The Sun. — London, England, 1833-05-21 00:00:00

d to' a'orti of the conduct of the polite, and that one oppne dto that verdict. A communication was made to the Coroner, about half-past eight that there was no likelihood of their agreeing. The Coroner said they would agree when they became a little more hungry ; but the jury several times sent a similar communication, and with no better success. DECISION OF THE JURY, AND REJECTION (BUT ULTIMATE ACCEPTANCE) OF THEIR VERDICT BY THE CORONER. At half-past nine o'clock the jury returned, and the Foreman informed the Coroner that they had agreed upon their verdict, which he read in the following terms ; " We find a verdict of Justifiable Homicide on these grounds : that no Riot Act was read, nor any proclama tion advising the people to disperse ; that the Government did not take the proper precautions to prevent the meet ing from assembling, and that the conduct of the police was ferocious, brutal, and unprovoked by the people ; and we moreover express our anxious hope that the Govern- ment will in future take better precautions to prevent th, recurrence of such disgraceful transactions in the metro poli-."—(Loud cheering in the room.) The CORONER said—l do not know how you can say all these things on the evidence which you have beard. The only evidence which you have had to show you bow this man met his death was of that young woman who saw the stab given to a man who was acting in a laudable and undrendinv, manner; and how any one on the Jury can justify such an act, I don't understand. I hope, Gentle men, you will reconsider your verdict. You are not here to try the conduct of other persons, whether in the Go. vernment or the Police. This, in my opinion, is no verdict.—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") Indeed, it isn't. It was not justifiable homicide. It was either wilful murder by some one you do know, or some one you don't know.— (Laughter, and "Ch, oh," which was suppressed by the officer in attendance.) Foreman—We have patiently considered our verdict. There have been conflicting opinions amongst us ; but we have all anxiously compared our opinions ; and that is the conscientious verdict of us all, patiently and carefully formed with the most anxious deliberation. CORONER—You are called upon to say how Robert Cully came by his death, and the only evidence you have to decide upon that is that of the young woman who saw him stabbed. Several of the jury exclaimed, " We do not believe her; no, not one of us." CORONER—And why not? A Juror—Because she was contradicted by other wit nesses. She sail she was two minutes talking to the policeman, and it was proved by all the other witnesses that that was impossible. She was tutored. Another Juror—She was ; she was tutored by the po lice. She acknowledged to having bee❑ with them ever since that day. 'Why ask us to give a verdict against our consciences? CORONER...-.YOU say there were no precautions. I think there were plenty of measures. A Juror—There were no measures to prevent the meet. ing ; and the means employed to disperse it were dis graceful. Foreman—We are all of opinion that if 100 policemen had occupied the ground, this man would not have been Another Juror—We only wonder that there were not more byes lost. CORONER—WeII, Gentlemen, your verdict is, that Robert Cully was killed with Justifiable Homicide. Jurors—We do. CORONER (to the Foreman)—Well, Sir, I shall strike out all the rest.—(The Coroner here drew his pencil across all the words that followed "Justifiable Homicide.") Foreman—l cannot agree to that, Sir. All the Jury—Nor any of us. Foreman—Before God and our country—on our solemn oaths—we have gives the subject all the consideration in our power; and that paper, which I have handed to you, contains the judgment in which we are unanimously agreed. I, you strike nut any part of that, it is not our verdict. Jury—Certainly not. Foreman—We have told yon our verdict ; but we would not give a verdict of justifiable homicide, standing by itself. CORONER—..So you say it was justifiable, because some persons broke other persons' heads, some half hour after the man was murdered. A Juror—We are not of opinion that the heads were not broken till after the man was killed. If you record any verdict without the whole of what we say, it will be a false and untrue verdict. Another Juror—lt will be his verdict and not ours. Another Juror—Yea ; what occasion was there to swear us, and keep us away so many days from our busi ness and families, if it is to be a Coroner's verdict and not the Jury's ? Several of the Jury—You had better dismiss us if you will not take our verdict. Foreman—And the sooner the better. We are fatigued to exhaustion. We have done our duty laboriously and faithfully, and our country can expect no more of us. CORONER—WeII, as you did your duty by giving a ver dict to say that a ma❑ is justified in stabbing an unof fending moo— Foreman—lf proper measures bad been taken, either by reading the Riot Act or a proclamation, or any other means, we would not bring in a verdict to justify the homi cide. Therefore, to let that verdict go abroad alone would be very dangerous, and it might be thought that we jus tified the stabbing a policeman who was legally employed. CORONER — I think that is the fact. Foreman—No; on the contrary, we wish to give the police every protection. CORONER—What you call your verdict don't sound like it ; I don't think that a fair verdict. Several Jurors—We will not give any other. is not a good verdict. A Juror—Well, if you will not take it, you had better dismiss us and call another jury. CORONER—DO you call these remarks a recommenda— tion ? Why, you ate finding filth with everybody with a vengance. Wnit reason was there to stab the man? Juror—Mr. Coroner, do you not recollect that before there was any stabbing or throwing of stones, or any other violence, s man rushed out from the body of police, and violently struck about him, having said to those behind him, " Now, go it, 13,:y5." We are of opinion from the evidence that this was the same man. Foreman—We have read over all our notes, and we can come to no other verdict. After a further delay, perhaps a quarter of an hour, A juror said—Mr. Coroner, we have become as quiet as a Quaker's meeting. May we go, or have you any other little job for us ?--(Laughter.) CORONER—You may go when you agree to your verdict. Foreman—Mr. Coroner, we have as strong an impres sion of the importance of our duty as any man can have, and we have agreed to that •erditt, and we will agree to none other. CORONER—So you think that a meeting to overturn the Government was a justific ition of this h o micide ? Foreman—No, Sir; far from it ; we are all of us men who have families, and some stake in the country ; indeed I think there are none of us but have some little property. We all of us are of one opinion shout the impropriety of that meeting, and we are fir from liking mob meetings. If the police had acted with propriety, we would all of us have turned out to assist and protect them at any risk.