The Sun. — London, England, 1833-01-18 00:00:00

T /:C~l SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. The Peers of Scotland, having held their electoral college at Edinburgh, have returned to the House of Lords the full compliment of their 16 representatives, hostile to Reform measures and to his Majesty's Government. The Mini sterial nomination-list--as religiously acted upon n old Tory days as the conge d'elire of a Bishop—was not probably produced on this occa sion, and under such a Dean and Chapter as Lord Lauderdale and his Conservative compeers would very likely have been treated with contempt. Thus are sixteen Deputies of the Scotch Peer age despatched to the Upper House to oppose the almost unanimous voice of the Representa tives of the Scotch people in the Lower. Thus do the majority of titled Scotchmen, who date their honours from before the Union, take a pride in declaring that they have learnt nothing since 1707, or that they are opposed to the im proved political creed of their age and nation. Thus has Holyrood-house become the last and only asylum in Great Britain for exiled divine right Royalty, and Conservative nobility—for fraudulent insolvency, and superannuated faction. The patrician order, as an order, in Scotland has given itself a suicidal blow, and accelerated its own downfall, by such an absurd resistance to the general feelings of the nation. Public opinion will henceforward scarcely estimate its existence as an element in the social condition of that part of the island. The people are also so strong in their own rights, and so rooted in the conviction of their own superior attainments, that they can afford to despise its opposition, or to treat lightly its favours. The days have gone by in which these patricians could count any portion of their countrymen among their vassals, in which they could dazzle them by their splen dour, or overpower them by their rank. The first working of the Reform Act among our brethren north of the Tweed has been remarkable for the energy with which the people—the ple beians as they used to be called—of Scotland have thrown down their idols—and passed from a state of superstitious reverence for titles and station to one of indifference or hostility. Yet this is the time in which an insignificant clique of some forty or fifty Peers choose to assemble in the old palace of the Stuarts, and vote by a list of sixteen of their number that the nation is wrong, and that reform, so universally desired, is a calamity ! Few of our readers need be told that, though there are upwards of four-score Scotch Peers who have votes for the return of the sixteen representative Peers to the British Parliament, yet that the number out of which candidates can be selected is much more limited. All the Noblemen whose titles to the Peerage were created before the Union of Scotland with England have a right to vote for the Parlia mentary deputation, though many, or perhaps most of them, have subsequently, under different titles, been admitted to the Peerage of Great Britain, and consequently now sit in the House without election. On the present occasion we find that seventy voted either directly, by proxy, or by sealed lists ; but it will easily be seen from their titles, that most of then), such as the Duke of Gordon, the Duke of Hamilton, the Duke of Montrose, the Earl of Lauderdale, and so on, are already senators. Pro bably, though the Conservatives had wished to send all the friends of the Ministry, who are not already British Peers, they could not have made out the number of 16 ; but that is no ex cuse for insulting the sense of the nation by excluding every one of them. In the last Par liament four of the Scotch Peers voted for the Reform Bill ; to the present, Lord Lauderdale has put his veto on their re-election. Another fact deserves to be remarked—a fact easily de ducible from the manner in which the suffrages are distributed—namely, that though the whole list of 16 is returned by the Conservatives, yet that the majority of votes for the successful candidates, is not great over their Reform rivals. Thus, the lowest on the list of the Conservatives has only 40 votes, and the highest on the list of the Reformers has 36. Indeed, with few ex ceptions, the noble constituents, so far as their opposite lists extended, seemed to have formed themselves into two parties, who adhered toge ther in their votes, so that a majority for one Conservative became a majority for all. It is not a little singular that the soul of this Conser vative confederacy—the leader in this electoral crusade against Reform—or, to use an appro priate anti-climax, the bell-wether in this Tory flock—should always himself have been excluded by the former Tory faction from representing his order in Parliament, and that he should have been obliged io get into the House of Lords for the first time by a British patent. It is still more singular that, in those days, he was not only too much of a Whig to receive Tory support, but too much of a Radical to be a Whig ;—that, in short, he was a citizen and a sans-culotte. Nothing, it would appear, would satisfy him but the whole swing of the pendulum from one side to the other ; but he may test assured that, though now more successful against the Government than he was with his former friends against his late oppo f;ents, this Holyrood-house victory will not firing him many laurels, nor add extensively to his infwence. He will be found, like most cunning glen, to have overshot his mark, by af fording voluntarily that opportunity of defeating his projects which could not have been properly seized by force. It is quite possible, without a new election, to reinforce the ranks of