 10 per cent. upon that property? On consideration he had d!scovered, that the relief, instead of amounting to 70,000/., would not amount to more than 10,000/. This was the reason why he had changed his opinion with respect to the measure. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then went through several returns of vestry cess paid in parishes in Ireland, and contended that the several expensive items he mentioned would still remain, though it had been said that the cess was virtually abolished. The cess, so far as it regarded the repairs of churches, was done away wi.h, but it would still be levied for several other purposes. The present measure would only double that vexatious tax. It did not, in any way, repeal the Act of George 11. nor the 7th of George IV., which set up select vestry cess, and by which it could be extended beyond church repairs. He regretted that the measure only barely touched upon a principle, without completely embracing it, and the only good that he saw in it was, that in recognising legislative interference, it gave to that House a control over church property. So far it had his approbation, but that appro bation did not go one inch farther. Lord ALTHORP said that the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had contended that the vestry cess in Ireland would not be abolished by the Bill introduced by the Government. He (Lord Althorp) could only say that the intention was to abolish it, and that if the Hon. and Learned Member could point out an instance in which that was not done, lie could assure him the Government would make such alteration in the clause as would have the effect of abolishing it. Since the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had spoken, however, he (Lord Althorp) had been assured by an Hon. and Learned Gentlemen near him that the clause, as it at present stood, would have the effect of abolishing all those charges.—(Hear, hear.) The intention was to benefit the people of Ireland by relieving them from the vestry cess ; and if the clause which was to confer the benefit were still found to be defective, they were willing to make the required amendment. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin then complained that the Bill did , not go so far as he wished.—(Elear, hear.) He (Lord Alth.rp) had no doubt that it did not go so far as the inclination of the lion. and Learned Member would wish—(Hear, hear)—and he would say more, it was never intended that it should go so far.—(Hear, and a laugh.) lie said further, that it contained many clauses which were of no consequence to a large majority of the people of Ireland. It was true, as argued by the Honourable and Learned Member that it was a matter of indifference to the Catholics of Ireland how the revenues of the church were distributed among the clergy; but he should recollect that this was a Bill intended fur the reform of the Protestant church, and that it was iherefore their business to remove the abuses of the Protestant church, but they were not obliged to go to the Catholics for advice how that church would be best arranged.—( Hear, hear.) He would new beg to say a few words in answer to the speech of the Hon. Member for Roscommon. When that lion. Gen tleman asserted that this Bill would do an injury to the tenants of the church, he (Lord Althorp) could assure him that it was not intended to do them an injury, but, en the contrary, it was intended to do them a benefit. The Hon. Member had said that the leases held by tho-e tenants were equal to a perpetuity. Now he (Lord Althorp) could assure the House that at present there were 45 Bishops' leases of which only ten years remained, ar.d be would ask if those leases could be considered equal to a perpetuity ?—(Hear, hear.) As far as he (Lord Althorp) could understand the tenor of the Hon. Mem ber's argument, lie appeared to contend that the continued renewal of a lease was more valuable than a perpetuity by bail a year's purchase.—(Hear, and a laugh.) He would now say a few words with regard to the observations of the Hon. and Learned Member for the University of Dublin. That Hon. and Learned Member said that the revenues of the suppressed bishoprics should be left with the Bishops who were retained. if the Honourable and Learned Member thought the revenues of the bishop rics which remained too small, he (Lord Althorp) could understand why the revenues of two Bishops should be given to one ; but as that was not alleged, he could not see the advantage of that arrangement ; and he thought it would be much better to apply those revenues to the ge neral purposes of the church of Ii eland. The Hon. and Learned 11•Ieuiber objected also to the abolition of the Board of First brui s er, and to the manner in which the first fruits were to be administered, He said that it was degrading to the church that the Board pfCommissioners who were t A o l ia ti a w y rp et ) he administration of them should be composed partly of ecelesiastics and partly of laymen. Now , he ( Lord thought it of great importance that those etn liloz ied n that ar d u ous and important duty should be per . of activity and industry; and that such a duty should not be intrusted to those persons alone Who could not be u t p p o r n op to cr. attend, \‘iie n bu o t ,ey ni ought ~ doto so tthatc o l r au n se ot lie is w t o l u le id y C tl a i l o l ulh be wady to prove that there was nothing in it deserving o' the censure which had been lavished upon it hy.the Pon. and Learned Gentlemen. The Noble Laid concluded 1,7 saying, that he had had no intention of taking part in the discussion that evening ; and that his only reason for rising was, because he had considered the observations made as necessary to be answered. Mr. GOULBURN thought that the Bill was intended entirely for the advantage of the aristocracy. He objected to tie measure principally for what it did not contain. It contained no clause for the protection of the Protestant faith, or for the promotion of its growth, and in that particular he considered the Bill as very defective. It did not promote that for which the church of Ireland was ori ginally instituted, namely, the promulgation and extension of the principles of the Protestan t religion.