— (Hey, hear, from the rest of the jury.) Coe°Nza—Why, every precaution was taken. Foreman—Oh, Sir, certainly; they prepared means of dispersing the meeting, and how were those means em ployed ? We blame the Government and the police, be cause they made no attempt to prevent the meeting. One hundred men upon the ground in the morning, or the ex postulations of a Magistrate, would, in our opinion, have prevented any meeting. CORONER—There were proclamations, forbidding the meeting, posted all over the town. A Juror—l am en my o,th, Sir, and I say that I saw imame of those posted on the Tuesday, the day after the meeting.—(Shame and laughter.) CORONER—lnstead of inquiring how the man was killed, you are trying the police, and other people fur quite different things. Foreman—lt is the conduct of those people which jus tifies us in giving that verdict. If precaution had been taken properly, there would have been no murder. Coaorira—Flow do you think you can justify a man for murdering this policeman, who offended no one, and who was giving advice to that woman whom we heard ? Several Jurors—Her evidence was disproved. She is not worthy of credit. A Juror—l have seen her drinking gin on the leads of this house with a crowd of policemen, with whom she ad mite she has been since the day of the meeting. Another Juror—She is still there drinking, though she swore this morning tbat she was in a hurry to go home, as she bad been ordered not to stay long. Foremoo—We can give no other verdict. We are of opinion t‘ at this man would not have lost his life had proper meimires been taken. No one saw the stab given. Wv are of opinion that it was given in the confusion which the violence of the man himself produced. CORONIK—But you can give a conscientious verdict without libelling any one. Foreman—lt is no libel. Jury—Certainly not. CORONER-It certainly appears that there was a good dui of knocking about on one side and the other. Foreman.—lt was all on one side. CORONER—Why the police did not stab. Foreman—Mr. Coroner, we are all unanimously of opi nion that if they had acted with moderation, the deceased would not have been stabbed. The woman who swore otherwise, we do not believe. It is plain she was tutored ; and the little girl who was brought up to tell us that she saw the stab given —young and ignorant as she was—was still artful enough to keep back the important fact that the man who stabbed the policeman was violently assaulted first, as she acknowledged when I pressed her in cross• examination. The conversation was here suspended for a very long time, the coroner and jury sitting in silence. Some per sons left the room, and some one, in a very loud voice, explained to the crowd outside the house the nature of the discussion going on in the inquest-room, together with the terms of the verdict. A cheeting the most extraordinary in vehemence and duration of any that we ever heard was immediately raised. It lasted more than a quarter of an hour, during which nothing that was attempted to be said by the coroner and jury was audible in the room. When it ceased, The Foreman said, in the name of my brother jurors, I have to repeat, that we have considered our verdict, and that it is the only one in which, upon the evidence, we should feel ourselves justified. Let me refer you, Sir, to the testimony of Mr. Goore. You will recollect, Sir, the treatment which he received, and the remarkable expres sion he used, that if he had a weapon, he would have felt himself justified in using it, and when hesaw how the fellows behaved, he said, if he could, he would have cut their heads off. The Coroner was silent ; and there was much mur muring among the jury, and cries of "Dismiss us !" One juror sa;cl, So help me God, lam ready to faint. I have fasted from ten o'clock this morning. I have had nothing but a glass of water. It is a shame to treat us in this way. If you will not have our verdict, dismiss us ; for if you keep me here for a year, I cannot with respect to my oath alter that verdict. The other jurors universally cried out, " Nor I, nor I." CORONER.—Recon , ider your verdict. Juror—You have kept us here an hour and a half to no purpose. If you think we are unfit to give a sound ver dict, call a more able jury. CORONER---Then this is your verdict, Sir? Jury—Yes, yes ; the verdict of us all. CORONER—SureIy you could give your justifying ver dict, and say that you did so for reasons peculiar to the case; but it is not right to give this verdict, which is slandering people whom you have no right to try. A Juror—Our reasons we have given. They are in that paper. If we say that it is justifiable homicide, without that rider, it would appear that we approved of any brutal fellow's stabbing a policeman in the ordinary execu ion of his duty, and that we would encourage illegal meetings. We will not consent to any such verdict. Jurors—We will not. CORONER—You throw all the blame on the police; but what will you say of the people who stabbed them ? This verdict goes to excite the people against the police. You call them brutal and ferocious, and every epithet to make them odious. Foremin—lt has been proved in evidence that their conduct wag such. CORONER—I think the first part goes a great way, without the rest, when you say that this homicide was justifiable. A Juror—l see no use in a jury, if one man can set aide their verdict. see great uge in juries. Another Juror—Nell, Sir, it you talk to this jury for melve months, I shall not consent to any other verdict. All the Jury—Nor I—nor I—nor I. ConoNEKLYour verdict only traduces the police and the Government ; you are not borne out by the evidence in justifying the murder of this man. Were the people innocent who used murderous weapons, stilettos, blud geons, and lances, such as you have seen ? Foreman—We state i❑ our verdict on what grounds we justify the homicide. We do not traduce the police ❑or the Government. IVe trust that our verdict will pre vent the negligence and misconduct which have causal the arms and heads of his Majesty's peaceable subjects to be broken. CORONER—Do you call them peaceable subjects ? Foreman—lt has been proved that they were peaceable. We will say no more, Sir; record our verdict, or dismiss us.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from the jury.) We have told you, Sir, we will not alter a letter. In regard to our oaths, and to our duty to our God, our country, and our King, we can give no other verdict.—( Vehement cries of " Hear, hear," from the other jurors.) Let us not pass any more time in this trifling contention, as we have nesrly passed two hours. We have fasted since ten o'clock this morning, and we protest against twig treat ment. If you will not have our verdict, please yourself, as you have the power. Dismiss us, and procure an abler jury; and let God and our country decide between us.