The Sun. — London, England, 1833-05-04 00:00:00

duce of land, and of all produce of mines, when the sales are made on the lands or at the mines, are wholly ex empted, as well as all the produce of quarries, or of imple ments used in quarries, mines, or farms ; and that thus, while every product of the hand of man has to bear this tax in almost a double degree, compared with linds and tenements themselves, the produce of the land bears rat' part of this tax, which is thus shifted from the shoulders of the great and the rich, and made to fall almost exclu sively on the middle and working classes of society. These resolutions, be contended, established a complete case of injustice committed by the rich man upon the poor man ; and in no one instance did ever the semblance of impartiality appear but in that of apprenticeships. The Nobility and Gentry never put their children out to trades, and hence it was they had been so just. Having thus, as he thought, shown the inequality of taxation, and how much more it pressed upon the poor than ulnae the rich, he hoped the House would agree with him in thinking such a system ought not to continue. The Hon. Member then moved— " That this House will, with as little delay as possible. make such an alteration in the several Acts, imposing duties on stamps and on sales at auction, as shall cause the Peers, Nobles, Baronet.), and other great landowners, to pay, in proportion to the amount of their property (subject to those duties), as great an amount in slime duties as is paid by the fundholdere, annuitants, trades men, manufecturere, farmers, mechanics, and the rest of the industrious then.' of the kingdom ; and as shall cause, in all cases, the rich to pay the said duties in the same proportion as the poor." That was the motion which it was his intention to propose. to the House. He was not indifferent as to its success He sincerely wished that it might be agreed to, for the sake of the House and for the country. If he held the opinions which some Hon. Gentlemen attributed to him, he should be gratified by the rejection of this just prop sition, because be was convinced the result of that rejection would be most disastrous. What had been tl.e cause of the French revolution ? That the aristocracy would not listen to the representations made to them. The higher orders in France had been destroyed by tie unequal taxation, rather than by the weight of taxation which had prevailed in that country. Arthur Young, who had vi sited France in 1787 (and those were greatly in error who fancied that the revolution in that country did not commence long before it appeared to com mence ; for it begun by the oppression of the people), stated the evils which existed in that country and put f rward as the foremost of those evils, partial taxation. The rich were invariably favoured at the expense of the poor ; on whom a double or treble amount of taxation was imposed. Goaded by their sufferings, and by the perpetual comparison of their situa tien with that of their rich and aristocratic neighbours, the people at length determined no longer to endure such tyranny and oppression ; and that cause alone produced all the evils as hich ensued. Now he hoped, after what he had said, the House would be ready to do justice—a tardy justice—a justice, he must say, too long delayed— to the poor people of this country. He would not refer to old grievances. lie, for elle, was willing they should be forgotten—for ever buried in oblivion. lie wished no ripping up—he asked only for justice for the future. He had done his duty in bringing the matter before the House; and whatever their decision might be, he was willing that the country should decide between them. The Hon. Member concluded, by moving the first of his reeolutions. Mr. S. RICE said if the simple question before the House was whether the Stamp Acts required amendment or not, he did not b.l eve there could be found any man in the country of a contrary opinion. And though he would not quarrel with the well known vigorous impatience— not to say indiscretion—of the Hon. Member, he must still express his opinion, that when notice had been given of the intention tif his Noble Friend, Lord Althorp, to ameliorate these laws, the more proper course would have been for the Hon. Mover of the resolutions to await the Ministerial proposition, and then to have addressed himself closely and fairly to it.—(Hear.) He held in his hand a book—not a volume of the Journals of that House, nor a work, which, being of great research and value, was hard to get at—but it was a work published by one Mr. Dunn, called the Law and Daily Commercial Advertiser, where, he could assure Hon. Members, they could find the whole matter of the Hon. Member with much less ex pense of time and trouble—(Laughter)—than lad that evening been exacted from them. All that the Hon. Member uttered came from Dunn—he made Dunn his own—Dunn and he were identical.—(Loud laughter.) From the publication of this book by Dunn, he supposed was to be dated that new era which the Hon. Member had foretold should commence when be was in vested with legislatorial power—improvements were to be made in every quarter on the advent of this new Shiloh— this political Saviour. For his part, he thought the bet ter way would have been that Dunn—(Laughter)—he read by the Clerk of the House, and entered on the Jour nals.—(Laughter.) He dare not, of course, impute mo tives to the Hon. Member, as that would be unparlia mentary, but very luckily he could go close into the enemy's quarters in another way—he could drive at the double— for it would not be unparliamentary to treat Dunn— (Laughter)—as Dunn deserved to be treated.—(Cheers.) Dunn was not protected by privilege, and he therefore hesi tated not to say, that that book, which so strangely agreed with all the Hon. Member had uttered, was filled with the grossest calumnies, and the most unjustifiable and daring exaggerations.—(Cheers.) But he would go to the facts. The Hon. Member's great effort in his speech was to chow ' that in there Acts the rich had been especially careful to protect themselves at the expense of the poor—in fact, to throw the entire burden on that class of society. The lion. Member had forgot to state—and why did he forget to state ?—that the first schedule of the Act contained a special exemption in favour of the poor.—(Cheers.) Cer tainly, it might be a question whether the indulgence should not have been carried further ; but it was not even mentioned by the Hon. Member, amidst his vituperation of the tyrant rich.—(ileer. ) He contented himself with a general assertion, that the schedules got heavier and heavier as the people became poorer and poorer.—(Hear.) Why, as to real property not being subject to legscy duty, let it he remembered, that money might be transferred in millions without any tax whatever; but land, in every change, was made to contribute to the revenue, and that heavily, by imposes on conveyances, mortgages, tee.— (Hear.) Then as to probates. In all scales of taxation, there must be a point which it reaches where there can be no taxation. Whereever there was a fixed scale, there Was an opening for arguments such as those used by the Hon. Member. Instead of taking the mean, he (Mr. Cob bett) very unfairly took the extreme ; anti so was produced the most complete piece of jumbling that ever came before the House.—(Hear, hear.) His (Mr. Rice's) plan was to take the mean—to go by averages---( Hear, hear)—and he would leave the House to decide which was the fairest. The Hon. Member asserted, that the probate duties pressed exclusively on the poor ; whilst, at the same time, he must know that probates under 201. were exempt from any duty whatever.