—(Hear, hear.) He did not object to the removal of the vestry cess; but what he complained of was the manner in which it was proposed to be remo ved. The Noble Lord seemed to have forgotten that there were two kinds of cess in Ireland. There was one kind laid on e xclusively by Protestants, and another which was laid on by the inha bitants of the parish generally, whether Protestants or Catholics. The first kind was intended for the mainte nance and repairs of the churches, and of the churches exclusively ; but the other was intended for the payment of the salaries of organists, all the expense of singing in the churches, the repairs and care of the churchyard, and these were points which were eternal topics of discussion and dispute.—(Hear.) There was not a more fruitful source of dispute in Ireland th in the churchyards, and he (Mr. Goulburn) objected to laying the whole ex perie, and the whole odium connected with them, upon the clergyman. Then with regard to that part of the mea sure which proposed the. abolition of ten out of the twenty two Bishops of Ireland, he would say, that if the hierarchy of Ireland were reduced to twelve, it would not be able to perform those duties which ought to devolve upon it.— (Hear, hear.) He objected to the Ecclesiastical Commis• sion, because it appeared to him as ir, by it, they were ap pointing a Commission for the purpose of taking care that religious duties should not be performed in Ireland. — (Hear, hear.) He approved of that part of the measure which broke up great and united parishes, and gave each parish a separate incumbent.—(Hear, hear.) He objected strenuously to that part of the Bill which proposed that where there bad been no service performed for a certain number of years in a parish, it should be in the power of the Commissioners to decide whether any clergyman should be appointed to that parish in future. In his opinion, the prosperity of Ireland wholly depended on the spread of the Protestant religion there; as that spread, so would vice and misery disappear. Mr. HUME was only sorry that the Right Hon. Gentleman had not taken this view of the evils of Ireland when he had sat on the other side of the House.—(A laugh.) It was a most unfortunate' thing, that at a time when he had it in his power to remedy all the evils of which he now complained—such as non-residence, want of schools, and so on, it had been found utterly impossible to open his eyes to these evils—it was only since he had left office that he bad become cognizant of them.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Now, in his (Mr. Hume's) opinion, there would he no peaca in Ireland till the Protestant esta blishment was wholly put down.—(Oh, oh ; Hear, hear.) For the last hundred years we had been trying, in every imaginable way, to make the Catholics Protestants ; but experience fully showed, that so far from succeeding, Pro testantism had been decreasing day by day ; and were we now to authorize a crusade of another hundred years in the desperate attempt to do that which had so completely been shown to be impracticable?—(Hear, hear.) He would agree with an Hon. and Learned Member, that this was a Bill which would give satisfaction to neither Catholics nor high churchmen ; but he had different rea sons from the Hon. and Learned Member for this belief. He (Mr. H.) did not find fault with the Bill because it put down ten Bishops ; he found fault with it because it did not put down twenty-two.—(Oh, oh, and Hear, hear.) It had been demonstrated by the other party themselves, that one Bishop in Ireland would quite serve every purpose ; for, according to their own statement, one of our Bishops—the Bishop of Exeter—had, within twenty or thirty, as many benefices (1,200) under his pastoral care, as all the Bishops in Ireland put together ; therefore, according to their own scale, one Irish Bishop was quite enough.—(Hear, hear.) In his own mind, one was too many—(Oh, oh; a laugh, and Hear, hear)—but he was reckoning at their scale - . In fact, Government had clearly never intended that there should be such a herd of Irish Bishops, or they would all have been allowed their seats in the House of Lords ; whereas there were only four there. An Hon. Member had talked a good deal about some mon ster that seemed craving for everything. He knew of no monster to whom this would apply, except it were public opinion.—(Great laughter.) Yes, public opinion de manded every thing—and public opinion ruled, or ought to rule, every thing ; and it was the public opinion that the Irish church was nothing but a sinecure church. — (Oh, oh ; Hear, hear.) He did not mind Hon. Gentle men's crying out Oh, oh ! lie did not appeal to them—(A laugh)—but he appealed to the body of the people, who, in 99 out of every 100, declared that church to be produc tive of the greatest evils—a sinecure—and that it ought to be done away with.