— (Cheers in the room, re-echoed from outside.) After a consultation of some length, carried on in a low tone between the Coroner, his clerk, and Mr. ➢l'William, and the foreman, the Coroner directed the verdict as originally put in, to be entered on the record. The de positions, inquisition, and record were then completed and signed. - [The exact words of the verdict thus recorded are stated above.] The CORONER said, " Gentlemen, I consider your ver dict disgraceful to you : but I thank you for your great attention to the case." The Foreman, bowing, said, "We thank you, Sir." s Hereupon a number of persons in the roam, which wa crowded to excess, exclaimed " Bravo Jurors; you have done your duty nobly, the country is indebted to you which was followed by the most vociferous cheering in the room, re-echoed with prodigious vehemence by the crowds outside. As the jury withdrew numbers of persons pressed forward and shook each of them eagerly by the hand. In the streets, as they passed, they were cheered by name, but the police were booted. It was some time after eleven o'clock when the pro ceedings terminated. The public cannot form any notion of the number cf persons wounded, or of the extent of injuries received, from the evidence that has been taken. The termination of the inquiry, without further examination, is a great dis appointment to upwards of 30 men and boys, and also many women, who were i❑ attendance from the com mencement, to exhibit to the jury broken heads, arms, and other injuries. As several applied urgently to he ad initted to give evidence in the course cf yesterday morning, it is presumed they mistook, or did not understand the meaning of the Coroner's proclamation. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, ALdr 20 On the Earl of SHAFTESBURY taking his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock, Mr. CLAY, and others from the Commons, brought up the York Market Improvement Bill, the West Moor (So merset) Improvement Bill, and other private Bills. Lord SEFTON presented a petition from Manchester. Lord LYNDIIURST presented a similar petition, signed by the same number of bankers, merchants, trades men, and others, of Norwich. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a similar pe ition from another place, the name of which was not leard. The Duke of RICHMOND presented a petition from Chichester (we believe) against the General Register Bill. Earl BROWNLOW presented a petition loom Bolton against the Local Jurisdiction Bill. The Earl of HADDINGTON presented a petition from certain medical practitioners educated at Scotch Univer sities against the prohibitory provisions of the Apothe caries Act, as applying to them; also a petition from Dr. Vetch, of the Charter House, praying that the pupils of physicians may be admitted to examination by the Apothe caries' Company, as well as the apprentices of apothecaries. The Earl of CARLISLE presented a petition from certain D6senters, praying to be relieved from the forms of the church in marriages, registration, and burial. THE DUTCH EMBARGO. The Duke of WELLINGTON presented a petition from the merchants, coalowners, and others of the port of New castle, against the embargo on Dutch vessels. The peti tioners complained that they were sustaining great losses, for that 500 ships had been regularly employed in supply ing Holland with coal since the separation of that country from Belgium. He should have gone more at length into the subject of the petition were it not that he had heard it rumoured that a probability now existed of a speedy ar rangement. He should say no more except to state how desirable it was, in his opinion, for all his Majesty's sub. jects, but especially for a ll th ose connec t e d w ith th e ship ping of the country, that the present state of things with regard to Holland should be brought as speedily as possi ble to an end. The Earl of ABERDEEN said he had been requested to support the prayer of the petition, which he should certainly have done to the heat of his power if the same reasons had not operated upon his mind which had been explained by his Noble Friend. Earl GREY agreed in thinking it desirable to abstain from discussion at the present moment. At the same time he mutt say that, if ever an occasion arrived at which it would be necessary, his Majesty's Government would cer- tainly be prepared to defend and justify the course they had pursued. It was with great reluctance they had adopted measures, the inconvenience of which they felt as strongly as the Noble Duke, or the Noble E irl, or as the petitioners could do. They bad acted for the interests of commerce, and for European interests generally, and should be most happy to take off the measures of coercion as soon as their sense of duty would permit. The Earl of RODEIV presented petitions from several places in Ireland and Scotland, praying for a better ob servance of the Sabbath. Also another from certain nonjuring Christians, praying to be put upon the same footing as Quakers. Lord LYTTELTON presented a petition from certain Dissenters meeting in Fetter-lane, praying for a better oh arvance of the Sabbath, not as a measure of religious compulsion, but of civil relief. The Eiri of WINCHILSEA presented a petition from Smdwieh, against the 19th clause of the Local Jurisdic tion Bill. The Bishop of BATH and WELLS presented petitions from several places in the county of Somerset, praying for an alteration in the Beer Act. The Marquis of SALISBURY pre3ented a petition from Hertford, against the working of children in factories. OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH. The Bishop of LICHFIELD and COVENTRY pre sented several petitions, praying for the better observance of the Lord's Day. The Bishop of LONDON said he would take that op. portunity of addressing a few words to their Lordships upon the subject of the petitions, in consequence of the measure to which they related having been rejected in the other House. He still hoped that the decision which bad been come to would not deter some Member of the Legislature either there or in the other House to bring forward another measure, tmore simple in its object and more moderate i❑ its provisions, such as he was sure the great mass of the respectable community desired to see. He was sure their Lordships would agree with him in feel ing that the subject was deeply important, whether in a religious, a moral, or a political point of view. If a measure were introduced that should be moderate in its objects he was sure that it would be passed by a large ma jority, if not unanimously, in both Houses; and lie hoped, therefore, that some one would propose such a measure. It had been much pressed upon himself and other Right Rev. Prelates, but he thought there was an evident ob jection to their bringing in such a measure. No measure that would be likely to pass, he feared, would be such as to meet their views of how the Sabbath ought to he kept. There would be many persons ready to take advantage of such an opportunity to say, " This is the standard which the Bishops set tip ; we have no occasion to go further than they require." The Bishop of LINCOLN presented several similar petitions from that county. ABOLITICN OF SLAVERY. Petitions were presented, praying for the abolition of slavery, by Lord Bexley; Lord Suffield (262 in number); the Duke of 'Wellington (praying also that regard be had to the rights of property) ; the Earl of Suffolk, Lord Lyt telton, Lord Rolle, the Marquis of Bute, the Bi , hop of Lichfield and Coventry, Lord Barham, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Marquis of Westminster, and the Marquis of Sligo.--Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MAY 20. The SPEAKER took the chair shortly after five o'clock. A message from the House of Lords brought up the Stafford Bribery Bill. CARLOW ELECTION. Sir R. HERON brought up the report of the Comm tee appointed to try the merits of this election, declaring that Walter Blackney and Thomas Wallace, Esqrs., were duly elected, and that neither the petition nor opposition was frivolous or vexatious. SOUTH STAFFORD. On the motion of Sir J. WROTTESLEY, a new writ was ordered to issue for the southern division of the county of Staffird, Edw. John Littleton, Esti , having accepted the office of Chief Secretary for Ireland. STROUD. Mr. HYETT moved for a new writ for the borough of Stroud in the room of David Ricardo, Esq., who had ac cepted of the Chiltern Hundreds.—Ordered. Mr. JERVIS presented a petition from the market gardeners, complaining of the rates they were subject to for the police. Mr. HUME supported the prayer of the petition. FORGING PETITIONS. Mr. HUME wished to call the attention of the House to a subject of great importance. Some time since he presented a petition from Stroud, signed by several hun dred persons against the Factories Bill. He had discovered that the whole was a forgery, and that he had been com pletely imposed upon ; be should therefore now give notice, that on the 30th of the present month he should submit a motion for the appointment of a Committee, before which he should examine the landlord of the Weavers' Arms, and others connected with the trans action. Mr. ROBINSON presented a petition from Balme rino, in Fifeshire, complaining of the present system of taxation, and praying for the substitution of a property tax. COLONIAL SLAVERY. Lord CHANDOS, seeing the Noble Lord (Althorp) in his place, would take the opportunity of stating that there was a strong impra ssion out of doors that it was not the intention of his Majesty's Government to persevere in the Bill brought into that House for the abolition of slavery. He could not, for his own part, suppose for a moment that it was the intention of Ministers to get rid of the question in such an unsatisfactory manner. Lord ALTHORP said be was not aware what im pression might exist on the subject elsewhere, but he was glad the Noble Lord had given him that opportunity of assuring bins that it was the most decided intention of his M ajesty's Ministers to persevere with the measure this session.--( Hear.) Mr. STUART moved for a return of the amount of fees paid to the sheriffs of each county in Scotland re spectively, for the last five years. Mr. HUME put a question to Mr. Campbell, the Soli citor-General, respecting, as we understood, the Debtor and Creditor's Bill ; but we could neither hear the ques•. tio❑ nor reply with sufficient distinctness. FACTORY BILL. Mr. ATTWOOD, after some preliminary observations, which were inaudible, said be hoped that the Noble Lord who had undertaken the introduction of the Factory Bill, would agai❑ bring it forward, and th it the report of the Commissioners appointed to make inquiries on the subject might be laid before the Committee on the Bill ; as he feared there would be no other means of getting the Bill through this session. He then moved that there he laid on the table of that House the names of the Commis sioners, the terms of their appointment, a copy of the commission, and a list of the questions to be asked by them. Lord ALTHORP would not object to the motion. Mr. ATTWOOD asked if he could move that the Commissioners should make their report within a month from that day. Lord ALTHORP—Not without having given previouß notice. Mr. ROBINSON asked the Noble Lord (Althorp) whether he could give the House any satisfactory informa tio❑ relative to the further distribution of the Deccan prize money ? Lord ALTHORP said the matter was (as we under stood) un.ler appeal in the Privy Council, and he could not say when it would be heard. He did not think, how ever, it would occasion much delay. FACTORIES BILL. Lord ASHLEY complain e d that so much delay had already been occasioned in consequence of the appointment of the commission. He bad a pp re h en d e d thi s , an d op posed the commission on that ground. The commission was voted on the 3d of April, but it did not leave London till the 24th ; he would allow more than six weeks after this latter period ; and therefore he would fix the second reading of his Bill for Monday, June 17. (There being no other order on the books for that day, Mr. Stanley intimated that Government, from courtesy, had precedence.) He (Lord Ashley) was determined to per severe in it ; and he would not, out of courtesy to any man, compliment away the lives of 50,000 infant chil dren, who suffered so much . under th e present system.— (Hear, hear.) If the Ministers were i nc li ne d to ma k e any opposition, he should divide the House. Lord ALTHORP then moved the order of the day that the House resolve itself into committee on the Church Temporalities (Ireland) Bill. Mr. GILLON rose to bring f orwar d t h e motion of which he had given notice on the subject of the Irish church establishment. He did not approve of this Bill, which is his opinion did not go half far enough. It was merely diminishing the evil, but only to a very slight extent, whereas something much . more effecti ve was requ i re d . I n this country, as well as 1!) Ireland, some change was ne cessary, but especially in Ireland, where the great ma jority of the people were not of the religion of the esta blished church. But even here he believed the number of dissenters were much underrated, and why were they or any people to be taxed to suppo r t a sys t em o f re ligion ich their own opinions did no t con f orm ? ay to other wh (Hear.) Toe present system in Irela n d was one t h at was upheld by military force, and for that reason he did not wish to see it continued, for he could never consent to imp' se a religious establishment upon any people by the force of the bayonet. He had a petition (as far as the noise in the House would allow us to bear) from Glasgow, signed by 16,000 persons, expressing the sentiments he had just uttered. The Hon. Member concluded by mov ing, as an amendment, that the revenues of the Irish church be applied to purposes of general utility, after the demise of the present incumbents. Mr. CUTHBERT RIPPON said—Sir—ln rising to second this motion, I must ask the indulgent attention of the House for a few minutes. I cannot forbear to offer some remarks on the subject now before us, as connected with the all-momentous question of church reform—as professing redress of grievances for Ireland, and as proving the fallacy of that opinion, at one