The Sun. — London, England, 1831-09-01 00:00:00

7_,oras4 does not mean to recommend or approve !the c wtinuance of benefices so small as to reqmre drat the incumbent should he pinched for food, if be -Ines not obtain a second benefice, or that the con= crept:ions of two parishes should be perished f n food spiritual by his holding both, and hut half serving both. We do not presume that Lord Harrowby requires inequality of subsistence to be carried to extremes in the Church of England, any more than our worthy correspondent wishes ":pittrali:. ties" to be carried to extremes. We see, therefOre, no reason in this reference to his Lordship's expressions. When we are told that in some cases clergymen would starve upon one living, and therefore tle.; there must be a dispensing power m the !11 - Shops, will any lover of dispensation consent that Parlia ment shall confine the exercise or that power to in stances of rely poor and insntlicient livings? Will they do that ? Will the Archbishop of Canterbto vote for the it roduction of a clause into his I3ill, for withholding the prerogative of dispensation, stve only where the livings to be held simultaneously fall jointly within a certain and moderate income . ? We shall then he able to give credit to the profes sions cf a wish to reform the real abuses of d i ,. Church. We have read the quotations from Arch bishop Whitgift's Nine Reasons against the Anti plurality Bill of his days, with which our rnrres pondent has favoured us. It was a fine time that, for men with power and patronage. in their hand, and a fine nuthority,—Archbishop Whitgift, albeit a celebrated prelate, we acknowledge,—from whom to take a decision in cur own days on matters of Church grievance and gross abuse! We print our correspondent's letter and the Archbishop's dicta upon the question ; so if the cause of plurality de rives no strength from either, the fault does trot rest at our door.—Times. Sir George Hill, who has been appointed to the Government of St. Vincent's, was handled in such a manner last night for a defalcetien of above 2,0001., that we should suppose it would - be utierly irnpos sible for him to show his face in his situation after the arrival of the English newspapers containing en account of the debate into the colony. The teverity with which Sir George was treated, however harsh it may appear towards the individual, will be of be nefit in improving the national morality. It is indi cative of more correct views with regard to injuring the public. However, it is to he hoped that some thing like the system pursued in France, of which Dr. Bowring has furnished an account in a report lately circulated by Parliament, will prevent in fee ture all defalcations of this nature. In France, it appears, it is not in the power of any functionary to keep back any money a single day, the Govern ment having constantly their eye on all his ope rations.--Morning Chronicle. The Irish Members are determined to allow Mi nisters no rest till the yeomanry are put down. Night after night the subject is agitated in the House, and it is impossible not to see that the good cause gains by every fresh ngitation. Last night, a petition was presented by Mr. Biekeney, prayin g that the Irish yeomanry should be disbanded. This brought up the affair of Newtown-harry, when Mr. Lambert read an extract of a letter he had received from the Rev. Mr. Walsh, confirming the statement he had made regarding the proceedings of the yeo manry, and respecting the outrage committed upon a poor woman, named Mary Maloney. He read to the House the following letter, which he had re-- (-civet! from a highly-respectable person :—" I have just seen a person who saw the body of the poor woman, Mary Maloney, the mother of six children ! Horrid sight ! The ball passed through her, ripped open her belly—she was within six weeks of her' confinement, and the child's head and body pro tuded through the wound. This was seen by numbers, who can testify to the fee upon oath if ne ces,ary." Welt might Mr. Hume exclaim, " his Majesty's Ministers suppose that the people of Ireland would rest satisfied that seventeen per sons shall be put to death, and no justice executed upon the perpetrators of the offence ?" However, it is not, we believe, in the power of Ministers to obtain justice for any atrocities in Ireland, because the tribunals are in the hands of the oppressors. Neither Grand nor Petty July will do their duty in matters between Orangemen and Catholics. But what Government can do is to take the arms from the yeomanry, and thus to guard in some sort against future outrage. It really strikes us to be a great mistake on the part of Government, to avow that it is under the necessity of relying on the