—( Hear.) While the Catholic was called upon to support the Ministers of another religion, there would be no peace in Ireland. --(Hear, hear.) Moreover he would have the church lands sold out and out—(Hear) —and the produce of the sale applied by the Legislature to such purposes as should be considered most adapted for general benefit. As to the proposed C ,m -mission, in his opinion it would never produce those bene ficial results which the real friends of both countries so ardently desired. He was for following up th's church reform. He would go, therefore, with the Noble Lord as far as he chose to go ; and when the Noble Lord would go no further, he hoped somebody else would take up the sub. ject and proceed with it, Mr. G. VERNON looked for a great improvement in the Protestant establishment from the operation of the proposed Bill. He could by no means regard the Pro testant establishment in Ireland in the view taken of it by the Hon. Member for Middlesex, who considered it as the source of all evil ; but he would deprive it of those quali ties which rendered it less operative for good. No man could be more sensible than he was of the value of the church establishment. His personal predilection and his personal duties must naturally induce him to regard it with favour. But however much he respected the insti tution of the higher orders of the church, he could never admit that the influence and importance of the episcopacy depended on its numerical amount. Those who talked of the number of acres in a diocese seemed to think that the duties of a Bishop were those of a surveyor. While he was in favour of the Bill generally, he supported the intros duction into the last clause of the words " for ecclesiastical purposes." Mr. WYNN contended that the adoption of the mea sure would be tantamount to a declaration that it was no longer the wish of Parliament to encourage and maintain the Protestant re'igion in Leland. The two principal objections which he entertained against the measure were —the reduction of the number of the Bishops, and the application of church property to purposes not ecclesiastical. Sr R. BATESON slid, the present proposition must lead to the destruction of the Protestant church in Ire land. He objected to the lay commissioners in the board, and thought the board ought to be wholly episcopal. As to doing away the church cess, he should be happy to concur in any measure by which the objections to the existing system might be removed. Ile strongly objected to laying a tax on so low a rate of clerical income as 2001. a year. In his opinion the tax, too, ought to be imposed on the lay impropriators equally with clergymen. Mr. ANDREW JOHNSTONE, though a church re former, and anxious for the removal of abuses, could not assent to this Bill. The abolition of vestry cess appeared to him highly objectionable; the vestry cess he looked upon as a burden on the land, and if the vestry cess were to cease, it would have the effect only of adding so much mote to the estates of the landed proprietors --(Hear, and N o , no.) He was a Presbyterian, and it might, there fore, be thought strange that be should, as he did, object to the reduction of the number of Bishops in Ireland. In his opinion, they ought to be increased.—(Laughter and cheers.) He considered that Ireland was a fair field for episcopal Bishops to labour in. Mr. SHAW wished to explain a misapprehension of the Right Hon. Secretary for the Colonies on the last night this subject was discussed. He was represented by that Eight Hon. Gentleman as having stated, that if this Bill had been brought forward by his friends on that side of the House, lie would have supported it ; but having been brought forward by the other side, b 2 atiould oppose it. The Right Hon. Gentleman was wholly mistaken. With regard to another statement of the Right Hon. Gen tleman, that the Primate of Ireland had suggested the reduction of the number of bishoprics, he begged, on the part of the prelate, to deny that such was the case, and he thought it would be prudent of the Right Hon. Secretary to be a little more cautious, for these assertions frequently found their way where the subsequent contradiction never reached,—(Hear,) Mr. STANLEY explained. He had so understood the Hon. and Learned Gentleman ; hut it was the farthest from Isis wish to misrepresent what had been said by him. With regard to the Primate, he had since ascertained that it was a misstatement, though not to any very great extent, as he had stated he had frequent dis• cussions with the Primate on the provisions of the Bill, and the impression en his mind was, that the Primate had suggested that the least objectionable means of obtaining reform was to reduce the number of Bishops. The Pri mate had, however, informed him, and, of course, he believed it, that the suggestion came from himself, and not from the Printate.—(A laugh. ) Such was the case. The Primate had certainly admitted with great candour, that if this fund were to he raised, the least objectionable mode wou'd be by reducing the number o f Bishops.—( Hear.) He was, however, exceedingly sorry that he should in the 1 slightest degree misrepresent a Prelate for whom be had such high respect. He had intended to set himself right with the House on the first occasion, and he thanked te Hon. and Learned Member f or the opportunity thus afforded him.—(Hear.) Mr. E. PETRE supported the Bill, though he ob jected to some of its details. He particularly wished the fund to be applied to some ecclesiastical purposes.—(Hear, hear.) It was with no small astonishment, however, that he had noticed the course pursued by H. and Learned Member for Dublin — he , too, who w the as so on critical upon the conduct of others.