The Sun. — London, England, 1833-08-20 00:00:00

Gentleman, Mr. Herries.) That Right Hon. Gentle man agreed, that if by the I,Lw, as it now stood, any num• her or partners tn;ght set together as hankers, then the provision in the measure to which objection had been made was correct and proper. In that view of the lax• the Attorney and the Solicitor-General agreed. He ad mitted, however, that he had been wrong in affirming the other evening that no barrister of eminence thought dif ferently ; for he had since understood that the Hon. and Learned Member for Norwich (Sir J. Scarlett) enter tained a different opinion. It was impossible for hhn (Lord Althorp) not to pay great attention to an opinion of so much weight ; but he had gone through all the Acts 'iron the subject, with the Learned Solicitor-General, and ho was satisfied in his own mind that the clause he had introduced was no infraction whatever of the privileges of the Bank of England. He (Lord Althorp) must certainly admit that he hail been guilty of a breach of faith if this clause took from the Bank any privilege it had ever held. The first Act said nothing about exclusive privileges. Thr second Act gave the Governor and Company the exclusive right of banking in England. The question upon that Act was, what was the meaning of such exclusive right in those days ? It was well known that in the time of Wm. 111., there were nn hankers such as in the present day ; the business of banking was carded on by goldsmiths. That provision in the second Act, then, did not apply to the business of banking as now carried on. If it did, then theie Was not one banker in London who was not acting illegally.—(Hear, hear.) The next Act to which he should refer was the 39th and 40th of George 111. By these various Acts it appeared that the privileges of the Bank of England were the exclusive privilege of banking, as already recited, and besides, that no company of more than six partners should have power to do those things 'ts hich would make it in fact a hank of issue. Par li iment was precluded from setting up any other similar bank ; but there was nothing to prevent the establishment of joint-stock bank;. He was clearly of opinion, that, in tit- measure before the House, there was no interference with the exclusive privileges of the Bank of England. Mr. HERRIES wished the Noble Lord would state whether the clause in question Would not permit joint stock banking companies already existing to do tbat within sixty five miles of London, which at present they might do beyond that limit ? He (Mr. Herries) was not the only person who had read the clause in that sense. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, before the time of William 111. it was the common right of all persons to carry on the business of banking or any other business without restriction as to numbers. That being the case the restriction sought to be set up must he found in the original Act having reference to the Bank of England, or in some subsequent Act. The Act of the 4th and 9th of Willi to 111 contained the first restriction. That was nothing more than a mere Parliamentary pledge given to those who at that time were lending a considerable sum of money to Government that no other similar company should be erected by Act of Parliament. If the Act went further than that, then it must be regarded as putting an end to all private banking. This pledge, therefore, left individuals to do just what they might do before the pass ing of the Act, viz., to form banking companies of five, ten, or one hundred, to carry on business with a conjoint capital. He found then from the Act of William to the 7th of Anne, which was the first Act which spoke of the number of persons.—that Act did not say that it was illegal for more than six in a company to issue paper. He defied any one to point out the Act which showed there was anything iilegal in the clause introduced in the pre sent Bill. He contended that persons could now do with reference to the business of banking whatever in these respects they could do antecedently to the passing of these Acts. Mr. J. A. SMITH was authorized by the gentleman ho rnA,fe use of strong expressions towards the Govern ment the otter day at the meeting of the Bank Proprietors to express his regret at the language he had used. He did not, however, withdraw the sentiment. For his own part he hail always expressed the deep obligations be felt teat the count!) , was under to the present Administration, but he thought in the present matter that the Noble Lord opposite had held out expectations and made promises which he had nut redeemed. H wished the Noble Lord opposite had addressed himself to that point; but he had omitted it altogether. He believed the Bank had, with greater readiness than otherwise they would have tihr.e, acceded to the proposals of Government, because t;:ey felt that the interests of the country demanded a speedy settlement of a question so materially affecting the currency.—(The Hon. Member spoke in so low a tone of voice that he was very imperfectly heard in the gallery.) Lard ALT HORP said that it was represented to him that the Bank had taken the opinion of competent lawyers upon the subject of the law relating to the Bank, and upon that he had consented to bring in a clause. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL thought it his dnty to declare that, after the most deliberate and dispassionate consideration of the vevion, he was more and more satis• tied of the correctness of the opinion he had already given. Ile was satisfied that it never was prohibited by statute to have more than six partners in a bank. Whatever, therefore, was before lawful remained lawful, unless pro hibited. Mr. ROBINSON expressed his surprise at the state ment of the Hon. Member for the Tower }l atlets (Mr. Clay), that neither the Bank of England nor the public were satisfied with this measure. As to the public, lit took their silence trirn the subject of the Bill as a token of their assent. The House was not now discussing a Bank Restriction Act. As it atLcted a depreciation of the cur rency, and feeling that to throw out the Bill now would act as a balance of evil to be given to the country in any case of momentary alarm, he would therefore support the tlhrti reading of the Bill. Mr. Alderman-THOMPSON objected to the declara tory parts of the clause proposed by the Ministers of the npiniona of the Learned Attorney and Solicitor-General; ;int, with respect, he would say that the opinions of Sir J. -t:arlett and Sir E. Sugden ought to receive the best con - sideration of the Crown, although be would not object to the insertion of words which would settle the doubts which prevailed with respect to the existence of joint-stock banks within sixty five miles of London. Mr. G. WOOD said a few words, which did not reach the gallery. Mr. M. ATTWOOD said—Taking the conduct of the Government altogether upon this question it was one of procrastination, danger, and disorder ; and in truth there was too much business of serious importance now before the House to admit of this Bill being as fully discussed as it would necessarily be in the course of the next Session. In discussing the question of jlint•stock companies of deposit in London, the opinions of lawyers should not be rep, chilly regarded ; fur in fact the common sense of hankers, of traders, and merchants generally, could much better decide the question. If lawyers had been consulted before the bargain was made by the Government with the Bank, there, might have been something, in it ; but in the present state of the case, the opinion of lawyers could he of lit!le or no advantage. The B Ink had