—(Loud cheers.) And why did he conceal this fact ? Why, that it might go forth to the public that the rich were unfeeling—regardless of the duty they owed to those beneath them—that, with " malice prepense," they shifted the national burdens from their own shoulders to those less able to bear them—that they were, in fact, tyrants.—(Loud cheers.) Let that one fact be a running commentary on the mischievous powers of one who might have turned his great gifts to nobler and better purposes than that of exciting the bad passions of the poor against the rich.—(Cheers.) But to the facts. From 20 to 100 the mean was 60, and the duty on that was 10s. or 163. Bd. per cent. From 100 to 200 the mean was 150, and the duty, unfortunately for poor Dunn laugh)—was IL 4s. The mean of 250 paid a duty of 21. per cent. in lieu of this 16s. Bd. ; the mean 375 of 21. 2s. Bd., in lieu of Dunn's 16s. Sd. ; and of 900 of 2/. tis.loil. and a fraction in lieu of aforesaid Dunn.—(Cheers. ) Here he admitted that he came to that portion of the Stamp Acts, in which were anomalies, which, as he had before stated, no one would wish otherwise than to see corrected. lie could go through the scale of the pro bate duty in the same manner, not for the purpose of proving that the scale was invariably right, but for that of allowing that the Honourable Gentleman was invariably wrong.—(Hear.) There was no one point on which the Hon. Member had rested his case that was not capabl e of being overthrown when it came to be fairly considered. I t mus t b e a d m itt e d that the probate duty wasr oppressive iu particular instances, but it certainly did not deserve the charges which the lion. Member hod brought against it. He did nopretend to defend every part of that d u t y , b ut merely te ‘ i show, in answer to the Hon. Member, that th e scale did not get higher as the p e ople on whom it op erate d were icherp.°° rteire, now no lowercame as ) t h o se whom it affected were r the case of conveyances. The Hon. Member made the same statement with regard to this duty as with regard to the rest; he said that the amount of duty diminished as the value of the property on which it attached increased. The scale of the duty on conveyances was to be dealt with in the same manner as that of the probate. duty. He would willingly give up to the Hon. Member a part of these duties—namely, those which attached upon con veyances from 10/. to 351., or even to 100/. lie did not intend to defend them; but though there were Cases of conveyances among the poorer classes where the convey ance was for a sum within 1001., on which le e was not prepared to defend the duty, still he must say that the lion. Member was not warranted in comparing the levy ing of that duty to proceedings under the Inquisition, nor in describing it as likely to break the confidence of the country, on account of the unjust height to which it had bee❑ carried. Now, how stood this duty? Why, thus : at 2251. the duty was 17s. 9d ; at 400/. he admitted that it was diminished to 15e. ; but at 6251. it was 19s• 2d.; and 1,0751. it was 1/. 6s. 7d. So that on this point, in • place of the duty increasing in pressure according to the lowness of the sum, it really increased in amount ac cording to the increased value of the c onsideration. He now came to the duty on leases—a duty which the Hon. Ml•mber said pressed exclusively on the poor. Did the Honourable Alemb.:r not know that the great mass of the property held by the lower classes of the people was held not upon lease, but at will? Did he believe that the great bulk of the cottages of the peasantry were held on lease? (Mr. Cobbett was understood to admit that they were not held on lease.) Then that was all he wanted, for it formed a sufficient answer to the lion. Mernl;r's own stat , 2rnent as to the unjust pressure on the lower orders of the people.—( Hear, hear.) But ad mitting that some part of the duties which the Hon. Member bad attacked could not be defended, still the Hon. Member might have seen, had he thougLt fit to look into the votes and proceedings of that House, that the inequa lity of which he complained was about to be remedied; for that there were resolutions of that House declaring this irequality, and which had been passed for the pur pose of aff,rding relief. Then he came to the question of mortgages. The first observation that arose on this point •vas that mortgages were not common among the poorer classes of society. But among those mortgages which did occur among the poorer classes there were many that paid no duty at all. He alluded to the mortgages upon public houses, effected by the party merely depositing his title deeds with the brewer or other creditor.—(Mr. Cobbeq said something across the table.) The Hon. Gentleman said that he had never heard of such a thing in the course. of his life.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear," and laughter.) The Hon. Gentleman had forgotten many things in the ardour with which he read the lucubration , of Mr. Dunn on this subject. But though the publicans offered the most numerous instances of this sort of mortgage, it was certainly practised in other cases, and the deposit of the title deeds formed what was called an equitable mortgage, sufficient in many cases to satisfy the creditor. Mortgages to the amount of 251. were not very common, and yet they were those of the duty on which the Hon. Member most complained. The fact was, that in these matters it was the lawyer, the black and cruel-souled law yer, as the Edon. Member would perhaps call hitn—( A laugh)—and not the stamp collector, who checked the fre quency of mortgages. It was not the amount of the stamp duties that affected them. If that was the else, then all the sympathy of the Hon. Member was wasted.—(Mr. Cobbett said, that however the law might be evaded, such was the law on the statute-book.) He knew it was—he knew that the law was thete—he knew it was in the act, hut was it in the deed ?—(llear, hear.) Why the Hon. Member might as well say, that because the writ he herdic() comhurer do existed in the statute-book, that, 'therefore, he was to call upon the 'lousy, in their horror of cruelties of such a sort, to say that men were burnt in the course of the last century.—(Hear, hear, hear.) If all the sympathy the Hon. Member professed to feel, and all he attempted to excite in the House referred to non-exist, nt mortgages alone, it was surely quite wasted, and then all he had addressed to the people of England on the subject was misplaced. Indeed it must he taken as a proof that the Hon. Member thought he had a bad case, fur if he had a good cas a he would not have committed the error of attempting to bolster it tip with such misera• ble anti such unwarranted complaints.—(Hear.) He should now refer to the subject of annuities. He wished lie was a lawyer, notwithstanding the heavy denunciations of the Hon. Member against that body, for then he should be able most completely to show how much the Hon. Member was in error on this point. The Hon. Member had referred to voluntary annuities—to those granted on a money consideration, and to those granted especially out of a freehold estate. The latter class surely could not be said to be contained in the division of duties that chiefly affected the poor. The Hon. Member had represented that on annuities granted for a money consideration, but a small amount of duty was payab'e ; but the Hon. Mem ber had not said at the same time, that when an annuity was granted for a money consideration, the duty on con veyances also attached. The Hon. Member had either intentionally omitted that part of the case or be was ig norant of it. In either case, his observations on the effect of the duty were unwarranted, and the House had a right to complain if a Member who professed to call for their judgment on facts, either suppressed some of those facts, or had omitted to make himself acquainted with them.