—(Hear, hear.) He formerly supported the measure, and yet on the present occasion he bad departed from his formerly declared opinions, and joined an opposition which, in his opinion, he had better I have left alone. b Mr. CHRISTMAS contended, that in the proposed measure there was nothing like a sufficient provision for the curates. Mr. LALOR asserted that it did not command the ap probation of any party i❑ Ireland. Lord CASTLEREAGH was of opinion, that it was mere folly to talk of settling the Irish church question when there was no Secretary for Ireland in the House. The question was then put, and the House went into Committee. Mr. RUTHVEN rose, and said a few words (as we understood him) on the Preamble of the Bill, on which — Lord ALT HORP moved that the Chairman should re port progress, and ask leave to sit again on Wednesday, which was agreed to. GENERAL REGISTRATION BILL. This Bill went through a Committee. The report was brought up and ordered to be received to-morrow (this day). The Inheritance Bill went through the Committee. In a Committee on the Dower Bill, Mr. BLAMIRE proposed an amendment in order that the law might re main unaltered as far as related to the dower of widows under the wills of their husbands. Yt For the amendment Against it 2S 'Majority Mr. ELLICE moved that the House do resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, upon the plan for the Abolition of Slavery in the West Indies.—Ordered. The other orders of the day were gone through, and the House adjourned at three o'clock. LIST OF THE MINORITY OF FIFTY-FIVE (TELLER. INCLUDED), WHO VOTED FOR MR. HUME'S MOTION ON FRIDAY LAST, To reduce the vote of 103,3181., proposed for Yeomanry is Great Britain and Ireland, to one-half of that sum, or 51,6591. For the Reduction 056 51 Majority 202 Against it.. Total in the House. ENGLAND. Aglionby, H. A.—Cockermouthl Beauclerk, Aubrey Wm.—East 311 ------ - - Warburton, H.—Br idport Wason, Rigby—lpswich Wood, M.—London Surrey Bewes, T.—Plymouth Briscoe, J. I.—East Surrey Brotherton, Joseph—Salford Chichester, J. P. B.—Barnstaple Divett, E.—Exeter Faithful, George—Brighton Fancourt, Major—Barnstaple Fielden, John—Oldham Fryer, R. —Wolverhampton Grote, George—London Guise, Sir B. W.—East Glouces tershire Hall, Benjamin—Monmouth Hawes, Benjamin—Lambeth Hutt, Wm.—Hull Lennox, Lord J.—West Sussex Lloyd, J. H. —Stockport Molesworth, Sir William—East Cornwall Parrott, Jasper—Totness Potter, lt.—Wigan Rumillv, J.—Bridport Scholefield, J.—Birmingham Seale, J. ll.—Dartmouth Tooke, W.—Truro Trelav;ney, W. L. S.—East Cornwall Vincent, Sir F.—St. Albans Walter, John—Berkshire SCOTLAND. Gillon, W. D.—Falkirk, &c. Oliphant, Laurence—Perth Maxwell, Sir John—Paisley Oswald, R. A.—Ayrshire Oswald, James —Glasgow Pringle, R.—Selkirkshire Wallace, R.—Greenock IRELAND. Blake, Martin—Galway Fitzgerald, Thomas—Louth lor, Patrick—Queen's Co. Macnamara, W. N.—Clare Co. O'Brien, Cornelius—Clare O'Connell, Daniel—Dublin O'Connell, Charles —Kerry O'Connell, John—Youghall O'Connell, Morgan—Meath O'Connor, Fergus—Cork Co. Roche, W.—Limerick Ronayne, D.—Clonmell Ruthven, E. S.—Dublin Ruthvoi, Ed.—Kildare Vigors, N. A.—Carlow TELLER. Hume, Joseph—Middlesex THE ASSESSED TAXES. - GREAT MEETING IN ST. LUKE'S PARISH. Last evening the parishioners of St. Luke's assembled very numerously, in the open space, in front of the work house in the City-road, " to consider of the measures pro per to be adopted to insure the repeal of the duties on houses and windows, in consequence of his Majesty's Mi nisters having totally disappointed the hopes of the coun try." The requisition, signed by the churchwardens, after so stating the purpose of the meeting, concluded as follows :—" Inhabit arts of St.:Luke's, the interest of the country imperatively requires that every man should now be prepared to do his duty." The chair was taken by Mr. MORELAND, the senior churchwarden. The sentiments of the meeting were expressed in a se ries of resolutions to the following effect:.--That his Ma jesty's Ministers, by pertinaciously adhering to obnoxious taxes, for the purpose of maintaining enormously large naval and military establishments, and the payment of un necessary pensions and sinecures, have evinced a disposi tion to perpetuate the burdens of the people, and totally disappointed the hopes of the country. That the pressure of taxation on the middle and industrious classes in that parish had been for a long period excessively great, and as a proof of their inability to pay the assessed taxes, it was stared, that at the first general election for the borough of Finsbury, thousands were obliged to expose their poverty to the world, by the non-payment of those imposts, to the injury of their credit as tradesmen, and the forfeiture of their elective franchise ; and finally, that by proper re trenchment, the house and window tales might be repealed without a commutation of taxes. A deputation was appointed to wait on Lord Althorp, to urge his Lordship to allay, by timely concession, the in creasing hostility to his Majesty's present Ministers, and avert the consequences that were otherwise to be appre hended. The meeting then separated. MISCREANTS. (From the Morning Chronicle.) [We have received the following communication from a respectable gentleman. We fear that there is an orga nised system in this metropolis among the needy and un principled, who abound in it, to extort money by trump ing up charges of unnatural crimes ; but whatever horror we may feel at these accusations, we must observe, that the recommendation of our correspondent is of a some what startling nature. Of course it can only be acted on by powerful and energetic men ; but every man who ac costs another between twelve and one o'clock must not be rashly presumed