charged the Chancellor of the Exchequer with a breach of faith in this transaction, anti particularly as to making the Bank of England the only joint-stock hank for deposits to vest in the Bonk of England. . He (Mr. Attwood) could not say whether the.case exactly stood as it was stated between the Bank and the Noble Lord (Althorp); but if the letter of the Noble Lord (Altliorp) was to be relied upon as evidence in this case, the Noble Lord might plead guilty. A bargain was made by the Noble Lord ; it was admitted by him ; and the only ground upon which he refused acceding to it was, that some previous bargain had been made some thirty years ago upon this subject with which he was not previously acouainted. That, however, could he no answer to the Bank, to whom a positive pledge had been given. This question involved the consideration of the whole of our monetary system, and of the enterprise and industry of the people of this great country. The Bank Directors con tlidered that their system had been the means of conferring great prosperity upon the country : large issues took place froth 1933 to - 18:2-1 and 1825, - and the result was, that speculation and distress followed such over-issues. Such a power should not be granted to any body, even though ;t were as respectable as that of the Bank of England. The price of Bank Stock had risen, but in what other cases had the prices of other commodities equally risen ? The course of the Government was one of vacillation, inconsistency, and disorder; and yet, rather than unseal, things as they now were, he would support the third leading of this Bill.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME objected to this Bill on two grounds— fitst, because the Government had made a bad bargain with the Bank ; and secondly . , because it would interfere with the currency of the count' v ; and his third objection was, that there were so few Members present upon an occasion like the present. To the legal tender clause he would give his most decided objection.—(Hear, bear, and " Question, question.") Mr. PRYME thought that joint-stock banks of deposit would be of grt at general benefit, and shove all things he would wish to preserve the convertibility of paper into gold.—(Cries of 4 , Question, question.") Mr. HA\VES hasi the most decided objection to the legal tender clause as it existed in this Bill. If this clause were carriadj.kr i iairritable result woul d be to have a re _ i" 4 "e - j. ; . lfsthe metallic currency were once _ , destroyed :.ih ::i . effect would be to create at once oflirt o igh priCeS t -an - gh_rents.— (Cries of " Hear, hear," and ._ . No, nc.") tliiiAauie ought to be postponed ; it.waa nut I'ems'l' y, inti-iferiiiid& would vote against it. e 7.,?..: Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, when a diri •io took place— For the original question Against it Majority On our return to the gallery we found Mr. G. WOOD addressing the House upon the motion which he had made upon a former occasion, having for its object to cause the insertion of words in this Bill to guard against claim for compensation on the part of the Bank, if at any time during the continuance of the Charter Parliament sheuld think fit to repeal or modify the enact ment making the B ink of England notes a legal tender ; also to move the addition of a clause providing that so long as the Bank of EnEl and notes continue a legal tender, the Bank shall he required to continue branch banks for purpoes of business, at convenient stations in different parts of the kingdom. He considered that the branch banks were very convenient in the districts where they existed. Mr. COBBETT, in seconding the motion, was sure it would have the effect of causing a rise in prices. He hoped that the Lords would throw out this Bill, or at least the legal tender clause. He had some confidence slto gether in the House of Lords; and again he hoped this Bill, as it now stood, would never pass into a law. It was now quite clear that the Whigs were going on with insolence, effrontery, and ignorance; and their conduct, sooner or later, would be discovered and scouted by the country. As to the conduct of the Bank, no one could look at it without reprobation, perhaps less, however, than to that of the Whig Government. The clause of Mr. G. Wood was then brought up and read a first time. On the motion that it be read a second time, Mr. P. THONISON said if the clause proposed by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Wood) were agreed to it would be in operative, for by it the Bank of England would not be compelled to issue gold to the Branch Banks. On this subject he should, therefore, feel it to be his duty to give the amendment his most decided negative. He did not support this Bill as it now stood in order to aid the Bank monopoly, nor to increase paper circulation throughout the country, nor to depreciate prices, but to act as a secu rity to a single bank of joint issue in London. Prices had been affected, but he believed that that circumstanze arose from matters unconnected with the Bank Charter. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON protested against the Bank being compelled to support an establishment which the public did not require. Mr. M. ATTWOOD objected to a plan which made the notes of the branch banks payable only at the branch bank where they were issued, whereas, he considered that these notes should he also made payable at the ptrent esta blishment. If the Bill remained in its present shape, a bank of Swansea might circulate its paper to any remote part of the country, its notes being only payable at the branch hank where they were issued. The House then divided— Against the clause 9B For it l9 Majority against the amendment...-79 Mr. WARBURTON proposed as an amendment to omit the legal tender clause. He believed the rise of prices was owing to this clause. Any gentleman looking to the news papers would find that companies were starting up. If it had already had this effect, he thought that in future it would lead to all sorts of vacillation. He thought the tendency of the legal tender clause was to get rid of and depreciate the feelings of the people in respect to the me tallic standard, and the notion of the convertibility of paper into real sovereigns. Mr. HU3IE supported the amendment, and held that this clause ouiht to be postponed for one year. Mr. COBBETT said that the legal tender meant the depreciation of money, and went to compel men to take a something which was not as good as another something. Mr. G. WOOD supported the amendment. The House then divided— For the amendment 35 Against it BO Majority against the amendment —47 The Bill was then read a third time, and passed. TITHES (IRELAND) BILL. On the motion of Mr. LITTLETON, for the further consideration of the report on this Bill, the House divided on the amendment of Mr. Home, providing that it be an instruction that if these sums which ought to be paid were not paid within the time prescribed the deficiency shall be made good out of the temporalities of the Church of Ireland. The galley was then cleared for a division, when the nu mberg Were— For the amendment 42 Against it Majority against the amendment —27 The BM was then re-committed. Mr. O'REILLY proposed an amendment to the 7th clatts to tie effect that the words " and he is hereby required" he inserted, "in order to compel the tithe owners to accept the money." Mr. LITTLETON could not support the motion. Mr. lIUME asked why those clergymen who had tithes due to them in prior years were to be excluded from the operation of this Act? Mr. LITTLETON—They considered these tithes as bad debts. Mr. SHAW said that there were many cases in the diocese of 06sory, &c., in which tithes previous to ISSO were due. Lord ALTIIORY said as it was optional to those parties whether they would apply for the relief, he did not see any ground of complaint. Mr. HUME wished to introduce the years 1829 and 1830 in justice to the parties. Mr. O'REILLVS motion was then negatived without a division. Mr. HUME said that if a man had five years' tithes due to him he would be shut out from two years' tithes as this clause stood. He would therefore propose to insert the years 1829 and 1830 Lord ALTHORP said his Hon. Friend must remember that this amendment, if carried, must cause an increase of expense. Mr. HUME still maintained that justice should be done at any rate. The motion was then negatived, and the clause agreed to. On the Bth clause being put, Sir R. INGLIS complained of the clause as promoting the power of persons to evade its provisions. Mr. LITTLETON defended the clause in a few words. The clause was then agreed to, after a few words from some lion. Members. Clauses up to 18 were then agreed to. On the 19th clause being put, several verbal amend ments were made. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY objected to the clause. Mr. SHAW objecte,f to the clause. He felt convinced that the Bill would be quite inoperative, like that of last year. Mr. LITTLETON contended that this measure gave much less objectionable and more efficacious modes of re covery tha❑ the measure of last year. Mr. JEPIISON said it was vain to expect that tithes could he recovered while the Catholic peasantry were brought into contest with the Protestant clergy. After a few words from Mr. TOWER and Mr. Sit Aw, Mr. WALLACE said the real difficulty in this ca i se was, that neither the Crown nor the clergy could collect the tithes. The best wily would be to remove tithes out of sight altogether, and substitute a simple land tax for them. Captain JONES proposed the following amendment : " That any landlord who had agreed to a composition, and who was entitled to recover from any other person, should not be liable to an in , talrnent." After a few words from Mr. HUME, the clause with this amendment was agreed to. Clause 20, 21, 22, 23, and 21 were agreed to. Clause 25 was objected to by Mr. O'FERRALL. The House divided— For the clause Against it Majority The clause was agreed to. The succeeding clauses to clause 32 inclusive were agreed to without amendment. Upon clause 33 it was proposed by an Hon. Member, whose name we could not learn, that the expenses of the Bill should he chargeable on the Church of Ireland instead of the Consolidated Fund. Upon this amendment the Committee divided— For the amendment lB Against it 4O Majority The clause was then added to the Bill. The remaining clauses of the Bill were then agreed to, and the House resumed. The report was ordered to be received to-morrow (this day). Mr. HUME said that on bringing up the report be S hould propose the clause of which he had given notice. CHOLERA. Mr. S. RICE obtained leave to bring in the Cholera Act of last session, and expressed a hope that the House would permit the standing orders to be suspended, that the Bill might pass as speedily as possible. The Bill was then brought in, and, the standing orders having been suspended, was read a first and second time forthwith, and ordered to be committed to-morrow (this day). The other orders of the day were then read, and the House adjourned at three o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, Avougr-lt. The LORD CHANCELLOR did not take his seat on the woolsack till nearly half past five o'clock. Lord SUFFIELD presented a petition, most nume rously and respectably signed by the clergy, merchants, bankers, and others, of King's County, praying that the disabilities of the Quakers might be removed. Viscount MELBOURNE presented a petition from Christ Church, Surrey, for the repeal of the assessedt axes. Lord WYNFORD presented a petition from the Notaries Public of Newcastle-upon-Tyne against the Notaries Bill. Lord GOSFORD presented a petition from Maryle bone in favour of the Separatists' Affirmation Bill. VINDICATION OF THE CHARGE AGAINST THE BISHOP OF ROCHESTER. The Bishop of ROCHESTER said that he wished to address their Lordships, upon a subject personal to him self. He conceived when any charge was made in pub lic against any Member of that House, of corrupt prac tices, it was the duty of that individual to rebut the accusation in the presence of their Lordships as publicly as possible. He now held in his hands a statement of the proceedings at a vestry meeting held at St. Ni cholas, in Brighton, where a person named English stated that at Bayswater, or Broadwater, the Bishop of Rochester had been applied to, to consecrate a piece of ground for a church and that he stated he would not do it under '7OO/ —(Cries of " Shame") —that at last he con sented to take 500/., and that he made that statement from authority." He (the Bishop of Rochester) hoped that he need not state that that statement was wholly without foundation—(Hear)—that there was no place named either Bayswater or Broadwater, in the diocese ; that the Bishops received no fees whatever for consecrating church yards ; and that they received no fees on any occasion whatever ; at least, for himself he could say, he received none. He did not mean to make any motion on the sub jest, but he thought it his duty, when a charge was made in public, to deny it. The Bishop of CHICHESTER rose, because one of the parishes named was in his diocese—he meant Broad. water. He had never had any duty to perform in that parish except lately a confirmation ; and with respect to any emolument, it was quite tl.e contrary. (here was a contest about some pews, and so far from receiving any thing, he offered to pay a sum, in order to put an end to the dispute.—(Hear, hear.) He believed what his Right Reverend Brother had stated was true. When Bishops proceeded upon visitations, they received a very small sum from the Clergy, but not sufficient to pay the expenses of their journey. When they went upon col &mations, or any other occasions, they did not receive the slightest remuneration, but were at considerable ex• pelage. The Bishop of HEREFORD said he trusted it was clearly proved to their Lordships that the Bishops re c,ived no fees. The LORD CHANCELLOR said the Right Rev. Prelate had totally cleared himself from the absurd charge; but their Lordships must perceive that there was a certain inconvenience in vindications of that description made by Noble Lords, Mem bers of that House, of themselves in that place, and with respect to matters not connected with their Parliamentary duty.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") In former days in both Houses of Parliament an attack upon Members was made a breach of privilege, although the attack was not levelled against any portion of their Parliamentary conduct. There was no doubt that an attack out of the Houses by a private indi vidual, was a course to be treated as a con tempt of the House, of which the parties attacked was a Member. But of late years he thought he was accurate in stating that that rule of principle bad, in a certain degree, been relaxed.