time so generally enter tained, of Ministers being sincere in their oft-boasted de sire for abolishing abuses. I maintain, Sir, that it is the duty of an honest Government and a reformed Parliament to examine into all parts of our political establishment to discover and remove the abuses which exist within them ; and I aver that, first and foremost, as aboundine in enor mity, as founded in injustice, as rife witih corrupt prac tice, is the church establishment. Two measures have been brought forward by his Majesty's Ministers connected with this subject—that now under consideration, the other far commuting the English tithes—both are alike devoid of principle, both are offered for the professed purpose of re moving abuse, but with the wily intent of inducing the people to submit for some rime longer to that system of ecclesiastical plunder and oppression, beneath which they hay, for past centuries groaned; both desire to maintain that monstrous grievance, that intolerable injustice, the compelling of men to pay for the upholding of a form of religious worship to which they cannot conscientiously subset ibe. Does the Noble Lord believe that the people will he deluded by this imposture on reform? Does he imagine they will consent to accept this, as earnest of the benefits that were promised to them by the Bill ? I entreat the Noble Lord not to deceive himself. I ask the Noble Lord to consider the ecclesiastical condition of the United Kingdom. More than one half of the people are opposed to that form of religious niinistrath n which the State upholds. A double tax for maintain ing their own ministers and the State teachers, is imposed upon Dissenters and Roman Catholics, the greater part of whom are comprised in the middle and lower classes, while the church of the wealthy and titled great, is wholly maintained at the public expense. Lay aside, for one moment, all religious considerations view this simply as a civil ques tion. Is it not the first duty of a Government to promote the general happiness, to remove all just causes fir discontent, to consolidate its power and authority, by attaching to its I ule the affections and ap probation of the people? Can such be the case, when the tnajoi ity ale aggrieved by that most impertinent in terference, the meddling with their choice and conduct in matters of religion ? You outrage common sense—you defy public opinion—you deny right —you refuse justice ; but mark, by this course of proceeding you hasten the fall of that which you desire to uphold. No defenders, however zealous—no supporters, however devoted—no protectors, however powerful, will save the establishment from early destruction. But now, as regards redress to Ireland, the Hon. Secretary for the Colonies said on a former occasion, that " the law must be feared ere it be loved ;" and also " that remedi il and coercive measures need not necessarily proceed purl passu." I deny the first position; I admit the last ; but I declare that jus tice should precede force. Laws must be equal and good before they deserve respect or protection. I consider that it was our first duty to examine into the grievances of Ireland—to hear her complaints with patience and atten tion—to prove our sense of justice by redressing her wrongs—and thus having performed our part of the con tract, then call upon or compel the fulfilment of hers; but not in the first instance to adopt the tyrant's short remedy for all inconvenience, the employment of force, but rather to adapt our measures to the sense and feeling of the people. Let them discover our willingness to re medy t rrors, to repair neglect, to relieve injuries, and thus disarm their hostility by our benevolence and our fairness. What have you done ? You have passed a Bill of coercion, you have skilfully compounded from all former measures of harshness the very esence of seve rity, and now you offer this Bill in discharge of redress, a Bill alike disgraceful to you, and insult ing to the people.—(Hear, hear.) What can induce a Ministry, at one time so popular and confided in, now so odious and suspected, thus to depart from their pledges and professions ? Are they ignorant of the rights of their fellow men ? They cannot be. Are they indifferent to their just claims? I will not suppose them to be. Do they want moral courage to be honest to their country, and to themselves? Here lies the truth—they resist that which is the right, for the contemptible consideration of preserving the composition of an ill-assorted Cabinet, and of avoiding that collision with another branch of the State, which, sooner or later, must happen. A Corn Bill, a property tax, many other inevitable and just measures equally with church reform, will produce this same dreaded result. I tell the Noble Lord, that any Minister who will do justice to the people, who will give to them (what they are determined to have) cheap government and equal laws, must diminish the monopolizing privileges of the aristocracy.—(Cheers.) By what means, let Inc ask, have the younger branches of that aristocracy as yet escaped the miseries of a law of primogeniture, that very basis of the order ? By being quartered upon, and supported by, the public establishments. Does any reasonable man, then, believe that this body will voluntarily give up their pe cuniary advantages—will willingly dispel the flattering il lusion of their fancied greatness, for the mere purpose of promoting the common good ?—in a word, that they will defer their interests to the interests of the commonwealth? The experience of the last two years, abundantly proves the fallacy of such presumption. But let us examine what is the composition of this formidable body, which a Ministry, professing to be honest—backed by the power of the nation, hesitates and fears to brave and defy. Behold, a small knot of persons, whose pre-emi nence only consists in au artificial distinction, whose nominal superiority was created by public preference, is permitted for the public advantage, and is dependent for future continuance upon public !avour. All rulers are the servants of the nation—power is intrusted to them to serve the common good, and when they cease thus to employ it, their privileges must be withdrawn. The Hon. Member for St. Andrew's said, on a former evening, " that the existence of Protestantism and C ristianity were depen dent upon the upholding of the Irish church establish ment." I would ask this Hon. Gentleman whether this church has any charter from heaven, any spiritual prero gative to prove its pretensions to primacy? I tell him that it is a mere Parliamentary church•—not the ally, but the subject of the state, its constitution and existence are dependent upon the acts and authority of Parliament. The Hon. Baronet (the Member for the University of Oxford) denies the right of Parliament to interfere with that which he calls the property of the church. I tell the Hon. Baronet that the property enjoyed by the nr tional church is national property, to be employed for the national use; and every proposition such as the present, which tends