the Mi nistry by as many Peers as by his arts and in trigues he has erased from the list of their supporters ! Times. We present our readers with some further extracts from that painful and distressing volume —.' The Report of the Factories' Regulation Inquiry"—the record of infant slavery, and more than infant torture. During the forty days' in vestigation of the Committee, and from the lips 4 figarly a hundred witnesses who were exa mined, we have learnt the existence and extent of a system of cruelty and degradation to which a large portion of the young of the working classes in our manufacturing districts are sub jected, which almost makes us shudder at the means by which our manufacturing superiority has been acquired, and our immense manufac turing wealth accumulated. For the last forty years we have had numerous examinations into the atrocities and abominations of the colonial slave trade, and into the hardships and horrors of colonial slavery. The former has been abo lished in consequence of the damning nature of the evidence by which it was assailed ; and the latter, we trust, will soon disappear amid the loud indignation of an enlightened and improving . b6lliin'triiity. And shall the scene of slavery then j --- : ,tei transferred to the mother country ?—shall p _ English infints be substituted, by the consent 1„ - i - , of , fieel:' refOied, and Christian England, for 1 " ; ;:\ --<,- AfiiiaWnt s ? It is not unadvisedly that we i eKi;inaltifr- , - Itii ling comparison ; nor is it for the ✓ Qaaaa.,o3 !purpose of disparaging manufacturing improve ments, or discouraging manufacturing enterprise, that we represent our factories, whose ma chinery is worked by children of tender age, in the same light as West India plantations cul tivated by negro slaves. The similarity is esta blished in almost every point—the parallel is drawn in the broadest lines ; and his only because the same element enters into both,—it is only be cause domestic, white, English slavery is row proved " by a cloud of witnesses" to exist, that we call upon the Legislature to interfere, and to abate the rank offence. Children of from six to twelve years of age, who are driven from their scarcely warmed beds to the mills before day break, and are wrought till they can no longer stand, or who can only be kept awake at their task by the application of blows and stripes,— who have sometimes their bodies maimed, or their lives endangered, by a cruel taskmaster, when invincible fatigue overpowers the strength of their feeble nature,—who struggle with scanty and insufficient food against the effects of an un wholesome atmosphere and a torturing position, —who contract diseases, stunt their growth, and acquire deformities, by an over exertion of their frames,—who are deprived of all the opportuni ties of healthy exercise, and all the means of moral instruction, so beneficial or necessary for their time of life,—children in this situation, we say, though sold to the factory by the necessities of their own parents, as the African chiefs sold their subjects or captives, are no more free agents than a West Indian gang, and therefore, for the same reason, ought to be placed under the spe cial protection of the law. Instances may occur in the agricultural districts where the young are equally exposed to physical suffering and moral degradation ; cruel parents, in towns and vilages which never saw the smoke of a steam-engine or herd of a cotton factory, may keep their in fants in misery and bondage. These cases the law cannot reach without probably the greater evil of domiciliary visits, but where great masses of children, as in our manufacturing districts, are collected into a particular place, and follow a common occupation, beyond the care of their parents, general rules can be enforced, and a kind of labour police established. We beg that this principle of absolute undeniable slavery of factory children, and this distinction between them and other children not congregated by the nature of their employment into masses, may be kept in mind in all notions of legislating on this question, as otherwise we must attempt an im possible task, or effect a mischievous result. The masters themselves, if their feelings de served to be consulted on such a subject, could not object to this interference with the age at which children can be allowed to enter their establishments, or the number of hours which they may be permitted to work. They cannot pretend, like the West Indian planter, that the children are their " property," and if they de rive no benefit from their work, they will not be required to pay their wages. The parent or the parish must supply the funds for their sustenance till they can support themselves ; but, from whatever quarter these funds come, English hu manity must not be further outraged by a conti nuance of the present system of infant bondage. Dr. Chalmers, as we see in the excellent and in structive evidence of the Rev. Mr. Gordon, one of the ministers of Aberdeen, told the Glasgow manufacturers, from the pulpit, several years ago, " that they regarded human beings as so many pieces of machinery, and the living principle within them as the power which set the machi nery in motion, and that their sole object was to get out of the machines as much work as poss sible at the least expense." There could not be a more undeniable or a more melancholy statement. This infant " ma chinery," must now be regulated by those who " regard the living principle within it" as something different from a mere mechanical power. There are duties more important than those of accumulating wealth by whatever means; and even the commercial wealth of a nation is bought at two high a price, if that price be the degradation, the depravity, the suffering, of those who produce it. Law must interfere to check the reckless inhumanity of the avaricious, as it does to control or punish any other bad or selfish passion which seeks its own gratification at the expense of others.