—(Hear.) He did not mean to say that the law did not remain as before ; but in practice of late years a breach of privilege had been confined to attack upon the conduct of a Member in Parliament. There was an obvious convenience in so restricting it. He did not mean to say they should exclude themselves from the power, but there was an obvious con venience in restraining themselves within these limits. He wished to remind them that if Members were to ac custom themselves to vindicate themselves from an attack unconnected with their Parliamentary duty, not only would a great mass of business be thrown upon the House, hut whoever did not choose to follow such a course, would be taken to admit the truth of charges which had been levelled against him. He would therefore press upon their Lordships the convenience and propriety of the course which had of late sears been taken, except in cases where their Parliamentary duty had been attacked. He did not mean, of course, to complain that the Right Rev. Prelate had taken that opportunity, for it was natural to suppose that he should have wished to have taken the earliest mode of clearing himself. _ _ Lord WYNFORD said the Right Rev. Prelate had acted as a Christian minister in the course he had pur sued, for he might have brought his action for the slander, or he might have called the printer to the bar. JAMAICA. The Earl of BELMORE, after some preliminary ob servations totally inaudible in the gallery, moved that the following papers be presented to the House : Despatch, addressed to Viscount Gederich, dated 4th April, 183'2, No. 163, together with the papers inclosed therein, signed (Belmore).—Also, Despatch, addressed to the Governor of Jamaica, dated 18th February, 1932, signed (Goderich).—Also, The reply thereto, dated 30th April, 1932, No. 204, signed (Belmorc). The Noble Lord was understood to say that his object in moving for the production of those documents was to free him elf from accusations regarding his administra! ion in Jamaica, which had been most unjustly brought against him. He was quite ready to run the risk of condemna. Lion for the purpose of getting a complete justification. The Earl of RIPON said he had no objection to the production of the first despatch, but suggested to the Noble Lord whether it would not be better not to call for the others. He bore testimony to the highly efficient manner in which the duties of Governor of Jamaica had been performed whilst the Noble Lord held that office, and observed that as far as he was concerned he saw no necessity for the inquiry which the Noble Lord seemed to meditate. SEPARATISTS' AFFIRMATION BILL. The order of the day for the third reading of this Bill having been read, The Earl of GOSFORD moved that this Bill be then read a third time. The Bishop of HEREFORD opposed the motion, o n the ground that no case to prove the necessity of the Bill had been made out. The alleged objection of the Separatists to take an oath was founded on the divine prohibition, "Thou shalt not swear ;" and if they were sincere in that objection he could not see how they could conscientiously subscribe to the form of affirmation laid down in the Bill, which, divested of its technicalities, was really neither more nor less than an oath. Besides, if the ground of ob jection alleged by the Separatists to exist to an oath was once admitted by the legislature, their next step would be to do away with the system of oaths altogether, and merely require a party to subscribe whatever form his conscience might dictate as binding upon him. Indeed sn convinced was he of the utter inutility of the measure, were it not, he thought, decided that the Bill should pass, lie would move for its third reading that day three weeks.—(Cries of " Move, move," from several Peers, particularly from the Duke of Cumberland and Lord Wynford.) Having been thus called upon, he would move that the Bill be read a third time that day three we-ks.—( Hear, hear.) The Bishop of CHICHESTER thought his Right Rev. Friend had gone to rather an unjustifiable length in setting up his own conscientious opinions as the judge by whom the justness of the conscientious scruples of the Separatists to the taking of an oath ought to be decided. H e con tended that, as regarded precedents for similar pro ceedings to that in which they were engaged, as re irded the respectability of the parties e2eking for the measure, and, finally, as regarded the security to life and property which an oath was considered to effect, there could be no reasonable ground of objection to the Bill, and, such being the case, he regretted much the opposition his Right Rev. Friend had offered to it. On what, he asked, did the validity of an oath depend? Surely it was on the degree of conscientious feeling with which it was made ; and, if a particular sect declared that the ordinary form of oath was opposed to their conscientious scruples, the very best means of insuring the validity of the obligation was to lay down such a form as, without destroying the requisite responsibility in cases of false swearing, best con sulted those religious scruples. Lord SUFFIELD said the Separatists, unlike the Q ua kers, did not object to the taking of an oath, but to the taking o f a form of oath, which, like that in ordinary use , unnecessarily, as they thought, called down a curse fro Heaven, should they swear falsely. from ELLENBOROUGH doubted much whether the wording of the Bill, and particularly of that part of it which laid down the form of af f irmation to be in future taken by the Se p aratists, g ot rid of t he objection to remedy which it was introduced, and suggested its postponement for some short tune at all events. After a desultory conversation, in which the Marquis of CLAfi alcaa ns, the Earl of Wacm.ow, Lord S UF FIELD, the p R D, took part, Earl Gary replied, and their Lordships divided— For the original motion.... 35 For the amendment lB Majority —l9 s of Gk e of WELLINGTON, Lord WYN FORD, and the E ar l F ° Whilst the gallery was closed, the Marquis of SALIfI MIRY moved for a copy of the correspondence between his Majesty's Secretary of State and the Sheriffs and other re turning officers in England and Wales, with respect to the provisions contained in the Reform Act for the registry of voters for Members to serve in Parliament, which was or dered to be produced. FACTORY BILL. The Duke of CUMBERLAND ;resented a petition from sundry manufacturers of the West Riding of York shire in favour of the Factory Bill. After which, on the motion of the Marquis of LANS DOWNE, the Bill was referred to a Select Committee of Inquiry into the difficulties affecting the enactments of the Bill in its present form. EAST INDIA TRADE BILL. Lord ELLENBOROUGH rose to present a petition, which the Noble Lord described as one of the greatest importance, inasmuch as it was from persons interested in the free trade to China, and upon the clause of the Bill to be read that day which regulated the appointment of persons to superintend the trade at the Chinese ports. The petition might, in fact, be considered as representing the sentiments of the merchants of Liverpool, Glasgow, and Cork, and of all others who had any intention of engaging in the free trade to China; and it might like wise be taken as a petition from the different traders in India. The petitioners stated their great disappoint ment on their finding what were the provisions of the Bill now pending in Parliament with respect to the supervision of the trade about to be opened to China. They com plained that the number of the officers and their salaries were to lie fixed by the Government, and they were sur prised that such a provision of the Bill had been allowed to be passed through a Reformed Parliament. He was convinced that there was not one single Member of that House who would assent to the provision though it had passed the House without any dissent. A charge was to be made for salaries to these superintendents which was not to amount to less than 27,0001. or even 30,0001. a year. This was out of all proportion to salaries charged for similar objects in any other part of the world, and it was known that the state of the Eastern trade could not support such a burden. The influence of the Company's officers in China had been derived from their being connected with trade, and all who were not connected with it could acquire no influence what ever among the Chinese. The trade was in future to be directed by persons not directly engaged in it, and they were to cost 27,0001. a year, of which the country trade was to bear at least two-thirds. He believed that the burden would be found most detrimental to the trade, and it ought to be removed by his Mijesty's Government. Lord AUCKLAND thought the discussion of the point had better be referred to tie Bill in Committee, when lie should be able to explain the principle of the clause. In the meantime be should only say that he thought it un reasonable that the country at large should be saddled with this expense. The Bill was then read a second time. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from the prisoners confined in the King's Bench prison, praying that the Marshal might be allowed to extend the rules to the prisoners in the event of the cholera breaking out in that gaol. The Noble Marquis observed that at the present state of the session it would be impossible to pass any Act upon the subject, although extraordinary measures might become necessary. Lord WYNFORD thought that an indemnity might be granted in case of a removal of the prisoners on the ground of cholera making its appearance in the gaol. EAST INDIA COMPANY'S CHARTER BILL. On the motion of the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, the Bill for the renewal of the East India Company'. Charter was read a third time and passed. GRAND JURY (IRELAND) BILL. The report upon the Grand Jury (Ireland) Bill was brought up, and the Bill, after a few verbal amendments, at the suggestion of the Earl of WICKLOW, was ordered to be read a third time to.morrow. THE WEST INDIA SLAVERY BILL. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY brought up the report upon the West India Slavery Bill. The Duke of WELLINGTON contended that the Bill was defective in not permitting owners to remove appren. ticed slaves from one estate to another. Earl GREY said he had always desired that this ques. tion should be viewed with the utmost moderation and temper; and although he had come down intending to maintain the continuance of the words in the clause, yet he must admit that the arguments used on the other side were such as to have induced him to think that they would be hettet left out. He should therefore be ready to admit that masters having two estates should be allowed to move his slaves from one to the other during their apprentice ship, with the consent of two magistrates. The Duke of WELLINGTON acknowledged the can dour of the Noble Earl, and moved an amendment accord. ing with the suggestion, which was agreed to. Lord SUFFIELD moved a clause declaring that, after the promulgation of this Act, the whipping, beating, or indecent exposure of the person of any female slave above twelve years old shall be a misdemeanor punishable by a month's imprisonment. Earl BELMORE said he was not the advocate of the practice of flogging females; on the contrary, he had done every thing, during his Government of Jamaica, to prevent it. But the Noble Lord in abolishing the punish went of female slaves had offered no substitute as a means by which the master should be able to control the slave. The Earl of RIPON said that it was painful to him to oppose such a proposition, but under the circumstances of the Bill having come up without the clause he thought it better that it should not be introduced. They were now in the situation of having adopted means by which slavery was essentially abolished, and therefore they need not have the same anxiety upon the treatment of the slaves which could not again be open to the same abuse. He disap proved more especially of the penalty imposed by the clause. Lord SUFFIELD said that when he proposed the clause before without the 'penalty it was objected to on that , account, so that he found it impossible to please the House. He felt it his duty to persist in the other part of the clause, and he should certainly do so. The Duke of WELLINGTON said that no interference had yet taken place with the internal regulation of the colonies upon this subject, and be wanted to know why they were so to interfere now. The measure had come up without this provision from the House of Commons, and be bad no desire to obtain a little popularity at the expense of that House by carrying such a provision there. He should therefore certainly oppose the motion. Lord ST. VINCENT concurred with his Noble Friend in thinking that such a proviso as this being appended to the Bill at this late stage would add greatly to the diffi culty of carrying the measure into effect in concert with the Colonial Legislatures. Little had been done at any time to conciliate the co-operation of those bodies. Their just complaints had been treated with neglect, and nothing had been done to induce them to believe that their feelings or their interests would have any consideration at the hands of the Mother Country. Such a proviso as that proposed by the Noble Lord would greatly aggravate their feelings, and do very great mischief. He therefore hoped their Lordships would not adopt it. Lord SUFFIELD said he should not persist in that part of the proviso which imposed the penalty; and the clause, with that portion of it expunged, was then put and negatived. Several clauses were left out, and slight verbal amend ments were made in others. On arriving at the 61st clause, The Duke of WELLINGTON moved for the omission of the clause, on the ground that it was altogether objec tionable. He had on two previous occasions stated the reasons why he thought it ought to be rejected, and should not now trouble their Lordships with a repetition of his arguments. Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared— Contents • Non-contents 3l Majority for the clause On the re-admission of strangers we found Lord WYNFORD moving the insertion of a clause, declaring that from and after the 28th of August, 1834, no coffee, sugar, rum, or other produce raised in foreign c olonies, excepting only cotton , indi go , and tobacco , where slavery existed, should be admitted into any part of Great Britain and Ireland, or the possessions of Great Britain. He thought that such a provision was bbso• jutely necessary for the protection of our West India Colo nies where slavery was to he abolished by this Bill. The Earl of RIPON did not think the adoption of such a clause at all called for. The quantity of produce im ported into this country from the South American Colo. nies was very inconsiderable, and never could prejudice the West India planter. Lord WYNFORD said that the amonnt paid for South American sugar in 1830 was as much as 40,0001. The Earl of RIPON said that the N o bl e and Learned Lord was in et ror. No such sum was paid in that year. Lord ST. VINCENT support e d th e clause, and he ' did so because he felt that som e suc h enactment was in dispensably necessary for the protection of our own colo nies, where an end was put to slave labour. The LORD CHANCELLOR was as anxious al any man to see slavery abolished not only in the British do minions, but throughout the world. This was not, however, the proper time to propose such an amendment, and on that ground be should resist it, for it was a aule stantive motion, and would go beyond the objects of the present Bill. Lord ELLENBOROUGH contended that the object of the clause was perfectly in unison with the provisions of the Bill. The object of the measure was to put an end to slavery, and that was also the intention of the clause proposed by his Noble and Learned Friend. The adoption of this clause would have one most desirable effect, and that was, to induce the Colonial Legislatures to accept this Bill with something like satisfaction. Their Lord.. ships must recollect that the West India planters would have in future to employ a more expensive system to raise their produce, and that it was therefore only reasonable to adopt this clause for their protection. _ Earl GREY resisted the clause. The House of Com mons never would, he was convinced, agree to such an amendment, for which no precedent could be found in the annals of Parliament The Duke of WELLINGTON supported the clause. It was the assertion of a great principle, and, if adopted, would go a great way to soothe the feelings of the colo nies and the C3lonia' Legislatures. No protection was asked for cotton, indigo, or tobacco, as these articles were not produced in our colonies. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY observed that it was quite competent for their Lordships to add any clause they might think fit to the Bill, for they should recollect that this was not their own Bill, hut the Bill of the other branch of the Legislature, which had been sent up to their Lordships' House for amendment. Lord WYNFORD, in reply, said that if Ministers were sincere in their desire to effect the abolition of sla very they could not resist the clause which he had in view. Lord CLIFFORD (as we understood) expressed him self hostile to the clause. Their Lordships then divided, when there appeared— Contents Not Contents Majority against the clause The Report was then received, and the Bill ordered to be read a third time to-morrow (this day). SCOTCH BURGHS BILL. The report of the Committee on the Royal Burghs (Scotland) Bill was brought up and agreed to. The report of the Scotch Magistrates Bill was also brought up and agreed to. Both Bills to be read a third time to-morrow. FINES AND RECOVERIES BILL. The Fines and Recoveries Bill was, on the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, read a third time, and passed. SCAVAGE AND PACKAGE BILL. The House then went into the London Scavage and Package Bill. The Bill passed through the Committee, and the report was ordered to be brought up to-morrow. ASSIZE REMOVAL BILL. The Assize Removal Bill was, on the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR, read a second time.—To be committed to-morrow. Tne Bill for regulating the Care of Insane Persons in England was passed. _ . The Housebreaking and Robbery Bill went through a Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time to- morrow. The Uniformity of Process Bill went through a Committee, and was ordered to be read a third time to morrow. _ _ Several Bills were proceeded upon through one stage, and the House adjourned at ten minutes past eleven o'clock. IRISH POST-OFFICE-NEWSPAPERS. The following is the petition presented by Mr. O'DWYER last nieht : TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE AND HONOURABLE THE KNIGHTS, CITIZENS, AND BURGESSES OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, IN PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED. THE PETITION OF JOHN KENT JOHNSTON, OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN, ADVERTISING AND NEWSPAPER AGENT. Mosr HUMBLY Snowern,—That your petitioner last year addressed a Memorial to the then House of Commons, setting forth various grievances under which he laboured in his voca tion as Newsvender, from the monopoly enjoyed by certain officers of the Post-office denominated " Clerks of Roads," which Memorial was ordered to be printed on the 27th March, 1832. That petitioner feels himself reluctantly compelled to trespass again on the time and attention of your Honourable House, not only because none of the grievances against which he therein complained have been redressed, but also because of fresh impe diments thrown in the way of his business, and of further and (as he conceives) unjust prerogatives exercised by the officers referred to, a few of which he will here enumerate for the information of your Honourable House. Ist. By the following ingenious expedient the Clerks of Roads" have contrived to evade all postage on letters either ordering Newspapers through them or renewing those already ordered, and also on those containing remittances for News. papers :---.Every Postmaster in Ireland, acting as their agent, receives subscriptions on their account, which he is bound to remit to Dublin, but instead of writing direct to them, which would incur postage, he is supplied by them with printed Circular Letters for his use, addressed to A. Godby, Esq., for Thomas Orde Lees, Esq., Money Order Office, which, passing free, give the amount paid by and the addresses of New Sub scribers, and also intimation of the intention of others to renew their subscriptions, without any charge for postage to the Clerks of Roads," who again, by another Circular, have directed him to notify also changes of address and changing of one Paper for another, by taking advantage of sending such Remittance Letter as above described. 2d. The evasion of the postage duties by those clerks is not confined to their correspondence with their agents the Post masters, but is extended to every person receiving a news. paper through them, inasmuch as they are in the habit of en veloping in their newspapers letters notifying the time when each subscription shall expire, and the mode of renewing it through the Postmasters, who, as above shown, are instructed to communicate free of expense. 3d. This practice of maintaining an illegal and secret corre spondence post free—a practice contrary to law, and not sanc tioned (petitioner would hope) by the Postmaster-General, is used on other occasions also when it is for their advantage to resort to it, as was the case lately when printed notices, bear. ing the signature of the proprietor of the Dublin Comet news paper (who had appointed them his sole agents), were enclosed in his newspapers, and then by them forwardedfree to the country. - - '1 hat the conduct of those officers who hesitate not thus to sa. crifice the revenue to their private emolument, to the injury of the public, whose servants they are, and whose interests they were appointed to watch over and protect, is marked by the most conscientious vigilance and scrupulosity when its discharge in that manner can be rendered instrumental to the injury of your Petitioner, as the following example will demonstrate:— On Saturday, the 10th day of November last, your Petitioner made up and transmitted by post to Mr. Thomas Kelly, Dun dalk, a parcel containing twenty-five weekly papers, which parcel, to his surprise and to the disappointment of his sub scribers in that town, was marked by the Post-office "con tains an enclosure," and charged no less than four pounds four shillings postage, for no other reason than that Petitioner had neglected to takeout of one of three Comets a miserable caricature illustrative of an article on the Church which had appeared in that print. That your Petitioner craves permission here to quote as applica ble to the present time an admission of Mr. Leet, a former " Clerk of Roads," to the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry in 1821, that he, as such, had an obvious interest in the delay of the Mails"—ana Petitioner quotes this in order to furnish grounds for inferring that the delay and detention of his Papers in the following instances, and in many others which he could ad duce, were either caused by the" Clerks of Roads " themselves, who have a palpable and