to deprive a body of our countrymen of their fair share of advantage in this property, is a direct mea sure of fraud. lam aware that these opinions are not in accordance with those of many Members of this House, but 1 can assure the House that I shall ever state that which I believe to be the truth. I court not notoriety; my sentiments are not hastily put forth—they are the results of deep consideration and honest conviction. The opinions out of these walls on this and many other sub jects are very different from those within them, and I have no fear but that I shall ere long discover the conta- giousness of public sentiment,around me. B byt e he ti a ns lte a re s d it ton in e ay o , f many who now sit un I shall enjoy the satisfaction of having discharged my duty to my country, in resisting the proposition for main taining the Church Establishment of Ireland, and in advo• cat j o g that princip'e of eternal right, that every man should worship his Creator without penalty or restraint. Lord ALTHORP was glad to hear the Hon. admit that his opinions were not in unison with those of others on this point—an admission which be (Lord A.) believed to be very well warranted by the fact.—(Hear.) With respect to the proposition of the Hon. Member op posite, he felt that he should not be doing that which was necessary for the advantage of public business, or for the benefit of the House, if he enteled into a lengthened ar gument. to prove 'that a church establishment was de sirable.—(Hear, heir.) He should only observe, that he thought it desirable for the advantage of religion. The Hon. Member seemed to asiutne that all which he did not approve of must necessarily be detrimental. Surely, before he came to such a sweeping conclusion, he might have considered that it was possible he could be mistaken. H e should say no more than that he could not possibly consent to the amendment. Colonel EVANS did not think the measure would answer the public expectation even in England, and most certainly it would not in Ireland. He regretted that the Bill did not go much further. Mr. FINN said that the only part of the Bill that would give satisfaction in Ireland was that which related to the Vestry Cess.*______ _ . Mr. ROBINSON denied the assumption of the Hon. Member who had seconded the amendment, that the Dissenters in England wanted an appropriation of the church property to purposes called purposes of public uti lay. He knew many Dissenters in this country who considered a church establishment extremely beneficial, and as necessary to the maintenance of the Protestant re ligio n itself. Mr. SINCLAIR had taken the liberty, on a former occasion, when his Hon. Friend presented a petition con taining sentiments similar to those which he had now ex pressed, to state his own conviction, tbat these were not the opinions entertained by the great majority of the people of Scotland. Their deliberate conviction he ap prehended to be this, that a national establishment, or, in other words, a national recognition of our dependence on God, is a national privilege and a national blessing. Many of the dissenters in Scotland, though not conform•, ing to the Presbyterian establishment, would admit the necessity of upholding a national church in every Chris tian country. Roman Catholics, for instance, and episco palians, might be considered as concurring in this view ; and he him-elf bad beard seceding ministers in Scotland, not only acknowledge, in private, the excellence of the established church, but pray in public for its stability, as well as for its' reformation. A public provision for incul cating the doctrines of the Gospel was the more indispen sable, because the willingness of individuals to contribute voluntarily towards the dissemination of religious know ledge is generally in an inverse ratio to their need of it. He could not, on this occasion, help quoting the high authority of Dr. Chalmers. This distinguished man nut only advocates the permanence as well as promotes the welfare of that church which numbers him amongst her most valued and devoted suns, hut has stood forward as the champion of the Anglo-Irish Episcopal Church, which he considers as one of the best bulwarks of the Protestant faith. If the machinery is less useful than it ought to be, the fault lies only with those who have ne glected to employ it in a manner best calculated to pro mote its efficiency. He (Mr. S.) was most anxious for the stability of the established churches, in both countries, and for a salutary reformation of all acknowledged abuses, as the best mean-4 of promoting that object; and without pledging himself to vote for all the details of this measure, his support of its principle would be as decided as his oppo sition to the motion of bis Hon. Friend. 11r. ROEBUCK thought that in a discussion of this sort, which ought properly to he confined to the advan tages or evils of the English church establishment in Ireland, it was hardly fair to mix up the question of the English establishment in this country. Here the majority of the people were in favour of the establishment, and the majority of the people were entitled to have what they wished—there they were opposed to the establishment, and he must say, that, considering that fact, the Noble Lord bad not dune for them what justice and necessity required. The House divided— For the motion For the amendment Majority —Ho On our re-admission we found the House in Committee on the Irish Church Bill. After a few words from Mr. Goulburn, Mr. Shaw, Mr. Estcourt, and Mr. Stanley, the first clause was agreed to. The Chairman (Mr. BERNAL) then put the question on the second clause for the appointment of Ecclesiastical Commissioners. Sir R. INGLIS contended, briefly, that this clause was an infringement of the Act of Union with Ireland as far as regarded the Government discipline of the chinch. No Ecclesiastical Commission as that Row proposed, with such extraordinary powers, had existed excepting in the worst times of our history. He objected, also, most strongly, to the constitution of the Commission. Lord ALTHORP de!'ended the clause, and took this opportunity of stating, that be intended to in•roduce an amendtnent into the seventh clause, by which the corporate seal of the Commissioners could be affixed to no document without the previous consent of one of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners.—( Hear.) Some of the Commissioners were paid in order to secure the transaction of business. Mr. Goulburn, Sir R. Bateson, and Mr. Shaw resisted the clause. Mr. STANLEY supported the clause. It had been asked why the Board of Commissioners was not constituted similarly to the Board of First Fruits. He (Mr. Stanley) did not apFrove of the constitution of that Board. It was composed of Archbishops, Bishops, the Judges, the Attor ney-General, and Solicitor-General, and two honest and discreet persons, and he had little doubt that three•feurths of the business was done by the two honest and discreet persons.