—Times. The Times, in their article of 'Wednesday, have returned to the charge against the ballot, and have strengthened their own forces by a communication from without, of surpassing merit in their eyes. They inform us that a re-action has commenced against the ballot. As far as regards the Times, and various other Ministerial organs, this is undoubtedly true : as far as re gards any one else, we deny it altogether. The ally of the Times tells us, that the question of the ballot lies in a nut-shell. It lies, indeed, in so small a space, that he has entirely overlooked it. In recompence, he gives us a long series of observations upon something which is not the question. He tell us that a man cannot, if he would, conceal his political opinions ; for it' the ballot conceals his vote, there are other way besides the ballot through which his political sentiments will become known. Moreover (he adds), even if it were possible for voters to con ceal their political sentiments, it is not desirable that they should do so. Here is precisely the same confusion which we remarked last week in the article of the Times themselves. The senti ments of a voter are one thing : his vote is another. The ballot does not either oblige or enable him to conceal his sentiments, nor have we ever said that it did. It keeps his vote concealed, whether he will or not; and it does not, by its direct effect, accom plish any thing more. We stated, in our article of last week, that if any landlord—the Marquis of Exeter, for example—chose to establish an In quisition in the town of Stamford, and to ad mit as tenants no persons who did not conform to a certain ritual, and make certain professions, the ballot would not prevent him from doing so. He may, if he pleases, admit none but bigoted Tories as his tenants, and he may exact such evidences of Toryism as he thinks sufficient. He may expel every tenant who does not con form to the observances and declarations which he dictates. If he carries this expurgation to its extreme limit, the town of Stamford will re main tenanted by none but Tories of the purest water. Nevertheless, though all this be con ceded, the efficacy of the ballot for its own pur pose will still remain unimpaired. What it professes to insure is, that no voter shall be constrained to vote except according to his own free will and preference. Now if the tenants at Stamford are all high Tories, they will vote with the Marquis of Exeter as a matter of course and by preference, whether voting be open or secret. The case will be similar throughout the whole country, if we suppose all other land. lords to have done the same—if we imagine every Whig landlord, anti every Tory land lord, to have already carried political per secution to the same length as the Protestant and Catholic Princes carried religious per secution two centuries ago—so that no Whig landlord had on his estate any but Whig tenants, nor Tory landlord any but Tory tenants. Let the landlords attempt this wholesale ejec tion if they can or dare. They have not done it yet ; and until they actually do, we have one chance still left of struggling for the liberty of conscientious voting. The case in England now is, that we have a great many tenants, who are electors, and who differ in political senti ments from their landlords. With these men the secrecy of the vote makes all the difference, whether they vote according to their own pre ference, or according to that of their landlord. Nothing can frustrate the efficacy of the ballot, so far as voting is concerned, while this state of things continues. Whether the landlord knows their political sentiments or not, he cannot bring any compulsory motive to bear upon them in secret ; he cannot put a lie into their mouths, while they are alone in the balloting closet. The fallacy of the Times consists in supposing that the efficacy of the ballot depends upon a man's keeping his political sentiments unknown to his terrifier. We repeat that it depends on no such condition. It protects his vote just as inexpugnably,whether his sentiments are known or not. It bars the landlord from injuring him or sparing him, according to the way in which he votes. We deny altogether that the ballot does " lead to habitual secrecy in matters of opinion, and that it is a dead letter else." A moment before, the Times had them selves observed, that habitual secrecy of opinion was impracticable. Does the ballot lead to this consequence in France, where, according to the Times themselves, it is the " sole guarantee of electoral independence ?" A dependant who differs from his superior is condemned of neces sity to great reserve in the expression of his opinions, whether he votes openly or secretly ; in the one case as well as in the other. He may be enabled to vote freely by means of the ballot : and there is no necessity that he should ever speak what he does not think ; but reserve in speaking what he does think is to a great degree unavoid able. As we deny that the ballot will produce any greater secrecy of sentiment than now pre vails, so we also deny its alleged effects in " deadening all known public opinion." We maintain that the real public opinion will be of much greater potency under the ballot than it is at present. The grand act and manifestation of public opinion is in the election of representa tives ; and the evil of which we complain is, that unprotected voting compels