to be in a conspiracy against him ; and before a man attacks another with such violence as to leave him for dead, he ought to be well assured of the guilt of that party.] " illtscaEaras —We publish the following as a warn ing to individuals whose pursuits may keep them from home at late hours, to hold no conversation with any would-be acquaintances. A gentleman was passing through Covent-gard , n market between twelve and one o'clock on Sunday night, when two men came up to him, one of whom said, A fine night, master ;' to which the person accosted rejoined some off-band civil answer. One of the men then left, and the other continued in the path of the gentleman at a dist ince of two or three yards. lie turned up a passage (his usual way home) leading from King-street to Long-acre, when the man who bad previously left came suddenly up and seized him by the collar, saying hurriedly, " I saw you do it— I'll swear to it." In an instant the other man, who had never left his path, seized him also, saying, " Yes, you did it," or something to that effect. The gentleman in stantly turned on the wretches, and being rather a power ful man, succeeded in giving one a terrible blow, and str iking the other left-handed, so as to throw him down. He then instantly jumped upon the fallen coward, and smashed his face and stornacti with his heels—a mode of defence in any other circumstances most cowardly and malignant, hut in this perfectly justifiable. The other wretch made off at once, and the gentleman having dis abled, and we are led to believe nearly killed his other wretched antagonist, made off too. This affair proves that there is to be a regular sjstetn in these disgusting endea vours at extortion—that two witnesses are to be brought forward instead of one, and so crush an honest citizen for ever. Let every man furnish himself with a stout knotted stick, and on every such attempt as this use it well (for in these cases bieaking every bone in a fellow's body is perfectly justifiable) ; use it so that the accuser shall never speak again, and this race of miscreants, of cowards and of wretches, will soon be extinct in England." A SINGULAR CASE.—On the 25th of April a suckling calf, the property of Mr. DAvus, of Pencoed, in the parish of Eglvesysts rw, in the county of Pembroke, appeared sickly; recourse was bad to palliatives, and amongst oti.er things a small qtaintity of antimony was 4da:inistered• On the 27th a snake, two feet lon4, was 7oided, part of which had actually commenced the process of being digested, and the calf is at prese❑t likely to do well,— Carmarthen 'journal. WEST INDIA QUESTION. MINUTE OF CONFERENCE WITH 1115 MAJESTY'S MINISTERS, JAN. 28, 1833. (Corrected by Lord Grey.) The deputation, consisting of Mr. Murray, Sir Alexan. der Grant, Bart., Mr. Colvile, Mr. Carrington, Mr. Hodgson, Mr. Burnley, Mr. Noyes, Mr. Rose, and Mr. G. Hibbert, jun., waited on Earl Grey, by his Lordship's appointment, at one o'clock. Viscount Goderich was present with his Lordship. Mr. Murray read the resolution, as transmitted to Lord Grey under the resolution of the standing committee of the 16th inst., and which was to the following purport : " That a deputation from this committee be authorized to ask a conference with his Majesty's Ministers, with a view to inquire— " Whether it is their intention to renew the Lords' committee of last session ; Whether it is intended to rescind, wholly or in part, the Order in Council of the 2d of November, 1831 ; " And to ascertain what course his Majesty's Govern ment intends to pursue in Parliament in reference to the resent position of West India affairs." Mr. Murray having then stated that the object of the deputation was to obtain answers on those points— Earl Grey, upon the first question (the revival of the Lords' Committee), declined giving a distinct answer until he should have consulted his colleagues ; he stated, how ever, that it could not be expected that the committee in the House of Lords could be re-appointed without its pro ducing, as in the last session, the appointment of one in the House of Commons. His Lordship inquired the ob ject in view in wishing the re-appointment of the com mittee, and on its being pressed, among other points, upon him, that there would be an opportunity of examining Lord Belmore, lie inquired whether that was the only ob ject ; and, on being answered in the negative, he observed that we might then protract the continuance of the com mittee for a considerable time. His Lordship adhered to his first remark, viz.—that he was not then in a condition to say whether it would Le proposed to renew the committees or not, but that the question should be submitted to the Cabinet. On the second point (having reference to the Order in Council of the 2d of November, 1831) Viscount Gode rich said, that as regarded the crown colonies a fresh order was issued a few months ago, which in some points, re lating to food, clothing, and the hours of manufacturing labour, gave power to the governors to make such modifi cations as might appear applicable to the circumstances of each colony. As regards the legislative colonies, the order having been rejected by all Assemblies, it was not to be pressed upon the colonial Legislatures. As to the third question, referring to the intentions of his Majesty's Government, after some observations on both sides, Earl Grey said that measures, in which the in terests of all parties would be considered, were under the anxious consideration of the Cabinet ; but nothing had bee❑ definitely fixed, and he was not in a condition to make any communication upon the subject, nor could lie bind himself by an