—(Hear, hear.) They had, however, partly assimilated the Board of Commissioners to that of the Board of First Fruits, and had improved on the plan, as instead of two they had added three lay commissioners. It had been said that the whole of the Irish Church Reform Bill was intended to throw additional patronage in•o the hands of Government. He (Mr. S.) did not think that the suppression of ten bishoprics argued much desire on the part of Government to add to their patronage. --(Hear.) He thought the clause as it stood would tend more to the security of the Irish Church than any of the plans proposed that evening. After a few words from Mr. SHAW, Mr. WILLIAMS WYNN had no objection to a consi derable part of the Bill, hut he thought that two lay commissioners would be sufficient. Lord ALTHORP had no objection that the majority of the Commissioners should be clerical, and he did not mean to object to the proposition that the Archbishop of Dublin and Dean of St. Patrick should be added to the number of the Commissioners. Colonel PERCEVAL thought that the Bishops ought not to be subject to dismissal from the Board by the word of any functionary, not even the Lord Lieutenant himself. After some words from Mr. WARD and Mr. J. GRATTAN, Lord SANDON suggested that it might be better that the clergy should choose delegates of their own body, who should be chosen by themselves, instead of by the Crown. He was decidedly of opinion that the Ecclesiastical Board at present existing was quite sufficient for every purpose. It was then moved as an amendment by Lord ALTHORP, that after the words " Lord Primate of Ireland," the words "and the Archbishop of Dublin," be inserted. l'-'6 Mr. C. W. WYNN observed, that both the appoint- men's and removals should be made by the King--the head of churek.—ratht r than by the Lord Lieutenant. Sir R. INtiLIS saw no reason why the laity should interfere in the management of ecclesiastic a l f un d s . I t . . was all right and proper that they should bear their share of the burdens—(A laugh)—but beyond that, they bad no right to meddle. The amendment was then agr&ed to. It was then proposed that the word " four" should be inserted. Mr. ESTCOURT strongly supported this proposition. He thought the Commission would be quite imperfect if it were not partly composed of Bishops from the different parts of Ireland. Dr. LUSHINGTON had had considerable experience as a First Fruit Commissioner, and he objected to making any addition in the previously propo.ed number. It there were any particular information required from any parti cular Bishop, it would be always open to the Commission to communicate with him. The clause, as amended was then agreed to. Clause 3 was then agreed to, after some discussion be tween Lord MatinEvit.Lz and Lord ALTHORP, which was carried on with such det ruined inaudibility as to amount to a mere conversation acro , s the table. Clause 4 was then proposed. Air. CHAPAIAN wished to know what the amount of the balances was to be, and what was the meaning of the expression "and other emoluments?" Lord ALTHORP said, that it was the intention to leave the amount of salary to the discretion of the Lord _ . Lieutenant, subject to the ulterior approbation of Parlia ment. He did not exactly understand the meaning of the expression alluded to; but could say, that there should be no other emoluments but the fixed salary. Mr. SHAW thought it very wrong to leave the amount of salary to the opinion of Parliament, for as the cost was to come out of the already too reduced incomes of the Archbishops and Bishops, hardly a Member of the House would trouble himself about what cost might be incurred. Lord ALTHORP made some observations in reply, which were perfectly inaudible in the gallery. The words " or other emoluments" were then expunged from the clause, which, as amended, was then agreed to. Clause 5 agreed to. Clause 6 read, and, with verbal amendments, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 7,8, and 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill. On clause 10 being read, Mr. GOULBURN suggested that it would be better to authorize the Commissioners to report to the King in Council, instead of to the two Houses of Parliament, which would avoid all appearance of interference with the prerogative. Lord ALTHORP said that the report was to be laid before the Lord Lieutenant, who stood in the place of the Crown, and afterwards before Parliament, which, he thought, was the wiser and better course. Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 11, 12, and 13 were successively read, and or dered to stand part of the Bill, after a short conversation, and after several verbal amendments had been agreed to. Clause 14 read. Lord ALTHORP expressed his intention of altering the schedules of the Bill, so that the livings of the poorer clergy should not be taxed. A long conversation then took place, several Mein,: begging the postponement of the c lause, which sfai'Pe agreed to by Lord ALTHORP'S agree in g to Postr) proviso thereof. Oa the n-ading of the 15 th c lause, severs' 7c amendments were proposed, and af ter a protract versation between Mr. Goulburn , loi o Shaw, Lord Althorp, Mr. Esteourt, Mr. Fauber, Wynn, Mr. Stanley, the Solicitor• General, Sir It Colonel Perceval, and Mr. Fergus O'Connell, the with some unimportant alterations, was agreed t. 0 0, Clauses 16, 17, IS, 19, were then, with s° , lll , e , A ' ° , amendments, agreed to, ben it was carried f Y Chai • rman should report progress, and obtain leafe again this day. The House having resumed, The Rating Tenements Bill was read a third The Fines and Recoveries Bill was read a ►air° ..;0 Mr. 11. Gotti.o;,, and passed. The Limitation of Actions Bill was read a ti and passed. Then the Inheritanceti,ird rea d ß bl w ,,,i a n s ig re m B at o L v a eLd. third On , Di lEI Teio Mr. s ß b L e ll eiac l , l ll ß Tt I E O, a , ti d. Ga after ENß a ,E few A l nn b :e t pi r sp t: s o t s ed ion t ti 7 t h e ; 1 1, After a short discussion the gallery was clear e r division, but none t oo k place; and whilst strange ito excluded) we understand that a verba l amencin3e° agreed to. After which Mr. I3LANIIRE withdrew hi' 113 and the Bill was read a third time and passed. CURTESY BILL. of ro T id h ne e rt, C h fe t o u rm t e to s iti y ei o ßill ipi w arte a s s tsh t i if r i e lb a eb d aer a r be t aa n di i t r i d an t zt i ,b m i r e:: (1 0 ; e :: 0 METROPOLITAN POLICE BILL.. , on alin:A l% iul l ,B,r r et. . h rEctrtuSeEl amusements, moved usem e t nh awithi nclause five minserted,lesof ei Pj btiPP divided, L ; :e p n o r t t h e e d r ethe appeared clause._ cock too ifr After some discussion, in which Mr. Jervi%t button, Mr. Wynn, and other Members took a P s 0.1 For the Clause Against it Majority d tigie/ lt The Bill, as amended, was th en read a thinpassed. The other orders of the day was then a greed t ° ' Elouse adjourned at three o'cl,eu. LIST OF TH, OF EIGHTEEN (TELLERS INCLUDE] MOT: To appropriate the Revenues of general utility, after the demi E MINORITY 61/ WHO VOTED FOR Pf . " rION, the Irish church to P D o , ise of the present incto9 L l l3, : a , t i r : r c g e h e n r: A ld Pi . , ll ll 'l E ' W . l lll3As u t---e5 a 1::;:::: r : 1 : col , Finn, iv. F.