a large pro. portion of the constituency to vote contrary to their opinions. To this extent it does not merely deaden, but positively reverses and falsifies, the working of public opinion ; so that there might almost as well be no public opinion at all. The correspondent of the Times is of opinion that an elector ought to exercise his franchise honestly under all the risks of open voting—that if he can not do so, he is unworthy to have it. We agree that he ought to do so. So ought a man to die at the stake, sooner than recant his religious opinions ; so ought he, like Regulus, to surrender himself to excruciating torments, rather than forfeit his word. We fully acknowledge this obliga tion, though we are not quite so prodi gal as this magnanimous writer, of the epithet fool, coward, and traitor, if we do not find in every bosom the constancy of a martyr. The simple question which we ask is, Cannot the Legislature protect the voter against any such risks ? and, if they can, ought they not to pro tect him ? We affirm that they both can do it and ought to do it. The assertion, that no man is worthy of the elective franchise who is not prepared to exercise it honestly at all ha zards, is utterly inadmissible. Every man is worthy of the franchise who is capable of form ing a judgment on public men and public mea sures. It is for the Legislature to provide means for receiving his judgment without ex posing him to loss or suffering. The corres pondent of the Times says— " An elector's first, last, and only duty, is to give his vote honestly. The duty of the public is to see that each elector does give his vote honestly; if he does, to guard him against all oppression or evil consequences wbatever : if he does not, to inflict its just indignation on him and all his partners in iniquity. Disable the public from form• ing this opinion of the elector's conduct, and you remove the very fly-wheel of the whole machinery." The first sentence of this paragraph is as true and important as all the rest is false and futile. To vote honestly is the elector's " first, last, and only duty ;" and it is for this precise reason that we insist on placing him alone in the balloting closet, where neither temptations nor threats can reach him, and where he will be sure to vote honestly of his own accord. The ballot insures the performance of this " first, last, and only duty of an elector with unerring exactness. Rejecting this effectual security, and letting in all the threats and terrors of open voting, this writer professes to neutralise and counterwork them by a phantom of his own—responsibility to the public, and protection by the public. We maintain that the public can neither afford the protection nor exercise the power herein implied. Is it meant that James Swann and the three la bourers at Oxford, and the thousand other sufferers by electoral tyranny, shall all receive pecuniary compensation out of the public purse? The very idea is preposterous ; though it is rare indeed to see public money bestowed upon such virtuous individuals. Or arc we to understand that the sympathy of the public will compensate an honest voter for ejectment and ruin ? He would receive much keener sympathy if his house were burnt down, or if' he lost his only sons, but does any reasonable man accept this expression of sympathy as a compensation for such misfortunes ? Sympathy will alleviate calamity, but it will do nothing more: and how can the public find means even to sympathise with one-fiftieth part of the unblazoned victims of electoral tyranny throughout England and Scotland ? " Omnes illacrymabiles " Urgentur, ignotique, long a nock, carent Dela vale sacro !" If the public cannot extend this needful pro tection, much less can they exercise the super vision, or enforce the responsibility, under which the voter is supposed to act. The public are to see (it is pretended) that every elector gives an honest vote—to watch, not whether he gives a vote judicious and acceptable in their eyes, but whether he votes as his own genuine preference guides him. By what conceivable conjuration are the public to determine this e To suppose Chem capable of it, would be to invest them with attributes nothing short of Omniscience. The wisdom of a man's vote may be appreciated by others as well as by himself; the hon es ty of it can never be ascertained by any other human being. Whenever the public do interfere as judges of the vote of an elector, they always constitute themselves judges, not of the honesty of his vote, but of its wisdom and propriety. They meddle in the contest, not as champions of honesty in the abstract, but as partisans of a favourite candidate; those who vote for him, receive a shout of applause, whatever be the motive which determines them ; those who vote against him, are hooted down with just as little discrimination. This is the only way in which the supervision here contended for can be exer cised by the public. Dictation of votes, and tyranny over private conscience, are the only purpose which such interference can be made to serve ; and we detest this odious function hardly less in the hands of the public than in those of the landlord. All this pretended responsibility on the part of the electors towards the public is a mischievous phantom—a compound of trea chery and error. The only security for good voting is the interest which the electors them selves have in it ; merely taking care that they shall be left to themselves, free to follow their own spontaneous preferences. Confiding, as we are willing to do, in the constituency created by the Reform Bill, we demand the ballot as the only means of shielding them against those ex ternal enemies who now deter them from voting according to their conscience. We ask for no stronger guarantee, nor shall we rest contented with a weaker.