assurance that any communication would be made to the West India body till the matter had been further considered by his colleagues. COMMUNICATION FROM Mr. STANLEY TO THE DEPUTATION. " Mr. Stanley has the honour to acknowledge the re. ceipt of a memorandum containing the individual views of the gentlemen composing the deputation of the West India body, upon the leading points connectea with the settlement of the slavery question; and he begs to offer them, in the first place, his acknowledgments for having undertaken a task of which he feels all the delicacy. " It is, however, with the greatest regret that he per ceives, from the paper now before him, that the views of those gentlemen, with regard both to the extent of the proposed measure, and also as to the amount of compen sation to which they conceive that the West India pro prietary would be entitled, are founded upon bases widely different from any which his Majesty's Government can be prepared to sanction. 31r. Stanley feel•, therefore, that no advantage could arise, and some inconvenience might result, from attempting to discuss in the present paper, seriatim, all the topics which are adverted to in the memorandum : he will, accordingly, content himself with a reference to one or two points in illustration of what he conceives to be the inadmissible nature of their proposition. "‘ The first point adverted to by the gentlemen of the deputation relates to the equitable compensation which, in their view, should be provided for the planters ; and, in their opinion, it is essential, before the planters can enter into any scheme for emancipation, that they should at once realize the capital invested in their slaves by a money pay ment in this country, and that this money payment should be calculated at the actual selling price of slaves previous to 1823, minus the per centage of the decline in the price of West India produce. Even if it could be fairly con tended that the public, in carrying into effect a measure which will convert the negro population from an enslaved into a free class of labourers, were justly liable to be called upon to pay the full value of the slave, Mr. Stanley cannot see that that value can be fairly estimated upon any other principle than that of the purchase•money of the profit at the present moment derivable from their labour ; and even if this value cannot be accurately obtained, and if it be necessary to advert, by way of comparison, to a selling price at a former period, which appears to be hardly more susceptible of being accurately obtained, it is difficult to conceive upon what principle it can be main tained that the deduction to be made from the selling price of 1823 should be the per centage decline of the gross value of produce since that period. Upon the principle adopted in the memorandum,. there seems no reason why the charges of duty and freight should not have been taken into calculation with as much justice as the charges of production, for the purpose of still further reducing the per centage decline ; but as the value of labour can only be estimated by the profit derived from it, not by the gross returns of its produce, so it appears obvious that the decline in the price of slaves (even setting all prospective considerations out of the question) should be estimated by the falling off, not in the gross price, but in the net profit of colonial produce, It is to be feared that the amount of that falling off cannot be limited to 15 per cent. ; if it can, the agricultural profits of the 'West Indians have not declined to a greater extent than those of this country within the same period. But it is impossible for Mr. Stanley to admit the doctrine that compensation is to be claimed for the depreciation of property supposed to have been sus tained in consequence of the resolutions in the House of Commons in 1823, or of the increasing feeling of this country with reference to the nature of property in slaves, Against such depreciation no government can protect the proprietors of any description of property, nor can justly be expected to give compensation for loss sustained from causes over which they exercise no control. Without entering therefore into close calculation, or commenting upon the statements of the balances of exports or imports, further than to observe, that by taking the average of the last 20 years, a result is exhibited which is neither war ranted by the present, nor, it is feared, can be expected from the future, Mr. Stanley will content himself with re peating this expression of his sincere regret, that the prin ciples upon which it is proposed to form calculations as to the amount of compensation are such as appear to the King's Government to he wholly inedmias;tile, and as could not, with any prospect of success, tie submitted to the consideration of Parliament. " The second branch of the subject, according to the view taken by the framers of the memorandum, is the mode of extinguishing slavery ; and Mr. Stanley regrets to observe, that while, with reference to the compensation to be secured to the master, all is full and definite, exrmp ting him from the possibility of loss, first by securing to him the immediate payment of touch more than the pre sent value of his slaves, and then by guaranteeing to him the continued services of those same slaves for an almost indefinite period, every thing is left vague and obscure with reference to the advantage to be derived by the negro. It is admitted to be necessary in the beginning to fix a stated scale of wages payable to the negro in his new condition ;' but Mr. Stanley has sought in vain, in the memorandum submitted to him, for any