-1;i1)001,10, Fitzsimon, O'Connor, Fergus rid, Roche, David—L.oe Ronayne, T rt,LEssio t GillOn, W. D.-- 14 Rippon, C.—Gateshe3 ENGLAND. Brocklehurst, J.—Macclesfield Ficlden, John— Oldham Leech, J.—West Surrey Molesworth, Sir William—East Cornwall Parrott, Jasper—Totness Roebuck, J. A.—Bath SCOTLAND. Maxwell, Sir John—Paisley Oswald, R. A.—Ayrshire SPORTING INTELLIGENT] --- TATTERSALL'S. 3 t c 'irO n The Glaucus party were not so sanguine Yest e r j o'cel,4 turday ; if he wee tried in the evening, it w0u,.., t o this that his friends were not very well satisfied w i 'v o rsitf4 nevertheless, he maintained his place. TwattY. ,` 9 to Robert, and Brother to Grampus, were at about till near the close of the room, at which Forester the call. Revenge has no friends ; they say that he c ylt work. Titian, Prince Llewelly n , an d th e Moses e e 30 ,r, out of favour. It is no w ser i ous l y d ou b te d by stit i le C generally well informed, wh e th er h e w ill start. side d sh ° ' found plenty of backers at 13 to 1. Several o ,' l l ; i fver,V backed. The only change in the Oaks was in . A 6to . ll s e yeller filly; she was backed to some amount at San d 11 1 % . " n ninio nu Al no public recommendations whatever. Her ru s e has been very bad. The room was crowded to exc.` h ness did not terminate till past six o'clock, at Yil uc odds averaged as under : DERBY (THURSDAY NEXT). 7 to 2 agst Mr. Ridsdale's Glaucus 8 to I agst Mr. Hunter's Forester 9 11 t t o ci a a g g s s t t i b ,o lr id G E r x ev e i t l e l r e :s s sßirr.RtoobtelrratalpUS (t3l°) 9 to 1 agst Mr. Cooper's fwattv colt tii ict4 10 to I agst Lord Verulam's Little Cassino lb to 1 agst Mr. Rawlinson's Revenge 28 to 1 agst Mr. Wood's Titian IS to agst t IN Clorl..(:,ehlifcnoseyb,s Bravo 's y PrinceLlewelly o 25 to asoc,) 21) tow agst agst Lo Duke Exeter's eoßutl Cactus 933 25 (MO" 33 to 1 agst Lord Jersey's Lucius take n) ' 33 to 1 agst Mr. Chifhey's Shoveller filly ( 33 to I agst Mr. Sadler's oangerous n) of ol 40 to 1 agst Mr. Sowerby's C a t a l on i a n (take n) 50 to 1 agst Mr. Payne's Whiteboy's dam colt 60 to 1 agst Mr. Houldsworth's Despot 1000 to 10 agst Lord Jersey's Glenmore (taken) 2000 to 20 agst Mr. J. Scott' s C onno i sseur (ta k e n) OAKS (FRIDAY NEXT.) 7 to 2 agst Mr. Cooke's Tarantella 6 to 1 agst Mr. Chifiley's Shoveller filly (taken ) 9 to 1 agst Mr. Batson's Revelry 12 to i agst Sir. Barrow's Alecto filly (taken) 12 to I agst Mr. Stonehewer's Chantilly EPSOM RACES MAr 21. The er EPSOM, MONDAY NIGHT, SEVEN O'CLOCK' tries have just clo se d as f o ll ows : — °e rter' Ai , TUESDAY.—The Craven St a kes, mile and r Malibran, by Mul e y, 3 y re . ; c . by Wra ° :• e ' ' s e'" ; Whiteboy's darn, 3 yrs. ; Hawker, b. g• c I.l ' • 3 yrs. ; Fop, 3 yrs. ; Damascus, 4 yrs. ; Flora' e der Vestris, 5 yrs. ; Th e b an , age d ; flunnym Ambrosio, 4 yrs. ; Copper Captain 4 yrs. t. glbfr Oatlands (Accept ances ).—Th e Witch, ''f'ove rrier, 7st. 131 b. ; Santillane, 7st. 131 5 .; to 6st. 31b. b r a ,o; Epsom Stakes.—f. Lady Ernf., Y rs ' Els e 3 Z K a aY r t i re n : . a 3 ;, 5 1S. y r i e. s t . ;c ; liTb b oi r ro . (ki ' ll I l4. e r r 'Y r : i ; r s n * it h; n r yrs. babdy' ; Csl3aYin':l3'lllll:: '11? ; the Hermit, 4 yrs.; Chatham Lass, 6 yrs. ; WEDNESDAY.—EweII . Stakes—Stately, 4 ' i n e od c '' ' quin, 4 yrs. ; Lucy, 4 yrs. ; Carwell, 5 yrs. ; 5 yrs. ; Alic e , 3 yrs . E s o irl: ' Croydon Stak e s —Walt e r, 5 yr e . ; L a dy - 1-0 i 5 littinins, 4 yrs. ; brother to Stately, 3 yrs' ; sre yrs. ; Pagoda, 3 yrs. ; Zarina, 5 yrs. ; r 1• yrs. ;f. Harpham Lass, 3 yrs. ; Morro, b THURSDAY.—SWeepStdkeS of 5 MS. each, 84 ;0 1 Pagoda, Friar Tuck, Lady Charlotte, Stays Ter and Fidelity. Is. ;a Or' Hopeless Stakes—Kittuws ; Palmyra., S penance, 3 yrs. ; Ali ce , C ame l f., D rya d, 110 01 ' °}" hopper, Sinb a d, an d P ago d a . brother fti to Error, bAY.-Th Der, Members' Lady ers C ' Pl halott, at r e—B e " P t; e iel ' lre ; i'P s l.l‘l# .°lll e . Schoolboy, The Fancy, brother to Merl:l o° ' Blinker, and Mermaid colt. c olf , n 'efr LIST OF THE HORSES AT EP`' -' gqir t :tei Balling, Titian, Lucius, Gienwore, Octave , - 7107 .. „, - Alice, Sister to Gayhurst, Twatty colt, Alalihrs°',l, boy's darn c, Tarantella, Weeper, D rce, Fanny G e t il f o to Grampn., Deceptio n , P rince Ll ewe llyn, D l ,' W bra;ch Fidelity, Ch intilly, Mi n i s t er ' s d am c , CO; i e Kate, Catalonian, Little Cassino, Sir R" ller 7robP Anima, Mantille, Glaucus, Connoisseur, Uncle I, o j e te l ; " villian, Swiss's darn b g, Revenge, Fop, F iv un iza n xb y r : : : : : : ° ? , b ,: (o lo , bro. to Merman, Diversity, Bravo, bro. to 10° 7 4 tt i ',lo bro. to Error, sis. to Frederick, bro. to filly, Falernia, Blue Eyes, Hannah, Forester' sr e O o s I b o a l b d ov a e nd ar t e ip in wa t r li d e , D :_ erbi lu o b r in O L A G s. o; T ol h ie e r, follow i " g . derer, Bye intium, Lucy, Longwaist, Young 114 ,, t tlittj g lie, Pagoda, Sanaareand, Luna c, Paraiiiga l si o fr Echo, Lady Fly, Hokee Pokee, Suffolk Pula c "'Ese Toe Witch, Copper Captain, Merrier, Santillans% Lady Charl o tte, Carwell, Sketchbook, Shar°e,. ' l o j oT* one, The Hermit, b r . t o F orester , C. by So t ' h e ' Trump, Bohemia n , L aureo l a f, D r over, Tb ews Hawker, Vagrant, Boit°, Ida, &c. &c. f 1 0 n - he. - The Derby and Oaks Chall e nge Stakes ° for t each, h fr.—The following are the acceptan ces ; g Handicaps : Afeet." -. oe MONDAY.—A. F. (Newmarket Houghton 5 0 5 ; Duke of ,0 0 af f CG C lr l aa e nf v t e toi l ni a ly, n : d E ' 7 B:l ; Muley 11 7A l ls o tr l . oc 2c1 h br ,...5 b a y t , : l n b r ; 0 3 0:0 1 1 4 : ci l to:c,1 SECOND CLASS OF DITTO.— Newmarket Se her. )-50 80VS• each, Is ft.—Duke of Pos.:130,0o colt, 84 t llb; Sir M. Wood's Contriver, 84 ' a‘ ,. ; Grafton's Octave, 7st 10Ib. pst t/ Ascox OATLANDs WEIGHTS.--Lueettaa__ goi t , Galata, 9at 4lb ; Bryan, 9st; Protocol, fist , l lo ° .l ' , E lse' andL Rotterdamijztro,nfrie: 7st t3l Dibat each ur ; a , S a et nd S 2iti;pßbOna,n7tst 41; / vi,poP‘_, HEALTH OF THE EARL OF f r ow O J We have b ee n favoured with the following extcae, e letter, received yesterday morn in g b y an bo,„or.a o fr 01 6 of the venerable Earl, in re p l y to a note of )°(l,!ropPl' his Lordship's health. It may serve to allay hensions of the friends and admirers of the occas i one d by the paragraph which we copied into o ur el' - jour lal have fromsuaff London paper st suffered much indisposition in the u s ual o, months, aggravated by gout, which has not had its u s ,:ir 0 0 : tary effects. Eighty-two years h ave likewise had s , i t effect. Such a number of years is far beyond that 2 , f te d s ate; we are told, upon good authority, ' all is but labour an II reP r i g Upon the whole, however, I am much b etter than reF°,,awcal ben ts me, save that my voice is much weakened.--. Journal. tich Rot ;: e ; ?:). An n / . 1 " 4, 8 to h ei i hknd !exe Iti tii " 4 ' inquc 4et of jt, t he fir . ,esses, Is( Jury tat