services of the yeomanry. We doubt if the facts warrant this. In the article in the New Ilfonthly Magazine for -September, from the pen of a distinguished Irish Member, a very contemptible idea is given of this force, which Ministers have made their sheet anchor. It is difficult (says the writer) to conceive the motives of the Government. There is in them something that appears little short of infatuation. The Irish yeomanry have long been a nuisance, without one redeeming advantage. They have nei ther past services nor present need, nor respectable condition, nor numerical force, to plead for their preservation, or allow for the mischief which they have caused. Altogether their existing force does not exceed 12,000 or 15,000 men. This probably is a great over-statement. They are for the most part of the mere populace; they are disowned by the great mass of respectabl e Irish Protestants, and abhorred of course by seven millions of Irish Gttholics. But it is said they put down the rebellion of 1798, and preserved the connexion. This is their common cry, and that of their partisans. It is one of the grossest and rankest misrepresentations ever made. The yeomanry provoked the Wexford insurrection by their atrocities, practised upon the unprotected and unarmed peasantry; and with the cowardice so com monly allied to cruelty, they fled from the armed or rather half-armed rebels, and from the wretched handful of French desperadoes which landed in the west." There does, indeed, seem an infatuation on the subject of the yeomanry. Mr. Hume well ob served, " that a body of armed men had committed a gross outrage—had taken away the lives of several of their unoffending fellow-countrymen. They (the House) had that fact before them ; they had also another fact, namely, thet bills had been sent up to a Grand Jury arid ignored, and, therefore, no public trial took place. Was it not, then, fitting that the Government should see that persons thus entrusted with arms had not made an evil use of them ? any man in his senses doubt that the persons to whom he alluded ought to have these arms taken out of their hands, and was it not in the power of the Irish . Government to do so ?"—Morning, Chronicle. SINGULAR FACT.—A gentleman has a Pigeon-house in the vicinity of Dunbar, and in order to prevent the troublesome and profitless visits of the cats, he set traps at the only places by which they could pos sibly gain admittance. About ten months since, a cat be longing to Mr. JOHN AITCHISON, innkeeper, entered the pigeon. house, when one of the traps instantly snapt off her tail and tight fore leg. About ten days ago, this cat had three kittens, and strange to sly, they had all tails exactly resembling the stump which the trap had left their unfortunate mother. The halt and maimed baudron, and her tail-less progeny, are considered great curiosit'es at Dunbar. Cumous DELUSIoN —There is a woman residing at Waltvorth, is th l e ;He of a tradesman in humble circumstances, Who nt :houring under an opinion that she is enciente of a been resorted to in vain f i t e s t n r:t t u i l e t B e u w i t m o 4 l r f p l o ' s ' e of convincing her Every means has of her delusion. ye i ars of age. She considers that her appetite has increase d the last few months, which she attribute s to within to the raven ous qualities of her unruly tenant. Latterly, v0w,,,„, she has had rec ourse to the " starving sy s t em ," i n t h e hope of destroying the monster, until she has nearly starved herself. Since she has adopted this plan, so fixed is her conviclion, that she asserts she frequently hears the wolf cry, and feels it kick for the want of nourishment. A medical gentleman, who has examined her, considers that she is afflicted with ovarian dropsy, or an abdominal tumour of some other kind, which is gradually increasing in size, and the presence of which she feels, and which at times causes considerable pain. The delusion appears to become stronger in proportion to the increase in the size of the tumour.—Lancet. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF lORDS, AuGusr3l. The nuchess of Kent's Annuity Bill was read a third :irne And passed. The Plurality of Benefices' Bill iva• ; MI the motion of the Archbishop of CAN , EatuA.Y, committed. Some amendments were ittrethiced, and it was ordered that the Bill slink' be printed as amended. 'Lord ELLENBOROUGH postponed the p'7';:senting of the shipownos' petition till Fridey.