principle for the regulation of the scale; on the contrary it is stated, as a matter for consideration, whether the wages should be unalterably fixed, or should depend, in some degree, upon the selling value of produce ; but no hint appears to be dropped in any part of the eneinorandurn of any pro• portion to be observed between the rate of wages and the value of the labour of the individual, or the portion of the loan which he may justly be called upon to red, em. In deed, h om a passage iminedia‘e y preceding that just cited, in which it is said that the ba►is of any general arrange ment in respect to wages most have a relation to the pre sent outlay defrayed by the proprietor,' it would appear that it is not contemplated that the negro should expe• rienee any relaxation of labour, or the planter incur any additional expense, as compared with the present system, during the period of 41 years, or at all events dpring the period of the first ' contact,' suggested in the memoran dum ; and that the negro, out of the superahundanc-' which lie at pte,ent enjoys, should be called upon, with out an option, for a progressive payment, amounting to his full assumed value. Thu., in point of fact, the aegro would only derive the poor boon of compulsory manu mission (i lie terms, as well as the manumission, being compulsory on him as well as on the master), while the master wculd continue to command the monopoly of the w at ho n le o of greater the n to him by Government a loan, or rather a ift, o f tb e g e r x o p 's e n t s i o nr a and nd i n lab ad o d u i r t io as n a h t a vpere saednvta, 0 6 ; 1 gust xtra' full price of all his slaves , c alculated upon the m vagant d ita. Mr. Stanley cannot hut entertain a h °l l that he has not correctly understood a proposition which, if so intended, it is saying but little to declire 04, utter impossibility of suggesting it for the consideration 01 the British Parliament. " Much stress is laid in the memorandum, uP ° t e : unparalleled liberality of the allowance of wages of three entire days for the negro to supply himself with clothing and necessaries. Mr. Stanley must, however, be permit!. to remark, that the liberality, or even sufficiency, of W I , allowance must depend altogether upon the amount °:. those wages; and that it would appear from the foi l ; part of the memorandum, that the allowance iqr 1 r amount, less than that which it actually costs the nvO te for the same objects under the present Stan system. i' " Mr. ley will ter f into the co n ' i , deration of a document not upon en which urther (as containing °6lj the individual views of gentlemen , however well ual%, to express opinions on this subject es p ecially) no of ic l ij , w tive measures can be founded ; an d the discussion of Wh, t . therefore, in its details, can lead to no practical ro There is much in it to which Mr. Stanley, i' P r e e ; pared to assent; he regrets to a dd, that there 19 °up more caovnooidi na i ba n iloen w d, hehliaceyh has ae which feelsohas nly t i o t impossibleair add,eathatty i or regre utoer(ebtctoihng Will ne 5° c u vi r t.h.e. tott t , taV an early opportunity of communicat in g officially 0 fdreopmutetdh ebyoptihneiotnnstooofotmhinosuenigoeantetlewmitert twheho West India body the general views entertained by 'Majesty's Government; although, if he were to ..) de m eat'. with but feeble hopes of securing, on the part of th 3t u i l . portant body, a concurrence, the full value of which '''J ready to admit, and the absence of which canno t : 4 , seriously augment the acknowledged difficulties al " .1 -G obt:evren..ll question. " Colonial-office, April 29." OBSERVATIONS IN REPLY. t he The undersigned have the honour to acknowledge ley, receipt of a communication from Mr. Secretary Sfrithe dated the 30th inst., in reply to their memoranda' t bB sl 23d inst., and it is with regret that they obeerve %stir considers it to be " a document upon which ll° ur- tive measure can be founded." b ed Under these circumstances, the undersigned %o w po waited for the promised communication of the g"hitl views of his Majesty's Government, and would o?tp. troubled Mr. Stanley with any further observat,'°e-00e present, but there are some points in Mr. S tanley,' munication which they consider it necessary to Ile t ' ee 3 jr. They cannot admit the principle laid down tr tY Stanley, that the Government has had no control O c i ?r e circumstances which, of late years, have caused t he „ r e o l3! ciation in West India property. It can be diatinelll,,r„ per that the value of that property has been affected 1;:ti, ceedinge of the executive Government, and by d°' l „ 4 on the title of property in slaves ; and as that titre•goa questionable in law, or in justice and equity, ore tY the planter, and is, indeed, specifically set forth for t Parliamentary resolutions of 1823, to be providedesod , all measures relating to the slave population, theY, B og for a moment suppose that Parliament will take g b ,., 64 1 of any depreciation which may have been caused ,J.OOP tn vernent in its alleged intention of carrying t hlr9 tions into effect, or that it will enable the pulliic " )4 , I ht the property of the planters at a depreciated vat-o'ci people of England having sold that proper t y to, 3 4 . ceived the price of it from, the planters. or The undersigned, upon reflection, and after roll c j 3,1 sideration of Mr. Stanley's observations, remain C' e f ti that the bash , suggested for estimating th e value -tot! property in slaves, that is by actual sales previc°' 1 1 , depreciation consequent on the measures of Goverf per ti , minus the per centage of the decline in the rice duce