— (Hear, hear, hear.) The Hon. Member then alluded to the subject of promissory notes and bills of exchange, and said, with regard to that, as with regard to other parts of the question, that the duty became lower as the amount of the subject of it became greater. Did not the Hon. Member know that even at this time there were but very few bills of exchange or promissory notes to a large amount, and that even with these few, if the amount of duty was increased, it would he at once most readily evaded by cutting up one large bill of exchange into several small onts.—(Hear, bear.) On this subject, as well as on that of the receipts, the lion. Member had fallen into a most glorious absurdity, a most evident fal lacy. He conceived that because a person was rich, he, therefore, dealt itt nothing but large bills of exchange and promissory notes.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Yet nothing could be a greater mistake. It was like the argument that had been advanced a few nights since, that because this was a rich country, therefore it ought to have a rich standard ; or like the still more humourous atoertion, that " who slays fat oxen should himself be fat"—(A laugh)—who is rich himself, should give no notes or bills of exchange but for large sums. Why the Hon. Member seemed to forget that it was the multiplication of transactions, rather than the consolidation of them, that both created and accompa nied riches.—( Hear, Lear.) The same argument was ap plicable on the subject of receipt starnps. But then, said the Hon. Member, the poor tradesman pays the receipt stamp. Indeed; did not the Hon. Member know, that whatever might be the amount of the stamp, it formed but a part of the price of the commodity, and that it was the consumer of that commodity, and not the seller of it, who paid the receipt stamp duty ? Instead, therefore, of the whole duty falling upon one man, it was most extensively distributed, and its weight, therefore, scarcely telt.—(Hear.) Then he came to the subject of the duty on life insurance. Why, instead of this duty being diminished in proportion to the value of the insurance, the fact was, that if a man made two insurances of 5,0001., he would have less duty to pay than on one insurance for 10,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Then, again, with regard to appraisetnents, on which the Hon. Member bad said that the middle classes paid two hundred and fifty times as much as the rich. That statement was one calculated to produce a most powerful effect upon the people at large, but it was not justified by the fact. The Hon. Member compared the appraisement of the estates of the rich with the sale of the property of the poor ; but that was most unfair. When a man appraised an estate, be did so not mere!y to get some knowledge of its value, but with a view to dispose of it.—(Hear, hear.) If so, then, the duty on appraisement was not the only duty he had to pay, fur then came the duty on conveyances, which had been al ready noticed, and which amounted to 9501. on 10,0001. —(The Right Hon. Member was corrected in this state ment, whith should have been 951., and not 9501. • The mistake excited much merriment in the House.) The result was, that instead of the poor paying two hundred and fifty times as touch as the rich—the rich paid eight times as much as the poor.—(Hear, hear, hear ) If he wished to resolve all the Hon. Member's statements by one test, lie could hardly do better than apply this to them ; but he should not do so ; he should still follow the course of the Hon. Member's observations, and show fur ther errors by which they were distinguished. The next point was the premium on apprenticeships._. (Hear.) On that point the Hon. Member observed, that here was one case in which an ad valorem duty was adopted. But surgit amari aliquid ; the Hun. Member remarked at the same time, that this ad valorem was only established because in this particular case the rich had no interest in being unjust. The Hon. Member did not search for the plums in the pudding, but greedily seized hold of the bitters, and exhibited them as specimens of the whole composition. But even in this he was wrong ; for though the rich might not have much to do with ap prenticeships, they paid stamp duties on something else. Something analogous to stamp duties on apprenticeships might be found in the duties paid upon grants of titles of honour; but of these duties the Hon. Member seemed to be quite ignorant; yet they were not inconsiderable. A Baronet paid on the grant of his title 100/., a Baron 1501 , a Viscount 2001., an Earl 2501., a Marquis 300/., and a Duke 3501. The Hon. Gentleman, though he said he loved to deal with the rich, did not state any thing of this. —(Hear.) But then the Hon. Member said that be loved too to deal with the clergy. But in dealing with them, he did not refer to the duties paid on presentations to liv ings, on sales of advowsons, and on other things of the same nature.—(Hear, hear.) Now, after having dis posed of these matters, he came to the subject of the auction duty. Ile should endeavour to follow huud pussibus equis the Hon. Member in this manner through all the topics of his speech. On this point the Hon. Gentleman had been most vehement, and seemed to imagine that by reference to the auction duty he could trace the iniquity of the whole system. The general rate of the auction duty was Is. in the pound. Then there was another rate of 7d. in the pound, and this lower rate the lion. ' L'lfember alleged was all in favour of the rich, and that under this lower duty were introduced all those things which affected the state of the luxury of the rich ; and ►hat under the higher duty were alone comprised those things that ministered to the necessary comfort of the poor. Now did this stand in fact? Under the high duty was included, in the first instance, furniture—in that respect both classes were equal. Then fixtures, with re spect to which the same observation might be made—then came pictures.—( Hear, hear.) Who, he should like to know, were most interested in this article, the rich or the poor? Then books.---(Hear)—then carriages and horses—(Hear, bear)—or other goods and chattels ; then came shares in public companies and reversions in the funds, none of which could fairly be said to affect exclu sively the lower classes. But the Hon. Gentleman sail that plate and jewels were under the lower duty, and that this was done in favour of the gentry. Now with re spect to this matter it was evident either that the Hon. MenTher did not understand the subject, or that he did not state the whole of it. If he did know the whole, why did he not state it? If he did notknow it, he ought not to have brought the subject forward till he was master of its details.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Did not the Hon. Gentleman know that plate had paid a pre vious stamp duty, in consequence of which this lower auction duty was afterwards imposed ? Gold plate was rated at 17s. an ounce, stamping duty.—(Hear, hear.) He put one against the other, therefore, and boldly asserted that the Hon. Member's statement was not borne out by the fact.