%—Atijoutectl. HO 47 , 3 V, OF COMMONS, Auausr3l. INGLIS presented a petition from 700 Pro testant persons in Ireland, on the subject of the College cf Maynooth. The petition stated that this Culler_ tvt.s foun'ed with the view of the Catholic Prier*Od effACsting persons in that country free from . the irifittence of any Foreign Power. It complai'Mql that formerly the College was frerrenterl by persons Of rank, hut that now it bad became a habit to introduce into the Priesthood persons of low rank in life, so that out of 206 persons now studetit only six were marked in the books as sons of metchant,r, one as the son of an apothecary, one AI the'wn of an archi - - tect, anti all the rest were the sons of graziers, farmers, and small tradesmen, It - complained that the College was opposed to the - circulation of the Bible, even a the Catho lic Bildt, which was sold at so high. r. price that the great hotly of the people were unabt! , . to purchase it. The peti tioners declared that tinier these circumstances the Col lege was net fulfilling the intention of its foundation, and that the grant to it ought to be discontinued. Mr. O'CONNELL remarked, that it was gratifying for him to observe, that no Catholics complained of the Col lege of Maynooth, this petition being only sig-oed by Pro testants. ror the Catholics it had perreetly answered the intettfron of its foundation. Ii observed that people of high literary attiinmenta had been educated at Maynooth, and instanced Dr, M'Cabe, who, he said, was a man of as high acquirtthents as any man whitever. That was an answev to the charge about the sort of persons educated there. Ile had no wish to retain this paltry grant, if the Government would allow the Catholics to retain all those establishments which, in former times, their ancestors had founded fee the education of their own priesthood. Lord k'ILLEEN bore testimony to the excellence of ti education afforded at Maynooth, where seventeen out of the whole number of the present Irish Catholic Bishops had been educated. Mr. commented with some severity upon the statement that the persons educated at Maynooth were not of noble birth. He contended that the Scotch Clergy and the Irish Clergy were as well educated as the Clergy of the Church of England, and performed their duties quite as well.—(l-Itiar, hear.) He was peculiarly sorry to hear stidi his observation as that fall from the Hon. Btrotret, who, as the representative of an University, aught to have more liberality. He was sorry, by such re marks, to be obliged to believe that the state of our Uni versities were such that they were the hot-beds of illibe rality and prejudice. Mr. S. RICE advised that the discussion on this sub, ject should be postponed till the question of the vote for the grant to Maynooth came before the House in the course of the evening. If the grant to that College were withd.awn, the College would not want support, for it would be supported by the people --(Hear, bear.) Mr. GRATTAN impugned the signatures attached to the petition, and insisted that it was the work of persons who wanted to undo what this House had so beneficially done in 1829. Sir R. INGLIS wits not responsible for the respecta bility of the persons who signed this petition, for he was not acquainted with any one of them. Ile thought the matter of the petition deserving of consideration. Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that the petition had been signed by the Rev. Thomas P. Magee and his Curate twice over. That Rev. Gentleman enjoyed a perfect sine tt, ure, and he (Mr. O'Connell) knew no part of the Scrip tures requiring that Clergymen should ride in their car riages. IRISH YEOMANRY. Mr. BLAKENEY presented two petitions, one from Dunleakney, against the Kildare-street Society, and the other from the store place, praying that the Irish Yeo manry should he disbanded. Mr. LAMBERT referred to what he hail said on a former occasion, regarding the proceedings at Newtown harry, and read an extract of a letter from the Rev. Mr. Walsh, confirming the statement be had matte regarding the proceedings of the yeomanry. He contended that the present Government ought to allow the yeomanry to fall again in , o disuse. Mr. MAXWELL was sorry that the subject had been revived, and expressed his disbelief that any shots had been fired over the Roman Catholic chapel, or that any woman had (as had been asserted) been ripped up during the commotions at Newtownbarry. The party or parties accused would be put upon their trial, and he earnestly recommended the Hon. Member (Mr. Lambert), with his present feelings upon the subject, to absent himself from the Grand Jury. Mr. BLAKENEY was satisfied, on the most unques tionable evidence, that the assertion regarding the woman was true ; she was in a❑ advanced state of pregnancy at the time. _ _ Mr. WALKER also read an extract from a letter from the Rev. Mr. Walsh, by which it appeared that the only etrot in the Hon. Member's (Mr. Lambert) statement was, that he had said shots were fired, whereas