—Morning Chronicle. Lord Lauderdale and his new allies, the Tories, have had a triumph at Holyrood-house. They have had their election as well as the people, and, just as the people had finished theirs by the return of Whigs and Liberals, to the almost total exclusion of Tories, the Noble Lord and his new allies, as if to show by what gentle bonds of sympathy they are united to the mass of their fellow-countrymen, have contrived to get tke aristocracy represented by Tories alone, so that Scotland, like the man with two voices, will run the risk of producing some discords in the forthcoming performances at Westminster. We, who are of no party, can smile at all this ; for, though the strength of the Lauderdale faction may prove very annoying to our Whig Ministers in the House of Lords, it is a great error to suppose that, because they may hamper an Ad ministration, they can impede the course of those liberal measures which may be said to be already in progress. The voice of Scotland spoke from the counties and the towns, and not from the chambers and galleries of Holyrood. We have no apprehension, when we look at the House of Commons, constituted as it is at present, that any influence of any party in the other House of Parliament can deprive the people of the ad vantages which they have a right to expect from reform. The relation between cause and effect is not more necessary than that which exists between the reform that is accomplished, and the various reforms that must be accomplished before the country can be satisfied. It would be as ridiculous to think of interposing between cause and effect as between a reformed House of Commons and the reformation of other institu tions upon which it will he required to legislate, and upon which it must legislate, in the spirit of its own improvement. But though we should have no apprehension of the result in one sense, we should be sorry in another to see the experi ment tried of checking and controlling th e de termination to further Reform by means of a dominating Tory party in the House of Lords. We wish well enough to the aristocracy, and to that branch of the legislation in which t hey are represented, to hope that the counsels of such violent men as Lords Lauderdale and Carnar von, the two deserters from the Whig camp, will have but little influence on their proceedings. It is the interest of both Houses t o go hand in hand towards the completion of those moderate and reasonable Reforms which ought not to he refused to weakness, and which cannot be with held from strength. Ministers, we hope, intend it. The people and their representatives, we are sure, intend it ; and we believe, if the truth were known, that Ministers are more in danger from the party who are for going forward with an accelerated pace, than from those who wish to stand still in the hope that at length they may have an opportunity of walking backwards. Lord Lauderdale may be chuckling at the suc cess of his scheme; and it is natural that the Tories should feel gratified at the only triumph they have experienced since the passing of the Bill, but we do not see what practical advantage they are likely to derive from the display at Ho• lyrood, when, excepting in the House of Lords, it is known that their weakness is proverbial every where else.—Morning Herald. The public, who take a deep interest in the affairs of Ireland, are anxious to know what is the standard of outrage in that devoted country fixed upon Government ere the arm of the law is to be stretched forth to arrest the march of murder, and put down that system of denounce ment which has caused each man to hold his life as it were by sufferance. Ireland, in point of fact, is not at the present moment under the sway of England or of English law. She is ruled by that arch agitator, through whose in cendiary machinations those desperate bands have been formed, by whom terror, desolation, and death have been borne through the land. There is in this beggared country a power be yond that of the Monarch's, and far above that of the law—a power bidding defiance to the Government, and issuing its mandates with an audacious confidence that they will be im plicitly obeyed, which can proceed only from a perfect knowledge of the monstrous, despotic, and sanguinary Influence it possesses. Whether under the name of " Captain Rock," of" White boys," of " Volunteers," or of " the Liberator," this authority is alike potent ; and the secrecy of its organization only renders more alarming the sudden and evidently combined mode in which at different places it, at the same moment, displays its barbarity. This many-named tyranny may be divided into two classes—the one, that of the orators who inflame by their maddening speeches tile worst passions of the deluded multitude, and who boldly take their stand on the very verge of treason ; the other, that of the midnight as sassins who immolate the victims denounced in the inflammatory harangues of the former. These form one body, having one aim in view, and that aim the extinction of all remnant of autho rity possessed by England over that portion of the empire. But are the Ministry calmly to look on and see thus rent away without resistance one of the most important mem bers of the kingdom ? Are they to deliver up the loyal portion of the Irish commu nity, with their possessions, to the infuriated sway of the ruthless hordes by whom they are at this moment assailed ? Or ought they not energetically and at once to put in mull force the powers with which they are intrusted, and put down with a vigour proportioned to the emer gency of the case those who have set themselves above the common feelings of humanity? It is time the reign of terror and of blood should end, and, if the laws as now framed are too weak to combat with time Nlachiavelian antagonists they are brought to cope with, let them be strength ened until the educated incendiary is made to pay for the double guilt of instilling treason for the purpose of 'engendering murder. Let this be done, and quickly too, or men will turn from loathing those who insinuate and those who do the deed of blood to those who perm it it to be done with impunity.