direct benefit by such detention, or that they in their other capacities of President, Vice-Presidents, and Senior Sorters of the Inland Office, did not exercise due superintendence over their Junior Officers, who perform the duty of assorting and despatching the Newspapers—a duty which your Petitioner is satisfied must be very negligently per formed at times, as he receives frequent complaint of disappoint ments and of confusion in the transmission of his papers through the General Post-office. Ist. Richard Butler, Esq., of Glengarry, Kingstown, for some time received one paper through your petitioner and another through the " Clerks of Roads." The one through him, though plainly directed to Glengarry, Kingstown, was not delivered to that gentleman until the day after his receipt the paper having been for some time b efore p ut into the ba g the i n o f t o h r e m r, , ed oc w c i a i s e i n o n t e h d e ( y a s r em M o r n . s ß t r u a t t l ed e r a a g n a d i youryour e Petitionerdelay) w f o o fe r r ß e lackrock instead of that for Kingstown , by the sorting officer, who, strange to tell, never made the like mistak e with the paper supplied by the " Clerks of R oa d s ." In conse q uenc e of repeated disappointments, and of there having been a penny charged on each, while the " Clerks' " paper was always delivered free, Mr. Butler has withdrawn his subscription from your petitioner. 2nd. George Taaffe, Esq., of Ardee, another of his customers, has experienced many vexatious disappointments through the neglect or dishonesty of the servants of the Post-office. His paper, THE SUN" of Friday the Ist March last, despatched from London by the mail of that day, which arrived in Dub lin on Sunday before 8 o'clock, a.m., ought to have been deli vered to him on the morning of Monday, yet it never reached its destination at all, but was abstracted from the cover by some person in the Dublin office, who substituted three Dub linehT nihsva p cht a l: ! de r : s vir inoph which had s ,ena t s e edd a rae d by. , evt w ge:r l ditcoshth,hai assure i ou e Ltr d . oeivn u 3 p oloru with paper, ot Honourable Taste,i br n e, t p h Hu e to e v ui or e s, nret into v at in t e t : c t o h n a d t uc su t c o h f t ir h r e eg , u , l c a l r e it r i k is o a f re ßo n ad ot s, a , tt t r o i w bu ar ta d b s l h e i t m o Pheti beteino n m e a r, ,r marked t e i d l 1 b k y ii d u i y oppressiver e a su upon his Subscriptionhriaspacious competition, L i st. n a.. much th as those officers, availing themselves of the opportunities afforded afforded by their official situations of ascertaining the clubs, societies, news-rooms, and private individuals supplied with papers ho ethb personalymeans by your n c a o Petitioner, twsi s t r i oi o tf n te e tnt r i , eai hav im eendeavour e d to supplant him, I;pl agent i s on th s e fr po om sun th as e t i e n r s s e:v o e ffer themselves, and u by , gs f o u um, r ifa n her is_ i h ,:nus i st i at a o p n ers to his subscribers, at prices known to be under the usual ra me t e es elnt h: .e r .ia e rnda le rp :s iefi t t han what are charged by the trade in London, and lower than they themselves charge to their own re. c it e i s on h e a r ve re s g u r c e e t e s od ha ed ving to add, that in That your Petitioner has presumed to submit the foregoing necessary details for the purpose of satisfying your Honourable House that the conduct of the present " Clerks of Roads" is pre cisely in unison with that of their pedecessors in 1821, when a long and particular investigation into the exercise of the ex.. press privilege led the Commissioners of Revenue Inquiry to re. commend its abolition altogether, because "it is most desirable to avoid all collision of private interest with public duty," and fur ther of convincing your Honourable House that the abrogation of the prerogative would be followed by considerable benefit to the cort munity at large That your petitioner most respectfully but earnestly submits, on the grounds both of economy and revenue, that the privi. leges of the " Clerks of Roa ds " ou g ht to be withdrawn, and the Newsvending Trade left open to a fair and honourable competi tion. That there arc around this city several Penny -post Dis tricts, and in the country parts of Ireland 109 Penny-Post Offices, and that all papers for delivery within their limits, whether forwarded by your Petitioner or others in the trade, by private individuals, or by the prop r ietors of Newspapers them selves, are all liable to a p osta g e. rate of One Penny on each paper, whilst a ll such as are transmitted b y the " Clerks of qluocant h a s been that almost the entire of that portion o f the" are permitted to pass free of charge ; and the conse busi „,,,,, passed into their hands, o the certain and serious in jury of the Post-office Revenue. Nor is this all —for under their privilege the " Clerks of Roads" assume the right of transmitting post free such unstamped publications as the Literary Gazette, wewor,dpearperar: !lei, ,p0,.,•ei,',. by which a loss of Fourpence on each paper is 0' Stamp.office. , tout Your Petitioner therefore most humbly praY so t,- 0 ,..- House to take the facts and circumstances herein _ ~0 0 ,,0 4 11 ru c ti o na n j I : issdteeerma advantagest consideration, t a t n o d pr t o o ot e ci B e ctniahaclutumesosutncp industryo- y. measuresaga as st t u t tie , l n I' 7 a P1../0 1i . `of your Petitioner will ever ~. ~ . . JOHN KENT JO 1, Eden-Quay, Dublin, June, 1833. APPENDIX.—No. 1. P ub Road , ' fe Extract of the Advertisement of the Clerks of - 03:i i alli-' in Smith's City and County Almanack for "_x c e, , i i i ptr ° " Orders received by the Clerks of Roads, Post-nus or by the Postmaster in each town, of whom lists ' ' and prices may be obtained." . ~,16 3. 0f No. 11. Roads, in advance for the f f o o l r lo a w m in o g n Sir,—l enclose X 1 am, Sir, your obedien iv , _ _ _ .cA , 1' erj Post_office, o fOr -- ------- ty , _.. s i, t, J. I have ascertained that the following Subscribers w' pert' Name of Paper. Name of Subscriber. ...,,/ -------.. fo / , it tlyhta The Circular of which the foregoing is a copy acs p e Ing endorsation, which permits its passing free, as der be an advice and remittance to meet a money ' 9 ' Deputy in the country : Augustus Godby, Esq.—T. Orde Lees , F-514 „,ifiee , Money Order-office, General Fe's Dublin. No. 111. w h T Ti c l h i Clerks u e eyyor equ suuebs o ts f u tr ß hi b o a a etd d y s fou b ur e g theleavewill ends °, to stet o st be your intention to continue to receive the PaPe r ' in tlreil, may be no interruption of its regular transmission f1'0 . ,,,,ay. ./ xl The subscription to be paid to the Postmaster in P . ~ For six months X l'l4 For three mouths X Ir:i No. IV. General Post-office, Dubli he e%P!,,,o to t i give nNoetwicseptage the l'os oo ' ost a t, Sir,--In future we intend sending you notices 01 ',ive l' of subscriptions a clear month in advance. This will r - yos4 runfeurrukal Pyoosut-otrate to t bett u e , ,i,, opportunityuut write t o o u f; ascertaining specially respecting those w a h r o e ue wish wa to but rel take r l O v i sp o of any letter you may have occasion to write,yrevl oo efi es piration of the former subscription, and notify th eir ocl , With respect to subscriptions for Weekly PaPe' the_ziO` of address, or changing from one paper to another, i to epit requiring these, if so urgent as to desire you to v ,, 00, 4 9 . , on their account, must pay a single postage. TO °”,,,,ifr , if . , those subscribers, take advantage of sending us an- order Three Day in the Week Paper, and include thf-a f 0 0 The profit on Weekly Papers is too sma ll to admit ° at expense of postage on orders for them. PA We are your obedient servants, AO , THE CLERKS OF 10 No. V. I n. 9 ' .4 Comet Office, 2, Church Lane, -a.. te d o yr Sir,—Your arrear for the Comet Newspaper ana o u willP r I/ on the 31st December ultimo, which Y 9 . 