he ought to have said that one shot was fired. There was no doubt that a woman had been killed under the most shocking circumstances; she was pregnant, and the ball fired passed through the head of the child. He saw no objection to the Hon. Member's sitting on the Grand Jury, in order to take care that justice was done, although it might be proper that he should not form one of the twelve men who were to decide ultimately upon the guilt or innocence of the accused. Mr. CRAMPTON remarked that the whore question was in a course of judicial inquiry. He (Mr. Clatopron) objected, therefore, to discuss one of this kind, the effect of which must be to prejudice the case of the policeman, as ,inst whom a bill for manslaughter had been found, in the case particularly alluded to. Mr. O'CONNELL contended, that public justice would not be done by trying the policeman on a bill charging him only with manslaughter; either he had been guilty of murder, er of nothing. . Mr. CRAIIPTON interposed to remark that the pre tient discussion was trying the policeman by anticipation. Mr. O'CONNELL said the prosecution of the police man in Ireland was a mere mockery and delusion, and he complained that Government was throwing the shield of a pretended prosecution over the delinquent. The yeomanry ought to have been deprived of their arms at once, as they had been in the time of Lord Liverpool, when a similar massacre took place at Strabee. The truth was, the pre sent Government was resolved to screen all who attacked the unhappy people of Ireland. What degree of justice or impartiality had it shown in appointing twenty-one sti pendiary Magistrates, not one of whom was a Roman Ca tholic? In the late disgusting and disgraceful affair at Newtownbarry, the yeomanry had been ordered by their superior officers to fire. Mr. STANLEY (interposing) said the evidence was most contradictory upon the point whether the yeomanry had or had not recrived orders to fire. Mr. O'CONNELL added, the Captain of the yeomanry swore oue way and his men another ; and he appealed to the House whether it was fit such a corps should continue to exist, when the officer asserted he had given no order to fire, and the yeomanry insisted that he had given such an order? Mr. STANLEY observed that the testimony upon the question, not merely of the Captain and of the yeomanry, but of other witnesses, was most discordant. Mr. O'CONNELL knew nothing but from the news paptrs.—(Cheers ) He was acquainted with the Re porters who were present, and who furnished the accounts to the Irish newspapers, and he was aware that the Cap tain of the yeomanry said one thing and his men another, on the important paint, whether orders were or were not given to fire. Mr. H. GRATTAN said, that if the Government did not protect them they most protect themselves. In the parish of Rathdrum, with which he was connected, the Roman Catholic inhabitants were made to pass under a triumphal arch erected by the Orangemen, and a pistol war fired so close to the face of a Catholic Clergyman that the flame almost scorched him. The fact was, unless the Orangemen were put down, they would put down the Go vernment itself. Mr. LAMBERT repeated his former statements re specting the outrage committed upon a poor woman named Mary Maloney, and read to the House the following letter, which he had received from a highly respectable person, confirmatory of that fact :—" I have just seen a person who saw the body of the poor woman Mary Maloney, the mother of six children. Horrid sight ! the ball passed throu g h her, ripped open her belly—she was within six weeks of her confinement, and the child's head and body protruded through the wound. This was seen by numbers who can testify to the fact, upon oath, if necessary." Mr. HUME put it to the House if the time had not at length arrived when it was incumbent upon his Majesty's Government to institute an inquiry ? Did they, suppose that the people of Ireland would rest satisfied thatseventeen persons should be put to death, and no justice executed upon-the perpetrators of the oft'enee ? Ile Would say that he thought the attention of the House was well occupied in hearing complaints upon that subject. If necessary, let the business of the House stand still, but let justice be administered. Let not the Government of Ireland be allowed to betray such weakness, or if the present official persons were not competent; let them retire. Inefficient personS not be allowed to occupy such situations in times. The p rind had no' arrived when not only the people of Ireland, but the people of England, ought to demand inquiry. Mr. STANLEY said, that if the Hon. Gentleman meant to say that the time had arrived when the Irish Government should