—Morning Post. COURT OF CHANCERY, JAN. 17. GREENOUGH V. GASKELL, Sir E. SUGDEN appealed against so much of an order of the Vice-Chancellor as went to protect the defendant from producing certain papers in his pos session, and which the plaintiffs considered neces sary for the purposes of the suit. The ground upon which this demand had been refused was, that the papers called for were confidential communications between the defendant, who was an attorney, and Mr. Darnell, who had been defendant in another cause. Mr. Darnell had been defendant in a cause as trustee, and in that character he had a right to borrow upon good security 5,0001., which was in the Court to the credit of this trust. Upon the representation of Mr. Gaskell, the present defen dant, that Mr. Darnell was a fit person to have a a part of the money on loan, the Court made an order to that effect, and 1,6501. was advanced to him, but it appearing afterwards that Mr. Darnell was not in such good circumstances, the Court called for the repayment of the 1,6501. Mr. Dar nell not having the money, Mr. Gaskell advanced it, and out of these transactions the equity of the plaintiffs in the present suit arose. They claimed in the prosecution of the present suit the production of the communications which passed between Mr. Gaskell and the town agents. Mr. PEPYS, on the other side, contended that the defendant was not bound to produce the communi cations referred to in the motion. They had been made between the defendant and his client, Mr. Darnell. The LORD CHANCELLOR said there had been many decisions on the subject, and he would take an opportunity of looking into them. ROLLS COURT, JAN. 17. ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. THE MERCERS' COMPANY. This case came on before the Court on further directions. The information was filed by the At torney-General, at the relation of a gentleman named Palmer, for the purpose of securing certain legacies which, from time to time, under wills, the first of which was dated 1545, had been bequeathed to the Mercers' Company, in order to enable them to lend out certain sums of money without interest, at their discretion, to different persons who should be mem bers of that company. From the date of these wills the funds so bequeathed continued to be dealt with according to the intentions of the testators, till some time about 1666, the date of the great fire of London, after which the charity fell into desuetude : under the investigations, however, of the Charity Commissioners, the funds, amounting to 2,8504, were brought to light, and the object of this infor mation was to have them brought into Court, and a scheme settled for their future management. When the case came on to be heard in 1831, the de fendants were ordered to pay iuto the bank the amount of the several legacies, and it was referred to the Master to approve of a scheme for their fu ture application, according to the will of the testa tors, or as near thereto as circumstances would admit. The Master by his report set forth a scheme under which it was provided that the Company, in place of paying them into the bank, as had been ordered at the hearing, should, for the sake of convenience, retain in their hands the moneys re ceived by them OH account of the several legacies, and lend them out without interest on bond with two securities to young men of their company in sums of from 501. to 5001. His HONOUR considered 5001. too large a sum to lend, as the scheme proposed. He was inclined to think that no sum should exceed 200/. It appear ing, however, that there were various funds in the hands of the Company applicable to the same pur poses, and the Court taking into account the pro portionate value of money now and when the testa tors had directed 2001. to be so laid out, this proposed limitation in the amount of the loans was ultimately abandoned. His HONOUR said that, in order to secure the publicity which was desirable and necessary to give due effect to the benevolent intentions of the testa tors, notice of the state of the funds should be placed in the hall of the company, and advertise inents should also be inserted from time to time in the public newspapers. VICE.CHANCERY COURT, JAN 17. This being the second seal day in the present Hilary Term, his Honour the VICE-CIIANCELLOR took motions. HARRIS AND ANOTHER, ASSIGNEES, V. THE BANK OF ENGLAND AND ANOTHER. Mr. KNIGHT moved to dissolve the injunction which had been granted in this cause, to restrain the defendants from giving up certain bags of dollars in their possession and custody. The injunction had been granted upon the affidavit of one of the plain tiffs, from which it appeared that he was the as signee under a commission of bankruptcy issued against Wiliam Glen Matthie, and Craig Allen Matthie, who had carried on the business of com mercial agents in Liverpool, and at Rio Grande, in the Brazils. Mr. PEPYS appeared' for the plaintiffs in support of the injunction. The VICE-CHANCELLOR did not believe one word of the plaintiff's case, and his opinion was, that even if the case was such as the plaintiffs had suggested at the bar, that was a reason why the Court should dissolve the injunction, with costs. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, JAN. 17. DOE, DEM. BAGALEY, V. LARNE AND OTHERS. This was an action of ejectment to recover pos session of certain tolls and toll-houses which had been mortgaged for money advanced to the trustees of the turnpike-roads where the toll-houses were situate. By the Act of Parliament five trustees were to be appointed under the seal of the preceding trustees. The defence to this action was, that in this case the fifth trustee had not been appointed under the seal, and on that fact appearing, the Learned Judge at the trial directed a nonsuit, which was accordingly entered, with leave, however, to move to set it aside. The rule which was after wards obtained came on to day for discussion. Rule absolute. COURT OF EXCHEQUER, JAN. 17. BLOWER V. HOLLIS. This was an action against the Sheriff of Mon mouthshire for an escape of a prisoner in his custody under an attachment of the Court of Chan cery for non-payment of costs. It was tried before Mr. Baron Gurney, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff with 2001. damages. Mr. Edward Thomas, the vicar of Llangwm, near 1.1,1 t, had filed a bill in Chancery against the plaintiff, who was one of his parishioners, for tithes. The bill was dismissed with costs, which were taxed and certi fied by the Master at 3811. 45., for non-payment of which Thomas had been arrested under the attach merit, and had escaped. At the trial an examined copy of the Chancery decree was offered in evidence. Mr. Campbell objected to its reception without the previous production of an examined copy of the bill and answer. Mr. Baron Gurney, however, received the evidence, and gave the defendant leave to move. The Solicitor-General had accordingly obtained a rule Nisi for a rion-itrit, or else for a new trial, on account of the damages being excessive, it being alleged that there was no chance of the plaintiff ever getting so much of his demand from Mr. Thomas as 2001. Mr. MAULE and Mr. NICIIOLL showed cause. Mr. TALFOURD, contra, contended that the evi dence admitted was insufficient, but the Court were against him on that point. An offer was then made respecting the damages, and the Court discharged the rule a; to the first point, and gave a we time for the parties to come to an arrangemen t specting the damages. COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Its. 11 EXPARTE CLARKE, IN RE WITHERS. On a former occasion the petitioner, a c redito the bankrupt, prayed the Court to annul the . fi at ' the ground th a t th ere was no goo d p e titioning ditor's debt. The respondent to that p e tition fa to show that ther e was a goo d p et i t i on i n g ere" debt, but the bank ru pt no t h av i ng surren dered , having been served with notice, the Court pounded the proceedings without annulling th e Mr. SWANSTON now appeared fir the s ame , P tioner, who had served notice at the bankrupt; place of abode, he being abroad, and prayed Court to annul the fiat. Mr. RICHARDS appeared for the respondent °, Their Honours the CHIEF JUDGE and Sir ROSE, without hearing him, decided that the aP , cation must be dismissed. Petition dismissed, each party to pay their oi Costs. INSOLVENT COURT, JAN. 17. John Freestone Parris, formerly a baker in P I , street, Grosvenor-square, and afterwards a La l maker, was opposed, for Messrs. Ray, wille i ;,, rf : chants, and Mr. Knapp, creditors, by Mr. I" ROFFE. He was supported by Mr. CooKE. The insolvent had been declared a bankruPt, 1830, but the bankruptcy had been superseul His present debts amounted to about 2,000/., bu t had only received consideration for 430/. of that! u, the balance consisted of debts incurred by g ivi acceptances to bills of exch ange to li qu id a te a C -n 1 position of 10s. in the pound, en t ere d i n to for., debts of Mr. Manly, a wine-m er ch an t i n the ne'!, bourhood of the Haymarket. Writs had been " 6 : against the insolvent on the non-payment of oi l bills, but he could not be found ; a distringas then issued, and a trial, in w hi c h a ver di c t WO ,-, tained on one of the bills, f o ll owe d ; an execu i Was taken out, when it was discov ere d that in '- a bill of sale of his property had been made ti Mary Woodhouse , the niece of the wife of the 016 vent, who claimed under that authority, in cr„ quence of which the execution was not put in and Messrs. Ray got nothing by their legal, P 4; ceedings; their costs amounted to upwards 0 1 11 The insolvent had already been upwards of a tvit month in Wbitecross-street Prison. It was i!g" on the part of Mrs. Woodhouse, on a suggeatiq t , the Court, that a certain box containing papers should be broken open, in order to Wert. what books or papers were contained in it, might throw light upon the affairs of the insolgeo and that the case should be adjourned till 'NW next. THE MARKETS. HAY MARKETS.—(At per Load of 36 Trusses.) CUMBERLAND (LATE ST. JAMES'S.) Coarse heavy Lowland Meadow Hay £2 0 10 0 New Meadow Hay 0 0 9 Useful Old Ditto ‘, 15 4 Fine Upland Meadow and Rye-grass Hay 3 15 5 Clover flay 4 0 I Oat Straw £1 Sto £1 10) Wheat Straw... 110 5' Supply moderately good, trade a little alive, and pn e tionary. Coarse heavy Lowland Meadow Hay £2 5 to New Meadow Hay o 0 Useful Old Ditto 3 0 Fine Upland Meadow and Rye-grass Hay 4 0 Cover Hay (extra fine)...£s 5 „Generally 4 5 oat Straw ... £1 4to £1 6 f Wheat Straw 1 8 rf , Supply rather limit e d, trade dull, and prices stat i o n> SOUTHALL MARKET.