—(Hear.) V in like manner, silver plate paid a stamping duty of Is. 6(1. an ounce—which, considering all other things, was an enormously heavy duty. Then, again, with regard to jewels, they paid a duty at the customs, of 20 per cent. on set jewels, and of 10 per cent. upon jewels that were not set, with an exemption for diamonds, which he did not clearly understand. However, it was manifest with regard to jewels, that, as they were indestructible, if they were transferred twenty times, and paid on each transfer 5 per cent., they would, at the end of the time, have paid their whole ♦alue to the Government. From these subjects he came to that of timber and wool. Now, as the wool was the pro perty of the farmer, to him must fall all the advant ige which arose from the abatement made in the tax, when the wool was disposed of in a particular manner.— (Hear, hear.) He thanked the House for the attention with which they had heard him. His object Win not to go through all the detaik, but to give a strong denial to the statement of the Hon. Member, that it had been the policy of this House, and of the nobility and gentry, to oppress the people, and to favour themselves in all their financial regulations.—(Hear, hear, hear.) That was the only thin.e that could have induced him to trespass so long on their time. The Hon. Member had endeavoured, by an innendo at the end of his speech, to compare the system of taxation in this country with that of France before the revolution, and had spoken of griev ances which, unredressed, had led in that country to re volution. But if there were two things which more than any other could be contrasted with each other, they were the opposite principles of taxation adopted in this country and in France before the revolution.—(Hear, bear.) Were the people of England to be deluded into the notion that there was any personal exemption from taxation here ?--(Hear, hear.) He trusted that they were not so easily misled as to believe it. But in France it had been so ; witness the carvces and the gabelle, and the other taxes to which the French people were subjected, and from which the French nobility and the clergy were ex empted.—(Hear, hear.) If there were any exemptions from taxation i❑ this country they were in favour of the poor, while in France, before the revolution, they were i❑ every instance in favour of the rich. This he would ven ture to say that the liberties of Englishmen had never been more boldly asserted, or more vigorously maintained, than by the hereditary nobility; and those who would deprive them of that just tribute, neither dealt fairly by the in dividuals, nor justly by the institutions of the country. Mr. HUME thought that the difference between the chal;enger and the acceptor of the challenge upon this subject was principally in words, and that they approxi mated more nearly than perhaps either of them supposed—. in language, indeed, there was a wide discordance. As to the eulogy just pronounced on the Peerage, if it were cheered within their walls, it would not be cheered out of them. He (Mr. Hume) agreed with what had been ad vanced by the Hon. Member for Oldham, and what the Right lion. Member for Cambridge bad advanced suffi ciently bore out his antagonist in his assertions. The meaning of the Hon. Member for Oldham was this—that in the legislation of this country a disposition had been ' shown to load the poor, and to relieve the rich ; and that case had been completely established. In fact, it bad been admitted by the Right Hon. Secretary to the Treasury, when he stated that there were actually bills in progress, the object of which was to remedy the evil. In many respects the fallacies of the Right Hon. Gentleman were so gross that they could not have imposed even on him self. The inequality of taxation was obvious when it was merely known that a man with 300/. in personal property paid a heavy duty, while the man with 3001. in land paid nothing towards the exigencies of the State. Leasehold property was also heavily burdened, and whe❑ the Right lion. Gentleman talked so triumphantly of the exemption of bequests under 201., he ought to have recollected, and stated that the reason for the exemption was, that the whole sum would otherwise be absorbed by the cursed course through which it had to pass. It remained, and was for some time likely to remain a stain upon the landed proprietors and nobility of the country, that they had heavily taxed personal property, while they left their own untouched. It was a fret which ought never to be for gotten, that on one occasion, when Mr. Pitt brought in two Bills, one to tax personal property, and the other to tax landed property, the first was passed, and the last re jec•ted. It was imposssible to call the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman an answer to that of the Hon. Member for Oldham, since the arguments had nut been fairly met, but treated with a degree of ribaldry and levity unworthy of a subject in which the people were so deeply interested. On the window tax, the Hon. Gentleman had only endea• voured to delude the House without giving it a particle of correct information. Then as to the duty on property bequeathed, in proportion as the amount was large the duty was small, so that the rich paid little or nothing,— On 1,0001. the probate duty was 3 per cent. 5,0001 per sent. 50,0001 3os. per cent. While 100,0001. and all sums above it paid nothing, s o that the more a man was able to pay, the less he was re quired to pay. The same observation would apply to letters of administraiion. 1,000/. paid 45/. or 4} per cent. 5,0001. 1501. or 3 per cent. 50,000/. 1,1'254 or lit per cent. _ _ And the other tables equally supported the position of the Hon. Member for Oldham. True it was that the large sums did not occur so often, but that made no difference in the justice of the case. He (Mr. Hume) maintained that all the exemptions of the nobility in France did not amount annually to half so much as the exemptions of the Nobility in England, taking into account the monopoly i❑ corn and the legacy duty.—(Hear.) The inequality could not be disputed, and it was the duty of Parliament to remedy the evil, instead of continuing it. Just ground for complaint existed; and as he was satisfied that the sub stance of the motion of the Hon. Member for Oldham was borne out by the facts, he should vote for it. Mr. M. ATTWOOD contended that the Right Hon. Secretary to the Treasury bad given so complete an an swer to the Hon. Member for Oldham, that even he must be satisfied that he had no ground left for his motion. Nevertheless, the Hon. Member for Middlesex had not scrupled to re-assert the charge in a stronger—if not in a coarser--manner. He (Mr. Attwood) regretted that the discussion had been so long delayed ; e'ght weeks bad elapsed since the accusation was first made ; it had s i nc e spread far and wide, and had excited among the people a deadly feeling of distrust of the House, and of hatred of the Nubility. There was no doubt that the mind of the Hon. Member for Oldham was biassed upon this subject, and he hail certainly shown himself as igno rant as the very lowest of those whom he pretended to instruct. On the subject of hills of exchange, and the comparative amount of duty paid by the rich and by the poor, he was entirely mistaken, and showed either a want of candour or a deficiency of reason. Had the duty on bills of exchange been fixed upon a different scale, the effect would have been to injure instead of increasing the revenue, without benefitting the poor, since none but small bills would have been drawn. He (Mr. Attwood) contended that land did not carry with