inflict puni!..hmritt Upon persons not found guilty by the ortiinary tribunals, be confessed be cott'd not agree with him. Whatever party feeling there might exist upon the subject, the Irish Government had been acquitted, even by the Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry, of any participation in that feeling ; and that Honourable and Learned Member was one d the warmest, not to say the most violent, advocates on the other side. Let the Home only turn its attention to the real state of the facts. Immediately on the lament abl'et occurreute taking place, Government sent down an officer, for the purpose of setting an inquiry on foot—Govern ment conducted the prosecution—Government persisted to the utmost in brim the matter before a regular legal tri bunal—and what more could Government do ? Ile con fessed it did not appear to him that the House was justified in proceeding judicially upon the highly-coloured statements brought under its consideration by the Hon. Member for Wexford. Mr. H rlfE said that a body of armed men had com mitted a gross outrage—had taken away the lives of several of their unoffending fellow-countrymen. They (the House) had that fact before them—they had also another fact, namely, that bills had been sent up to a Grand Jury and ignored, and therefore no public trial took place. Was it not then fitting that the Government should see that per sons thus entrusted with arms had not made an evil use of them ? Did any man in his settees doubt that the persons to whom he alluded ought to have their arms taken out of their hands ; and was it not in the power of the Irish Government to do so ? Mr. JEPHSON said that i;fter the letter which had been read, there could not be a second opinion as to the necessity which there existed for disarming the offending parties. Mr. HUNT, after adverting to the crimes committed by the yeomanry at Manchester, obFerved that it was not matter of surprise that Irish Members should be loud in their complaints. Mr. LAMBERT said that the facts fully supported the statement which he had made. After a few words from Colonel TOARENS, the petition was ordered to be printed. On the question that the Order of the Dry be then read for the House resolving itself into a Cruimittee of Supply, Sir GEORGE MURRAY gave notice, that in the Committee on the Scotch Reform Bill, he should move a clause that all counties in Scotland, which contained a population of 100,000, should return two Members to serve in Parliament. He should also move that the city of Perth do return one representative. An 110 N. MEMBER gave notice, that he should move that the Eastern District of boroughs in Fife do return one Member. SUPPLY. The House having resolved itself into a Committtee of Supply, Mr. RICE moved that a sum of 50,0001. be granted for defraying the probable exprnres of their Majesties Coronation. The Committee would observe, that that sum amounted to not mere than a fifth part of the sum expended upon the last Coronation, and that therefore the arrangements must have been made upon a principle of the strictest economy. Mr. HUME was ready to admit, that if a Coronation at all took place, the vote moved for the approaching cere mony was moderate compared with the expence attendant upon the Coronation of George the Fourth ; hut he could not help expressing great regret that his Majesty's Govern ment should hare thought it necessary to call for such a slim as 50,0001. He did not blame the present Govern ment for the manner in which they brought forward the present vote ; on the contrary, he believed they mad- the whole of their arrangements with a view to save expence ; nevertheless, he could not bring himself to regard such an • appropriation of 50,000/. otherwise than a complete throwing of it away, and he %Ira; quite sure that it would be infinitely more satisfactory to the people if the ceremonial were gone through without such an expenditure of the public money. He must, therefore protest against the grant. Mr. HUNT said, that if the Hon. Member for Middle sex was sincere in his opposition to the vote, he would di vide the Hou e upon it, and if he did, he (Mr. Hunt) would divide with him. Mr. HUME did not :understand the Hon. Member for Preston. He (Mr. Hume) thought it right to give his opinion on the vote, but it did not necessarily follow that he was thereupon to put the House to the trouble of divid ing without the prospect of any useful result. Mr. RICE differed front the Hon. Member for Middle sex, as to the necessity which there existed for the cere monial of the Coronation. Those who framed the Corona tion Oath were deeply impressed with the necessity fur such a ceremnny, and there was no man acquainted with the Constitution, who for a moment doubted that it was not alone the King, but the people who were interested in the due performance of that ceremony. Mr. O'CONNELL said the Hon. Member for Preston had accused the Hon. Member for Middlesex of insincerity. As mankind were prone to judge of others from them selves, he confessed it did surprise him to bear the Hon. Member for Preston accusing any Member of that House of insincerity.