6,, ye ~, Il i to pay to the Postmaster of your town, together vr_l' . ." vo ldP scription in advance, otherwise the Comet must Itt' withheld from you on Saturday next. 'et' i ' I am, Sir, your obedient servant, .propri JOHN SHEEHAN , ' ~.,t No. VI. 11 cl °' i i% Glengarry, Kingstown, AP r A tp Gentlemen,—l beg to inform you that lam obl i kSelf tinue for the future taking an English or Iristt o se.l g through your agency, o w i ng t o th e gr eat disadv r onlo which your office labours with r es pe c t to persons c ' n eacb, as I am. lam obliged to pay one penny postag e ° ye 3!, ri' you send me, and thi s ch arge , w hi c h a t th e end of a ct od r a serious addition to the cost of a daily Paper, I g. well i et subscribing through the Clerks of Roads at the.n toll," office. How strang , it is, yet true, that if I live u l joblitpii, bourhood of a Post Town one hundred miles frorn ne rs', o7 or would be no charge for transmittin ~Vuge. ~ but as I live within six miles of the Castle I ant - siv i postage for them. o blii 4 4t l ', Having at all times found such an anxiety t° a° 0. ready attention to my wishes on the part of yourselr.ri 10 1 r, whom you employ, should circumstances alter 11, too pleasure in renewing our communications —I reor.o A RICHAR D To Messrs. Johnston, Eden Quay, Dublin. , 1 0 1/ No. VII. Gentlemen,—l am directed by the Committe e he re room to inform you, that the Clerks of the Roa''', a ch, ' () to supply London Papers at the rate of 91. Os' - At them by express as expeditiously as you do. , ino re llf The Committee expect that you will not charg-.g be , Clerks of the Roads demand, as otherwise they Will y change.—Your obedient servant, B RUCE, Messrs. Johnston and Co. SAMUEL To T. 0. Lees. Esq. Name of Paper. Name of Subscriber• MINORITY Of 37 (tellers included) who, on the 19th of to e$ voted in favour of Mr. Warburton's mo ti°n 00 1 ' the legal tender clause from the Baok Ch arter 0 ...... .. O A FAograitnhset motion ...................... '...................,...:* /,'' Majority ........ ... ....... . ... I gs In the Houte . ................... ,o, ENGLAND. . iNGl' f ' w ich Aglionby, A.—Cockermouth' Morrison, J.--Ir s b ete Baillie, .1. E.—Bristol . . • Philipi, M.-- - . 114 ,tt , Blake,. Sir F.—Berwick Potter, R.—„"' 6 l,; r jag' Brocklehurst, J.—Macclesfield Pryme, G...." rn opt ,0 Brotherton, Joseph—Salford Shepherd, T.—Fr r xel ,l .1 Briggs, R.—Halifax Walter, John—Be,too r,si Bewes, T.—Plymouth Clay, obl e t W t , Williams, G.—A sl 4, t sir .- i d castle ,„oc2f f Wood, G. NV.- - . --- .—A wm 'o_vre o r i li dh a a m m lets Willoughby, Divett, E.--Exeter Ellis, W.—Leicester NID• i Ewart, Wm.—Liverpool IRELA' ilo Mx ; Forster, C. S.—Walsall Jephson, D. 0.-- - „,,,isi Fielden, John—Oldham . O'Reilly, W,....P.2,r, c0 re Grote, Geo.—London ,Ruthven, Ed.--. 1 ',4" 0 / Harvey, D. W.—Colchester Vigors, IsL c.....CP' if Heathcoat, J.—Tiverton Wallace, T.- -Carl° Humphery, J.—Southwark Howard, P. H.—Carli s l e TFLl.Ulqdlift f Mi no Hawes, B.—Lambeth H ume, Joseg . ,- - :_oriti. Lloyd, J. H.—Stockport W ar b ur ton, n• COWES, AUG. 18• 10 0 1 1 The celebration of the natal day of her 1103 . 1 0 1 the Duchess of Kent, yesterday, was distin4cu'ivglo by every demonstration of respect and rejl2l )4 1 II squadron, consisting of SO sail, hoisted the " f ° o4 3lc , ard, and the Club House and Cowes Castl e ' :j th e B Marquis of An;;lesea is Captain, also disP ia) : it bsiil ensign. The shipping in the harbour heist,'" t oo se l in honour of the day. The Commodore's -c;. l d disc Vice-Commodore's Water Witch's spleP ut 0 1. 1 ,01 flags attracted universal admiration. At 0 ' c o sdr • salute of 21 guns was fired from the Sq u deja ll l The Falcon and Water 'Vetch also fired a fe u I that half-past 12 the Noble Commodore made ''g -„ „ s c iittP o ,4 Royal standard was in sight. The Emerald Yi e d t, t I their Royal Highnesse s and su it e on board, ea'tbe the fleet ; after which Lord Yarborough an d a collo Belfast proceeded to the Em era ld to to n g ' He t plu Duchess on the return of her natal dal" roamed Highness invited the Commodore and l l'e e h oe , the Duke of Norfolk, and the Earls of D"reastle,,e cheater, to a banquet that evening at NorriB ly 0 1 01 The silver cup brought down by an Adm i " ot ii o early in the day was displayed on the come, Emerald, filled with fragrant flowers. to j ot The annual review of the pilots b-long io g r then took place. The vessels, 26 in non 3 hs, o% gefi each with two flags, started on a signal frorntibe by the line being formed according to the al t he t l vessels. They took the usual course roan bost r iji rounding a boat off the Custom-house. The c bee in succession past the E,ntrald. The pilots _per, Royal Highnesses. The Princess Victoria Oreflie, el rested and gratified with the whole scene. each received one sovereign to drink the Duch - te" At night the inhabitants of East Cowes illu' dwellings in honour of the day. d d The band of the Portsmouth division of In sr ,,of from Portsmouth to play during the entertaioo" 4 Castle in the evening. i sif t Our illustrious visiters have not yet lan d t be if/ Cowes ; they, however, were row e d through rd . 0 0 _ . by 12 oars, the barge having the Royal starly-oh On Friday afternoon, after witnessing t h e Eye s the squadron, they were put on shore at d w air h z e ine n o :c r e erye t r h yt e oic y es d aa r yt ov wh t i o pp N in o g rr h i a s in Ca c s h tl u e. rch. ite ' 1 This day their Royal Highnesses and flu ' 1)e / opi tc „t An Admiralty messenger brought dos de dee yesterday for Lord Yarborough. v esti ~f Lady Graham paid a visit the day beta yob ° 6, Earl Spencer at Westfield, in the Adroir a l e . o o z h e 4 that his Lordship daily e iie YfiftlV infirm ; be is unable to ascend the stairs' - A C .. e,,4 constquently, a crane has been constreete-t: tt , 1 , 7 1 the purpose of hoisting the Eaintend rl in a cha ir ir i l d ta pir ° l ' It is said that the squadron to Pr"; o ai: . Bourg after the regatta, where it is exPecte, ibe take place under the auspices of his Mar; 0 0„0 1, „/ the French, who will, according to t he I: t iP y melts, reach Cherbourg Ault the 3 : f lpirs l remain three days ; Marshal Soult and "` 6 will accompany the King. 0,7 ARRIVALS a the %it, Countess of Stradbroke, Lady S e lina a n ne erOpli,C t f Major and Lady Augusta Baring, 'Viscount ,' sit cil 7 4 , Conroy, Grenadier Guards (son of Sir Joh n) j 511 ,1 4/1 , and Lady Mary Cole, and Miss Talbot, 1,°. 4,eP ,f, t, brock, Sir Henry and Lady Rivers, LAY '' - c, It• de, Blachford, Lord Vernon, Mr. Rigby MurraYl,o *OO } lO , Esq., M.P., Mr. Algernon Grevine, Sir Thl ot iet;l , 4 . ; 0 son, Bart., Earl of Glengall and Loy = 1 ",,,, 11 ,, r , 11 ,.: A.,/ to the Earl and Countess of Belfast; . - ri . , ' s 'o, Penleaze, Esq,, M.P., Sir Arthur Paget, i'f ' rhot ° ' , A r Capt. Codrington ; also the Markham, Coote, Corbet, Congreveridies.and r . tlif vi 00 Yjir ~,, jers Itil_d IoNA.--The lona Club, vve -. : 1 Goo! r ~ cgoovtepretrhmeisbsuiorinedfrioninscrtihpetiir.nPsr.esident, i''' oe ss°", 4 Y', l `' Of ARGYLL, to explore the tombs eh' CoP' "V I The viaduct, or rail-roam f n r e:ra is )-I'°: t 5 1tts ' ; ( , 11 Greenwich is to run from Joiners.streette pool London Bridge, th roug h Bermondsey, °"fortiitipes west of St. H e l ena G ar d e ns, through 1 1:e d i° the canals and waters to Greenwich• be run in twelve minute H t 00F ` ; e t 11„, - 0 4 4 1044„"°