it the caeans O f paying the high duty which was obtained from personal property. ro trust to the transfers of landed property would be a most inconvenient as well as uncertai❑ way of supplying the Exchequer, and it ought not to he forgotten that land was subjected to a great variety of burdens from which personal property was exempt. In conclusion, however, he felt bound to say, that though differing so widely from the Hon. Member far Oldham, the Noble Lord opposite had by no means given him a satisfactory answer. Lord ALTHORP said that, after the speech of his Right Hon. Friend near him, it would be superfluous in him to trouble the House at any length. He (Lord Altborp) had been accused of not having, on a former occasion, given a sufficient answer to the lion. Member for Oldham. lie admitted that at the time rerared to he had not given that Hon. Gentleman a sufficient answer, and, amongst other reasons, he was unable to do so, from the vagueness of the terms in which the lion. Member's motion was couched, and from the nature of the speech with which he introduced it. He tilked of showing that the poor paid towards the taxes forty times as much as the rich, and dealt in other statements equally unfounded in truth. To such statements he confessed he was not prepared to give an answer ; and he coofessed his having omitted to do so occasioned him very little regret, when he remembered thit his Right Hon. Friend had done so with so much effect. The Hon. Gentleman had accused him o` to run down his predecessors ; really he thought the House would hear him out in saying that that was a most unfounded charge.—(llear, hear.) It had never been his pratiee to underrate tl:c efforts of those who had gone before him, and he trusted that the House wou'd acquit him of any disposition, or petty feeling of rivalry.—(Hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL contended that the probate duty did fall with extreme severity up at the poorer and middling classes, and when the Hon. Member for Whitehaven ae ou,ed others of i:•noranee, he should have taken care to inform himself of the difference between lezacy and pro- bate duty. Mr. WARRE denied that the operation of the tax now under consideration bore any resemblance to the ex- emptions enjoyed by the French NoPesse under the old regime, as had been alleged by the lion. Member for Mid dlesex. Between the two there did no exist the slightest analogy. The lion. Gentleman opposite urged upon his Majesty's Ministers the duty of retrenchment and econo my, forgetting the difficulty which now attached to eco nomy, for Ministers, placed as they were, coming in nearly at the conclusion of a period, when economy was or ought to have been for years the prevailing principle. Mr. LENNARD said that he should have supported the motion of the Hon. Member for Oldham had he not heard the Right Hon. Gentleman near him admit the force of his arguments, and declare that they were pre par. d to make reductions. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the original motion For Mr. Cobhett's resolutions. :26 Majority On re-entering the gallery, we found Lord ALTHORP replying to a question of Mr. M. Attwood's (the latter Hon. Gentleman having, as we understood, asked the Noble Lord whether ka was pre pared to give the names of the Hon. Members whom he intended to be on his proposed Committees of Inquiry on the State of Trade and Agriculture); the Noble Lord said, that he was not prepared to give the names ; but that the Committees, as far as it was possible, should consist of persons entertaining different opinions, so as that the feeling of the House should be properly represented. Mr. M. ATTWOOD thought that it would he ex tremely satisfactory to the House, if the names were stated before they went into a debate on the motion. Lord ALTHORP begged to state, that the shipping interest would he included in the inquiry about trade. Mr. BARING did not know what the Noble Lord meant by having all sorts of gentlemen on his proposed Committee ; it looked, however, something like throwing a tub to the whale. If the Noble Lord's motion was carried, the effect would be a great, unmanageable Com mittee ; and if the Noble Lord's intention was to waste away the session, he was taking the best course, in bring ing forward his present absurd proposition. He thought that the motion should not be brought forward at the late hour of the night it was likely to be brought forward, and asked the Noble Lord whether he would not postpone his motion until Monday next ? Lord ALTHORP said, that from the state of the order book, he could not have given a longer notice of his mo tion, and objected to postponing it. Mr. F. YOUNG said that he still reserved himself as to his notice of motion on the state of the shipping trade. The conversation here dropped; it being understood that Lord Althorp's motion was to take its course, and come on after the army estimates. The SPEAKER the❑ left the chair, and the House went into a Committee of supply. ARMY ESTIMATES. Mr. ELLICE shortly recapitulated the statements tha had been lately made by his Right Hon. predecessor. The increase in the land forces was caused by the state of Ire land and of the West India colonies, since is the former country it was thought absolutely necessary to increase the forces to the amount of upwards of 3,000 men. and also it was considered necessary to make the same increase of force in the colonies mentioned. The increase altogether was between six and seven thousand men. He regretted that circumstances, over which the Government had no control, required this increase. He begged to: mention that the reduction made in the forces of England was 4,000 men, and he hoped that when the Honourable Member far Middlesex proposed further reductiona,he would he specific as to the way they might be effected. Some re trenchments had been made by his predecessors, and he assured the Committee that others were in pro gress, and that all the reductions that would be found practicable, compatible with the public service, would be effected. He should also take care that ample information on details should be given to the House, so that it might he able to judge of the improvements contemplated. Many complaints had been made against the higher branches of the service, hut he thought these complaints were invi dious, and that they referred rather to the exceptio❑ than to the rule. The Government was prepared to make every siring that could be made, and the, emoluments and re wards of General Officers would be referred to a Com mittee up stairs. However this was not to be done through any neglect or disrespect towards those officers, for he considered their claims would be better considered in that Committee than by the whole House. With respect to clothing the army, it would be seen that some of the regi ments were to be clothed by public contract. It would not be necessary for him to enter into the details of the little differences between the estimates of the present year and of the past. lie would merely again observe, that those differences were caused by an increase of troops in Irel end and in the Colonies, and by a decrease in England. He would not detain the House longer, but at once pro pose " That a sum not exceeding 3,168,2161. 