—Jan. This day's supply of Beast s was moderately good, and sf kind of small stock but limited. The market was rather, t attended by buyers, particularly from London, and was dull throughout, at the following pri ces per stone o sink the oflals:— _ Beef._ 3s. Od. to 4s 6d I 3s. Bd. t °' ; Mutton 310 5 0 f Pork 3"S The foregoing quotations are prime Beef and Pork is stone lower, prime Veal 2d. per s t one hi g h er, t h an on , se'nnight ; prices otherwise stationary. Beasts, 313; t 2,078 ; Calves, 36 ; Pigs, 44. But a sma ll propor tion stock, left the market unsold. LEWES M ARK ET.--Jan. 15. 3s. Bd. to 4s. fxl. I V, :on 4 0 50 I Pork. .._... w ., 1 13( 0 t'i Supply moderately good, and trade rathor dull . RUMFORD MARKET.—Jan. 16. s. d. los. d. s. d ' Beef 3 0 4 4 Veal N * lutton 3 8 4 8 Pork 3' 1 Suckling Calves from 14s. to 34s ; Quarter old Pig s l2s 5O 1 oe' 0 e' Supply limited, and trade with prime small Veal s° brisk, with other kinds of meat dull. VIS I ErS DURING COUNTRY CORN MARK W heat. Barley. Oats. Per Quarter. Blandford —......... Brigg S. to S. s. s. 26 36 40 S. t o s. 22 19 22 51 17 1 16 18 '24 15 20 17 22 19 20 22 28 ° 16 22 52 19 25 „j i 17 22 '" 20 23•"" "r, 22 2 2 7 8 4 . 16 24 13 14 .1" Ca abridge..,.,,,,,,,,, Chard .-----..- 52 60 - 55 48 56 58 63 56 64 50 55 54 56 55 59 42 59 43 55 50 64 Huntingdon --- Long Sutton--.. Louth 28 32 22 3L Lynn.... Newark 27 32 20 39 29 37 29 39 25 34 30 34 -• 43 36 38 24 34 20 24 Nottingham Peterborough Plymouth Pontefract Sleaforil Uppingh am ..—...... Wisbech .nr,•••••••• h. 65 70 44 57 44 46 LEEDS CORN MARKET.—Jan. 15. 0 Wheat, Norfolk and Suffolk, 601 b. York. and Lincoln. 601 b. Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk Yorkshire and Lincolnshire Grinding Beans 631 b. Oats, Potatoe —healing, For. 12d. to 13d Eng. 11d. to I`4sl . n. Shelling Rapeseed, English, 21/. to '22t Foreign, —l. tom LIVERPOOL CORN EXCHANGE.—Jan. 1.5. Wu EAT, English, White, per 701 b. Red . Scotch, Welch, and Manx Irish, White 7 4 ----- Red 7 I Foreign 8 6 OATS, English, Welsh, and Scotch, per 451 b 2 5 -- Irish Foreign 2 BARLEY, English, Malting, per Imp. quarter 34 0 —.----:- Scotch and Irish, per GOlbs. ---.. Feeding 3 10 BEANS, English, per Imperial quarter 36 0 Irish, Fa. Foreign PEASE, English, per Imperial quarter 44 0 -- Foreign FLOUR, English, per 2801 b. 43 0 ---- Irish OATMEAL, English and Irish, per 2401bs 2l 0 INDIAN CORN, per 4401 b. RYE, per Imperial quarter NIALT, per Imperial quarter Flo.- . . . 2 1 6 'Vh 0 e d at in miBa'rkodet,"'. "yin Wheal Oats. I Barley Flour. - , _ 1 til t! Qrs. Qrs. Qrs. Foreign, Brls.ilrish, S t e. scks. 1 e d ,, 18,1155 8,190 1,183 0 1 8,089 .......„ ten sta HADDINGTON CORN M A RKET.—Jan. iiii i'ia,l % ( Wheat. Barley. Oats. Pease. S 4 4 0 First s6s Ocl 32s 6d 20s 04 25s 6d :;' r4l) -, Third i qrs. of 19 Unsold.-0 Grey. Pis' ' Average .................. 2/. 9s. Od. 9-12ths. I • 'ht ..... 1 l'eti ....---' ei,e ti . BIRTHS. f madi e .s. Se co nd ... ::ere 4 4 9 :3 od On the 17th inst. the lady of Charles Porcher Lang' a a son. ~,f t , -- 1 "ri 454 23 wh s e Cid reof tv•'' 2_l On the 17th inst. at Kensington, the lady of J. ,"" -'' Durrant, Esq., of a daughter. 4 be t ,, On the 17th inst. in Ely-place, Mrs. Francis Whisllo/ C t w " On the 14th inst. at Patrick-Bampton, the lady ''' - 'lli lieneage Elsley, Esq., of a son. / 61. 45 1 ri, 4i MARRIED. #a tY tajo, On the 17th inst. at St. Lawrence Church, Cate: 4.- d L , 'lt William Verey, Esq., to Catharine Louisa, second d, a l' - "lit, the late John Willim Newby, Esq., of Poland-stree t, 'l , street. f °. 0 On the 15th inst. Charles Bacon Grey, Espy 0 iberet Northumberland, to Emily, youngest daughter of t ',, P o e t! C 544 William Loraine, Bart., 01 Kirkharle, in the same eo","i,, tti On the Bth inst. at St. Martin's Church, Guerol„i a be t r William Tupper, late Fellow of Exeter College, Oxf° l e ,,k, a d, mid son 01 the late Daniel Tupper, Esq., of Hatn it y,' Eliza Jane, daughter of Thomas Priaulx, Esq., of 31 0 10 i On the 17th inst. William Wilson, Esq., to Eliza, Robert Metcalf, Esq., of Camberwell-grove. --- - ' 1 1 . DIED. od o 4 sho o t ON the 15th inst., after an illness of nine days, pr 00 , severe cold, Charles Dibdin, Esq., for many years ° eig if , , manager at seve al London Theatres. He is deeply r o t p l aits his family, who loved and respected him for his ferve o ! 3, affected piety, which shone forth in his latter ye 3 ll creased and peculiar lusture. He retained his ment;o l ~..,) 'A o to the last hour, and spoke of his approaching d:',4 4 '2, c h eer f u l n ess, expressing always an humble but firm . 9, c merits of his Redeemer. „i , 1-,, - On the 14th inst. at Warminster, Wilts, Mrs. Van' ~ ' , Lift Sith year. 4 ,, tenh a On the 16th inst. at Camden-town, John Waller, C am Long-acre, in his 65th year. 0 f 4' LH On the 16th inst. Nicholas Birch, Esq., of 1N. 3 Goodman's-fields, in the 86th year of his age lie, Platt On the 16th inst. at Westrop-house, Highworth, - s e R a i d, llness , Mrs. Slater, of Upper Gower-street, Bedfor: 1 ;1 r , Lan vi r, ---- i PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY M U It D 0 YO ,u• i,„r 0 ....P r ' SUN OFFICE, 112, STRAND, LONDON. MART GLAB G°W t th at t he Th e sal Dra lc eme Beside s ... W i ll ha any on d. " the s i l'and, a l „ e and c 0 :4 1 4 entitled to o,oooi a no o se,. ; sti t Ord er . , be d u).. ° iron TI ttext'] 13 ha .'BEI, als o bees thf, fully guara IN Al',NEl°n "f t ° jest t,, a ' stnall T he se‘ r e ro i ; nie Vlr.nilv Value, Wilk!, 2, 0, Will b "0 c „ , ALLOO" ~,nares ONE a 1, te e , . fionault tee, delicacy 're, nl A n g the IN -.lily at , • ed to . ny e I:3E 11 , T h Just D eb' GL Th i4,B ". e SYP hy r , 4 "d p lay EIAI ',. s .Qr tf :ad a Ih, — n-at '(held ri . Bath Ivo ' la tn ; -16 . 1 Lod kr Lft•ds!id,ge; Tr 'ore Ald o ' 44 T o d r din and LE '4O eicb By ,%