—(A laugh.) As to the ceremonial of the Coronation, he was persuaded that there were very few persons in that llow.e, or in the country at large, who did not feel the propriety of such a solemn recognition of the compact between the Monarch and the people ; and he was sure no Monarch could take the oaths with more perfect sincerity than could our present most gracious Sovereign. His Hon. Friend the Member for Middlesex had been re commended to divide the House upon the present vote. Did he venture upon that step, he assured him he would stand alone. There was one additional and great cause of satisfaction—namely, that the proposed expence would not amount to more than one-filth of the expence of the last Coronation. Mr. BRISCOE approve.' cf the vote. Mr. HUME—AII that he would contend for was this_ that the ensuing Coronation might be conducted without expellee. The people were not admitted to the ceremony, and in fret and in truth, his Majesty's Government were driven into the expence by the taunts of the opponents in the other House ; they seemed to have no power to resist those taunts. Of this, at all events, he felt perfectly as sured, that if the expences were kept within 5,0001. the arrangement would prove much more sa tisfactory to the people ; it was an expense for excluding the people.— Vote agreed to. Mr. RICE said, that the next vote was one of tlicese which was under the consideration of the Committee above stairs—it was for defraying the expences of the House hold of the Lor-I Lieutenant of Ireland. He could assure the Committee, that all possible p sins had been taken to render the estimate as low as possible—it was still under the consideration of a Committee above stairs, and he bad no doubt that it would obtain, as it merited, their most serious attention. The amount was 16,379/. 14s. 111. Mr. HUME bore testiinon✓ to the anxiety manifested by the present Lord Lieutenant of Ireland to effect all possible reductions, but he hoped soon to see the office abolished altogether. He trusted that the first S:ssion of a reformed Parliament would put an end to it. Sir JOHN NEWPORT, on the subject of the office of Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, would reserve himself till the subject came regularly under the consideration of the House. Sir JOHN BURKE observed, that there was a sum of 2,3731. for the payment of the Battle Me Guards, and wished for some explanation on that point. Mr. STANLEY said that they formed part of the pageantry attendant upon the office of Lord Lieutenant-- that the present members of th.t body had purchased their situatit:ns, and, therefore, could not with any justice be dismissed, but it was intended gradually to abolish them as they fell in. Mr. O'CONNELL approved of the plan of abolishing them as vacancies by death arose ; but as to the office of Lord Lieutenant, he could not agree to its abolition ; for if there were one subject more than another upon which all Irishmen were unanimous, it was upon the expediency of maintaining that office and the establishments attendant upon it. Mr. LEADER said, that during the last ten years, there had been a falling off of four hundred thousand pounds a year in the customs and excise of the city of Dublin. Could it then dispense with any of the usual advantages which it at present possess .d ? Mr. HUME did not desire the abolition for the mere sake of the pecuniary saving, though that was not incon siderable, but for the sak,l of good government in Ireland, Till they got rid of the Lord Lieutenant, there would be nothing like good government in Ireland. If the Iris h Members on the other side rose to express their opinions, he was sure they would dissent from those of the Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry. An liox. I 1 taai wished to know who it was that preitenbed Irish gentlemen from sraking?