14s. Id. be voted for defraying the charges of the land forces for the service of the United Kingdom and our po-seesions abroad, except fer the troops employed in the country possessed by the East India Company, for the year begin ning the 31st of March, 1833, and ending the 31st of March, 1834." The votes being put, Mr. HUME said that the House, in ♦oting these sup plies, had first to consider the services which these forces hid to perform ; and secondly, whether the circumstances of the country were such as to warrant such a large ex penditure. He would shortly state the grounds he had for objecting to the keeping up of so large an establish ment. In the vote now proposed, there were various min pot taut items to be considered, in which considerable re ductions might be made. The expense of the proposed 89,000 formed but a part of the vote; there was an ex traordinary allowance of 60,000/. for the recruiting ser vice, for the depot at Chatham, and a few other items— cost 63,009/., &c. ; and, under the head contingencies, there was an expense altogether of 110,0001. In all these items there was room for very considerable reductions. In the first place, however, he had a strong objection to some part of the forces composing this 89,000 men. If we look at the number of the Life Guards, as compared with their numbers at former periods of peace, we should find their number, and the consequent expense of them, consi derably increased ; anti in tee cavalry, which was a most expensive class of soldiery, a similir increase had taken place. There ought to be a great saving in both these expenses. At present the Guards were the only corps in the world, or at any rate in England, to whom sums of money were given, without any account being demanded from them of their appropriation. If the House would not consent to reduction in the SUM given, he hoped that at any rate they would remove this anomaly, by putting the same check and control upon the expenditure of these troops as over the infantry and other soldiery. He did not mean to say but that their expenditure might be very unexceptionably ne enaied, and indeed he had heard as much, but while there was any mystery observed in these de tails, while the public were kept in the dark as to how their money is disposed of, there would always be a lurking jealousy on their parts, which ought not to be the case in any part of the public expenditure. If the House would not consent to reduce the numbers of the army, it would be well at least to reduce the numbers of this class of troops. The number of regiments had been increased to 99; but each corps, though the number of its privates had been considerable, still retained the number of its officers; why was this? Why was the expense of officers, constituting at least one-third of the whole, to be continued the same in each otherwise reduced battalion ? Surely it was not right that the same number of officers should be kept up, when a battalion is composed of only 400, as it had when the number was 600 or 1,000. — (Hear, hear.) lie would, therefore, without saying a word about reducing the number of the whole, propose that the 99 regiments should be concentrated into 84, and that the numbers of officers should undergo a cor responding reduction. In the recruiting and contin gencies departments great savings might be effected. Indeed, as to the former expense (60,0001.) be saw very little necessity for it, or indeed, none at all ; for in the present unfortunate times the army bad no need of king racrui:efl for, while 10 many able-bodied men were anxious to enlist themsAvea to keep from starving. It appeared to him a most extraordinary thing, too, that such a dreadfully expensive paraphernalia as the six field. marshals, seven adjutants, six paymasters, and the enor mous staff, should be kept up at a time when so large a Falun of the population were in actual want of food.— (Hear, hear.) There was a nether sum which he h Itl often remonstrated against, as applied to a particular class, and eminently calculated to excite feelings of jealousy and ill-will against that class—namely, the 6,000/. a year granted for keeping a table at St. James's for the Light Dragoon Guards' nffieers ; there were never more than seven or eight officers to partake of the dinner, yet this outrageous sum had' been annually granted for this item ; surely it was an item which might fairly be reduced. As to the item of 1,200/, for law expenses, he wai at a pet feet . . loss to ußderstaml the meaning of it. What lead the army to do with law expenses? There was another item of 1,2001. too for bibles and religious batiks ; now these were excellent things when properly applied, but as to those said to be distributed at this en , ,rinuus rate among the army, he had good reason to suspect their application by the soldiers. He would direct the attention of the House to the scale of troops in former years of peace, when there bad been quite as much necessity for troops as now, but when a much smaller number had been found quite efficient for every purpose. Indeed, in the years to which he should refer there had been a much greater necessity for troops than at present : yet in 1822, the number of troops of the line had been only 68,000 ; in 1823, 69,000 ; in 1824, 63,000. The questi , n he had wished then to put to the House was, whether we could not have every ser vice effectually performed with the same number of troops now as then was found adequate? In the three years mentioned, the average number of troops, rank and file, was 61,900 ; this year it was proposed to increase this number by no less than 19,000. The increase of expen diture over the scale of these years WAS not much less than 21 per cent. on the whole. Under the late Government, the number of troops was only 80,000; now it was pro posed to have 89,000. Surely this was not the proper is ay of proceeding. Ministers cried out that they were unable to take off the most oppressive and obnoxious assessed taxes on account of the great expenditure; well, then, it would be hest to lop off the unnecessary portion of that expendi ture, so as to enable the Ministers to meet the anxious wishes of the people. His union of the necessary num aers did not, he believed, exactly coincide with those of Govern ment, for lie thought, that instead of having 44,000 troops in England, 20,000 would be quite sufficient for every purpose. As to the colonial establishments, most of them were high y objectionable ; for instance, where was the need of troops in Canada, in Nova Scotia, at the Cape, at Ceylon ? At Mauritius their own misgovernment had created disturbances, and then we must have soldiers to repress them. At the lonian Islands the presence of our troops had been eminently mischievous ; and at the same time most heavily expensive. He was ready to allow Ministers full time for putting a safe plan of economy into effect, and he would, therefore, on this occasion, move that the amount of the original vote should be reduced by 279,0001., being the ainouut of six months' pay and allow ances for the army above the establishment which had been the average to all in the years he had mentioned. He should, therefore, move, as an amendment, that a sum not ex ceeding 2,888,772/. be voted, &e. The amendment being put, Sir HENRY HARDINGE rose, and said that, how ever desirous he was of every advisable retrenchment, he could not help saying that the reduction proposed by the Hon. Member was, in the circumstances of t . e country, perfectly preposterous.--(Hear, hear.) He defended the system of the depots. The six companies which were abroad, being composed of the beat and most healthy men in the army, were not only efficiewi - but were even found, in seine cases, to be subject to less mortality than the army at home. But if this recruiting service were done away with, it would be necessary to draft men from the regular corp , , to the great detriment of the army. Thinking, as he did, that tha exam ,tes were as moderate as they could be, he would give his suppoi t to Ministers in almost ail the items. Sir HENRY PARNELL bad hear with satisfaction the course proposed to be pursued by his Majesty's Govern ment, and he did not mean to object to any of the items. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Middlesex as to the necessity of economy ; but he did not think that the Hon. Member for Middlesex had pursued the proper course to obtain it.—(Hear, hear.) If twenty thousand men were to be reduced at once, they should necessarily have to discharge a great many men, which would of course increase the pension list. He thought that it would be better to follow the plan formerly adopted by the Duke of Wellington, of not filling up the casualties. The casualties averaged annually from 10,000 to 11,000 men, so that the reduction could be made in a very 'short apace of time. He thought some saving, however, could be made by consolidating the different departments of the army accounts. As they were at present regulated, there were so many different items, that it was impossible for the House perfectly to understand them, or to have the proper control over them. Major BEAUCLERK thought lie should not be doing his duty, if he voted for the number of men proposed, after having voted for the reduction of the malt duty, and of the house and window tax ; and he condemned the system by which promotions were regulated. When the amendment of the Hon. Member for Middlesex should be disposed of, he would move that the army should be reduced by 7,000 men. lie thought the Hon. Member for Middlesex went too far ; and that it was impossible to reduce 19,000 men in the present state of the country. Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought it the worst economy which could be pursued to adopt the suggestions of either the lion. Members for Middlesex or for Surrey. When he looked at the disturbed state of Europe, be thought it im possible to reduce the army ; and he should, therefore, consider it his duty to support the motion. Major HANDLEY thought that some reduction ought to be made in the staff of the army ; but he did not think that the number of regular men in the army could be reduced. Sir JOHN BYNG said that be agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Dundee, that the plan pro posed by him was the best. It was gradual, and therefore safe. As to the additional regiment which had been sent to the Mauritius, he thought that, in the present circum stances of that colony, it was necessary. Lord ALTHORP certainly thought that the plan pro posed by the Hon. Members for Middlesex and Surrey not the best that could be proposed. He considered that the stopping of the recruiting, as proposed by the Right lion. Member for Dundee, was the only economical system to effect a reduction. - At present his Majesty's Govern ment did not feel themselves justified in making any re duction in the army; but he could assure the House that, if in the course of the year an opportunity oc curred of reducing the army, it should be done in the way suggested by the Right Hon. Member for Dundee. The same system had been followed by the Duke of Wel lington to a great extent, and found eminently successful. It was their wish to reduce as quickly as possible; but still it was necessary to keep the force effective. His Noble Friend would propose a Committee on the subject, to which he (Lord Althorp) would accede. He hoped that their labours would give satisfaction to the country; and he should, therefore, not offer any more remarks on the subject. Mr. LENNARD addressed the Committee for several minutes, amidst incessant cries of " Question, question," " Withdraw, withdraw !" which rendered him entirely inaudible in the gallery. Mr. HUME spoke to order. If the Committee did not choose to listen to the Hon. Member for Maldon, or any other Hon. Member who wished to speak on a ques tion of so much importance, he would move an adjournment. Lord ALTHORP said that if, at that hour of the night, Hon. Gentlemen would not attend to questions of im portance, it would be impossible to get through the public business. Mr. LENNARD proceeded. He contended that his Majesty's Ministers were bound to fulfil their pledges of economy; and if they refused to reduce the establishments of the army, the navy, and the ordnance, how was it pos sible they could do so ? Mr. BRISCOE observed that no less than two-thirds of that part of the revenue over which Government and the Legislature had any control was expended on our naval and military establishments ; and therefore be felt that the present was an occasion of retrenchment which ought not to be neglected. Under these circumstances, he could not pardon himself if he were to refrain from giving a silent vote on the subject.—(A. laugh.) H e should certainly support the amendment of the Hon. Member fur Middlesex. Mr. HODGES would support the original motion ; but, feeling as he did, that the whole country wished fo. a reduction of public expenditure, he should certainly, in the next session of Parliament, if the estimates were not framed on a more moderate scale, oppose their adoption. Mr. HUME said that the object of his motion had been misunderstood. He did not want anv reduction of the number of men, if the reduction of the expenditure coulo b e otherwise accomplished. Ile wished to see the surplus officers of the Blues and of other regiments reduced; and to see the expenditure reduced in every possible manner. He confessed that he was at a loss to understand the principle of the vote of the Hon. Member for West Kent. If that Hon. Gentleman allowed that the whole country desired a reduction of the public expenditure, why not set about it at once ?—(Hear, hear.) The lion. 11Ieu3heb voted the other night for reducing the taxes. I s l °f .i t ii appeared to hint (Mr. Hume) that it was not acting tam taxes, and wit to vote for reducinz the expenditure. , it Mr. HODGES explained. His vote the other to to reduce t'e existing taxes, was for the PurPc' e bi s stitutMr. O'CONNELL must vote for the amendinento lion. Friend the Member for 3liddlesex. The Dec e n ' it 'a for keeping up so large a military force was aff.irvp.osed. u f: e , their mal-administratio n land. In England, with a 12,000 population r of sixteen !nib' with a nu. land Government c if lation of eight millions, there were 20,000 troop s• troops were engaged in the collection of tit he % l ei• his Majesty's Government, instead of adopting such sies of justice as were calculated to tranquillize Ire'.anith Against reo ..........................▪ ... chose hi to indulge in amusements of that kind, it vrat , f the nn Ti a e decided reason for supporting tie reduction 0' military establishment. The Committee then divided— ^0 For the Amendment ........................ ' having resumed, •the report was ordered to be ution was then agreed to, and re• licCivelll Monday. .irtnxj,:sgeihiraceirsr,),tr,lillyy'aejretsyty tax. M Ministers to vote fo r redoirg PENSIS. Lord EBRINGTON moved " N for a Select Commtta ,a) inquire into the state of the garriso ns at 0 , a1 ..„' eit 'S abroad ; into eri ry branch of their pay and ernoldn;lio, and also into the pty and emo l umen ts of Vice -A oe and Admirals, Generals and Colonels, an d to reportut dr titer any diminution can be made in the same Wit)°,. e jtitt triment to the efficiency of the public service, or t spi rewards of professional men ;" which was agreed a Committee appointed accordingly. FUNDHOLDERS. 