which has subsequently taken place, is itPt b ee,, e I , D table ; and they are prepared to enter into adrant‘ir O' explanation upon this part of the strbject, observations of Mr. Stanley, they are appreheni i t o lot i ,, has not correctly understood the nature of the ca''' IP it submitted, as to the decline in the price of produericer'; calculation is not made upon the gross se lling P t Mr. Stanley seems to imagine, but upon the °. O lO realized by the planters, the duty and sale charges tbd t t the periods selected being deducted, est sir , According to this calculation, it does not $1'1 ) oi l. the decline has been more that lb per ce nt. ;, e 1 ;0'17, 1, Stanley, in his observations that a decline to this , , P''' • k extent is not greater than that which has take' , agricultural produce in this country, seems to ove, 1 00 0,: most material circumstance. The loss resulting % t o' ?, depreciation in the value of produce in thila Ce ut t o Is ° 't divided b tween the capitalist and the laboure r many cases, indeed, the latter bears more than his Pi, able quota, but in the West Indies, under every yo'/ tude, the negro has still received his customary Oh' and the whole loss has been borne by the plantr t ! e ode; As to the mode of extingniahing s'iyeery, m re cti3O signed regret to find that Stanley bas 0' • their suggestions and observations in the s pirit ' n os:, they were offered. They deny that the s caled ° tion proposed would exempt the planter from ° l e o lity of loss, although they cannot discover any iSP-0 for his suff.ring a 'pis by measures which gitrredog upon him solely on national grounds. A'„ c ,: ol erl t if principles hitherto acted upon by P 0.7 r Pilo( all cases where private property is taken purposes, of p tying for the whgle prepertY4 to to an essential part is required, the planter is erft°,,,for id mand payment for the whale of his propertYr solv, capital sunk in land and buildings, as well as f ° t o vested in slaves. But in the su_gestions oti're Stanley, it is proposed that the planter should heda:ll, value of the slaves only ;he would tun the ob i " the change on the lirger pßrtion of caPi ta " o o 9 t 'ot stank in land and buildings ; and even in the AO guine view which can be taken of the subjec t, tbei 00 of his cultivation would be increased no t sc cti P Yr t sis amount of the interest and sinliing fund of ;1;e,,:,,, h u o Of all y t t e h d a n t h% l money V2S' th e neon o f , , exceed his present outlay for the care and sqr eob L i, slaves ; by increased public taxes; and by t u ., e ii beil i P , and pay sn m p e p n o t se o d f to wages b P t 'a o i d r'oe_ri meat arising out of the pircumstance of a duce, with utp pc rather increased' • el l under hour u4,A r i .w o ths a iel e tiallu s eib l e i wp a y pe or another : so that his p ro 0 00 return for the capital sunk in land or buildings rp, I P d be very encouraging. otiti , system,mo t y i i n m t a d ga from It t h h at.rtbt the s hi aio g en a M iny ? tvc;i q hu d i r,ig o eo f the planter's paying to the negroes in moner vi „a equivalent to their present outlay in the care e t :e of their slaves. But no person acquainted sc A it o it' e l jd i Indies can expect that anything' of the c 041 . result of the emincipaticA of tht ataiea! o f,rll' 6 tr unjust to impede the 'risWor this gpou the 0 t ol the undersigned Gould mit,lead Mr. Stanley a' e w ill an n int a r t e r as an o g n em to en e t xp w e h ct ich tha im t p t o li s e ed p t la h n e te w rs ho w le i i ' them. If they take the risk upon their O e rl r ,o lands and buildings, it is the ntroo*t t h '.t 4 ' be expecteti l - tbi" 1 0 , umbrsigned e4nnot aMnit that ". eYeqntogeotA vague and obscure with referencp to the advrolef derived Ely the Rego:," and must refer Mv• memorandum of the 23d of April, being c o the regulations there proposed cannot have understood, otherwise they could not .114" e ,r m; ,de observation* de t;pon them by ' o°', o was distinctly stated in the memorandum? I:OA:A of wages which might be fixed must ha ve re $:;;0; present outlay upon the slaves by the maste'i s j tie anent of interest and sinking ft l nd ; 11;14 $ d i be) some proportion to the value of Pr'odtiee• su relY,„) sideration be given to theSe seve ral head s) ao soript terest of the negro might be sufficien tl y, protected. It must be kept in mind ti tbF „1 3 1 atep,/ details as to wagea and regtilati, l di d' e res their new condition which , thust yary j eg . de r ? and can only be finally adjuste`tf iri the COlO O , tbo se loi 4 dersigned, therefore, dui not attempt to fil l 1 /1 009 p ,s6 o, The observation that, under the regula,,, c ,ni t , of '' the master would continue to command t"T' "iei e a s P the whole of the negru's time and !PA ° . ' o ri $ ep at no great expenrie," will not it borne 9,tit nat hec o te /; . amain C ,le i , r i i : e n r ew a r t oi t iu r l i :juj n o ep f ( t )f l no re utni m i de e rt ilt i ei r i,ga r r a to n et d u i e tn r s , n u l u n i n 4 t i ( 7 ;1 1 : r , a inrirhU iSI A. COL V , I IO Hucig ••• Iv vernment scheme autnnitte t d " to JOHN n C l • ewer" MACA LEY'S and Mr. GritANT's rent - y I There is no trti h td Morning Advertiser. , Of it e ,1 1° His Royal Highness the Du t' h is 4 , General BA ITDRAND, and several officers ori Grilion's Hotel this morning in t wos t be , their MAJESTIES at Windsor. S, Vrral : 1 to 0 Or d .otirse, of the day for the Castle. On o , be it t In ,MAJESTIES return St. J.tweN's Palace, the rer ,r . 01 50 usua l will hold his arl i:ilrieenkisity,rLseivvei: also kiv`,o,ol3l';'lo' London, May 2, ]833• z ' l ll/iN r 4qatile the r;ihter thi itravttil Dubois, ; 1, t44 ;RAN F