0 0e1 Mr. T. ATTWOOD moved for a retur n of t- e t , stoc k, of all persons possessing 10,000/. and upwards n'Aisrell, in any of the Government securities , on let 1819 ; distinguishing the respective sums standing "c name of each person on that day, or on the near e '_ r eto rD on which the account can be made up. Sar.ot f rl4 March, 1815, or on the nearest day onimil account can be made up. f io al " Lord ALTHORP said, to require the nalne%°tror vlijadminenistawry" p t r u i i n is c t ip u i n e tt i s t u c ll u , dinbdeliejuksntiefiwedn. ot i n i n e 7 40.0 0 tio ts pose the inotion. 03° After a few words from Mr. ATTWOOD, the was withdrawn. , AGRICULTURE, TRADE, MANUFA CTuit AND SHIPPING. Lord ALTHORP in rising to move for twomsss, Committees of Inquiry into the agriculture, traetb facture, and shipping of the United Kingdom, said„i aware that there existed a very great wish fo r jOl' r i " p roP e in compliance with that desire, he thought it Ilw i e je Ore' to have two Committees than one. He should, t..a,a ts move the appointment of a Committee to ingnire:ooter. state of the agriculture and the agricultu ral throughout the kingdom, and of another Co nt i u fb'pe t i inquire into the state of trade, manufactures, 50""t'ivoLr of the f U ro n ai ite i i n l q K u i i n r g y d i o n m t . his Hweaythtolumgnhftrommorae be°".,lC,o°,; Ge oet. oe 41. tnittee to inquire into the distress of the countll', o f I te not expect any great practical relief as the reseittofr labours of these two Committees, but the very f a , c ;t 00 1 quiry could not fail to be advantageous, even ;arioo showed that none of the measures suggested in „wcfL l : quarters could with propriety be adopt: d, The ° ",.'hey: tion that could he raised was, he believed, an to talq the shipping should or should not be united in e oti°''o inquiry with trade and manufactures ; and be c was of opinion that all these subjects should be er, in connexion, for no one could pretend to saY were not intimately connected, although to a ceri,t% to they might sometimes have rival interests• jp- of Lordconclutdoed inquire by moving intothe statethefor of h a ptpoe a into g i r r ai / o re Committee e the T U he uild ti K on ind a t s tm ag . reed to, and on the ni °ti lleo (bebl44 Noble Lord the following persons were chosen as of the Committee : .1. As. Fe Althorp, Viscount 'aVirr rest_, rd Attwood, M.; - Baring, A. Ortneli° I/. Or , Benctt, John Peel, Sic S ir ' ` V R. Vic Brigstock, W. P. ttobarts, Ord Browne, D. Russell, Buller, J. W. Sanford, P,„,, jot' Cayley, E S. Chandos, Marquis of ! S ta nleY, ` s :" ir ft; 0% Childers, J. W. Vy m vYan, Whitore, Denison, W. J. Folkes, Sir W. Graham, SirJ. R. G. Heathcote, G. J. Henniker, Lord Howick, Lord Kerry, Earl of Knatchbull, Sir E. Lemon, Sir C. Littleton, F. J. Mildmay, P. Milton, Viscount Clive, 11.. H. . of' Dalrymple, Sir J. 1 Committee Lord.A.Ltr inquire in th u e , n ti i i n e o s ld te t o h f e . trb' 1 tures, and shipping of the United Kingdom. Mr. M. ATTWOOD made a few o•,setvati°94 i 0 were inaudible in the gallery. 00,1 , Mr. YOUNG said, that by this junction o f the ov s f i with trade and manufactures, the former was t ,_ llr v itti ; together overboard. The laws regulating the °°4 111 0 ,4 the country were of such an exceptive charactertcoold' required a separate Committee, if the incluil 0 expected to lead to any beneficial result. Cr e 4 „ if g b. Lord ALTHORP said that if the husin e ",d be, ~?; fairly conducted in the Committee, it "'°°' s til' ° o k, well to have a separate one for the shipping il3te ld' i , g A l ' but he thought the inquiry would be properY„ c r ical til , Mr. RU I'HVEN complained that on the ''' ge at le di Committee there had been placed only ts v° , kK r from Irelind, which, he contended, WB4 not a ''' tion for that country. j...... the trades ine°s;ll4.,l4' i The following Committee was then a ppoin t 'i, a Abercrombie, RightlFielden J. Parke r, .;ir'''si'' 1 t a rn 'C.,'.'ll ' Hon. J. Althorp, Lord Attwood, T. Bannerman, A. Baring, A. Briggs, R. Brothertem, J. Goulburn. _ 11. Grote, G. Herries, J. C. Hyett, W. H. Lambton, H. Lowther, Viscount Lyall, G. Mack , • - Bob~ ns Id, . 6 Runw - fi , ; er n , „ rj , Tenna,oo;„ TpoT;sor..:. Bulwer, E. , E. L. Chapman, A. Christmas, W. Davenport, J. Bacourt, T. G. B Ewart, W. Mackenzie, J. A. S. Marshall, J. Morrison, J. O'Connell, D. Oswald, J. w a rbit' s g, Woo' f. a° Young e , en cligP°' The other orders of the day were t:--- ;11e House adjourned at half-past two o'clock. MINOF I er d r MOTION.' e O'Connell, Chyrsto Oswald, R. A. --A 10 11 9. 0 5 Palmer, Generauo, ,00 Pease, JoseptiV,„ rePefC/' Richards, J. I. o e Roche, Willia...so"oil Ruthvcn, Ed. 0 0 0 Scholefield, J• goltendpo6 [Tor r ens , H. Nyarburton,,.:_car i. Vigors, N. _A:I: I , O 4,, d ICPCO T "11--' 1 ‘ fr O rl ‘ Hume, Josep h $ O'Connor, ''.ge A is' The names of Messrs. Itobarts, Yelverton, tli J. 'Talbot, were inserted by mistake in our list 0 • fo r re. - ie lo who having voted for Sir W. Ingilby's motion 0r1i.,000/ Malt Tax, on he 26th ult., did not vote on th e Key Mr, Scolafield paired off in favour of Sir Rho SPORTING INTELLIG I ' y CLIFTON AND BRISTO.- 0. oiu THURSDIY.—The Bristol Handicap SweePst3- 11 0. 1 5 forfeit, vvitb 20 added by the Tradesp coPle' Mr. Messer ' s The Witch ................... •...„., f , Mr. Reeve's Flora ........................... to Mr. Harris's'Dictator ....................... trocf:" The City Members' Plate of 50 sovs., 2 sous' 1 the second horse. The Clifton Stakes COur' Mr. Messer's The Witch ................... " 5 'of , Mr. Leigh's The Dwarf ................... 1 '.00 3 Mr. Wilkin's Barney Bodkin .........."t ,kith The Handicap Sweepstakes of 5 sows. each, About one mile and a quarter. Four sub'. Hylas ................................... very cle ver ly la cr ): l 3 . l s r v . e llilk s in t 'aks Stakes. m• Ainella' 1)°.1.' . •• .'' ' d Miss Eldon ............................ •••••'' fs. War, The Galloways' and Ponies' .Handicap.. O r I"otingOr Cale's ch. m. Miracle. The winner ;vas ridden DY f ---......—•---- ..., vo.gbili CHESTER RACES NE I tl'e for CHESTER, FRIDAY MottzsriNo ---The entries - p r , &c., have closed as follows : ' s P ICO° Ludlow, Sally Mags, and Kitty Fisher. n oth,' Of , Maiden Plate.—Wagtail, St. Winefrecl, 1 ‘ 131:4 ml dg' Y, Phantom, Saccharina, Lauretta, f. by LutterY:iiitor,ap TUESDAY.—King's Plate.—Pickpocket, SP ec " Gf r , ithantoo:o, ff° I Todd, Ratcatcher, Belmont, ch. C. by Y, coner, Parthenon, Manchester, Giovanni, 0550 ~r, Chester, Mammoth, and Osman. ~r• ,7' The Members' Plate.—Philosopher, Parthenlooo;oo, i Plianton ' , Grand Falconer, b. Eby Lotte r '' , I o, ; and Miniature. "e T cj , I f WEDNEsDAY.—City Plate.—Jemima, Lauri 1 1 vanni, Traveller, Belmont, and Miniature. . li atir l Tu mist:lnv.—Plate of 70/.—Wagtail, BelMoni;otcr, 0 Grand Falconer, Parthenon, Traveller, blanche 1 Lottery, Osman, Ossian, and Giovanni. asst• r" Betting-4 to 1 agst. Her Highness, to 1a- ) 7to I agst. Speculator. The rest as before• Oil ----1 r -------1 grab t ie 0 Last week, as a lady .n the , geo 0 , ......—Caractacu , cii ( 6 % 1 0 of Arbroath was in the act of dressing a . e , cif , 0 . parton) she found in the stomachs ball or the Third, worn as thin as a sisr.ea:c, " letters perfectly fresh. IN: icv)teirt.loir LIST OF TH. ON MR. CORBETT': Attwood, Thos.—Birmingham Blake, Martin— Cobbett, William—Oldham Faithful, George—Brighton Fielden, John—Oldham Finn, W. F.—Kilkenny Fitzsimon, C.—Dublin Co. Fryer, IL—Wolverhampton Lalor, Patrick—Queen's Co. Lowther, Col.:—Westmoreland O'Connell, John—Youghali O'Connell, D.—Dublin City O'Connell, Maurice—Tralee 0 Connell, Morgan—Meath Crlt C • )cr r„..: -o ns . a L