—(Great laugh ter, in which Mr. Hume heartily joined.) The next was a sum 0f:5,334/. for defraying the charges of the office of Vice Treasurer in Ireland. Mr. O'CONNELL said that the late Vice-Treasurer was a di faulter to a large amount, and he should be glad to know whether anything and what bad been done on th jt subject ? Mr. RICE began by explaining, that the late Vice- Treasurer of Ireland, Sir George Hill, had some years ago an account with the Government, the balance of which was about 8001, but vas subsequsntly reduced to a much smaller sum. On his being appointed to the Vice-Trea surystlip, the annual suns that passed through his bands was 10,0001. ; but an account of the disbursement of this for the five years that he held the office was not rendered up to the time that the late Government appointed him to the office of Grovornor of St. Vincent. After Sir G. 11111 had sailed to the West Indies he was w►itten to on teh subject, and his accounts were peremptorily demanded ; on which they were then rendered by a gentleman in Ireland, who was named by Sir G. Hill ; and on an examination, it appeared that there were about 2,000/. due froat Sir G. Hill to the Government. the payment of which hail been demanded at his hands, together with the vouchers for the other part of the account. Mr. R. GORDON had been the first to mention this subject to the House; but, subsequently, understanding that the business was in a course of inquiry, he had not continued to press it. Ile attached no blame to this Go vernment, but he did to the last, fir sending Sir G. Hill uut to the colonies before he hail rendered his Irish ac counts to the Treasury. Mr. HUME went further, and wculd say, that the Treasury WaS highly culpable in not requiring their ac counts to be settled annually. Mr. G. DAWSON was surprised at the tone of the speeches of the last two Hon. Gentlemen. They treated the case as if there was an actual defalcati•m ; but there was a great difference between the postponement of an ac count and a defalcation. He admitted, however, that this account had been postponed a very long time; and he (Mr. G. Dawson) bad done everything in his power while in office, to bring Sir G. Hill to a settlement ; but, unfortunately, he had not succeeded.—(A laugh, and hear, hear.) He said this, that no man bad a right to cast an aspersion on Sir G. Hill till it was proved that he was unwilling to pay the balance ; and he would under take t say, that the public would not lose a shilling by this account. Mr. R. GORDON had not cast any aspersions ; he had only said that the account was confused ; and he thought that that was pretty evident from the Right Hon. Gentleman's own statement—(A laugh)—and he must again say, that he attributed great blame to the late Go vernment for allowing this account to run live years with out any elucidation of it.--(Hear.) Sir J. NEWPORT referred to the case of Chinnerv, and observed, that he had several times attempted to call the attention of the Government to it at that time ; but the result was that his appeal not having been attended to, a considerable sum was lost in that case. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that there would be no money lost in Sir G. Hill's case. Perhaps so ; but he thought that that was no answer to the public for the delay that had been allowed to take place.—(llear, hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL wished to know what was the sum for which vouchers► were required in Sir G. Hill's account? Mr. RICE did not precisely know ; but supposing there were vouchers for ail the account, there would still be 2,1007. unaecNinted tor. Mr. O'CONNELL zpked what excuse there could pos- sibly be for these 2,1001 being for a moment in Sir G. pocket ? He defied any man to say that, on his own confession, he seas not a public peculator ; and those who refrained from insisting on the accounts were partici patois in the crime. The Right Hon. Gentleman said that he had written to him threatening letters, but what were those, when the iSsue of farther money ought to have been stopped.— (Hear, bear.) It was said that t'ie public would not ultimately he losers; but he did not know that. The next packet from the \Vest Indies might bring news that the yellow fever had killed him. He should feel it his duty to bring this matter again before the House ; for he did not know that the present Government teas justi fied in continuing this person i❑ office. He knew of no ,hing worse than political timidity ; that was the besetting sin of the present Administration, and he wished to God that they would learn to distinguish their friends from their enemies. —(Loud cries of " hear" from Mr. Hume.) Sir G. MURRAY thought the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Rice) had put this case upon its proper footing, by stating that the present Government was becoming urgent with Sir G. Hill to explain the matter, at the same time taking care not to press too heavily upon that; gentleman. Ile thought that to say, however, Sir G. Bill was by this transaction unfitted to hold his office in the West Indies of the Gmornorship of St. Vincent was, to say the least of it, a little premature. Mr. WILKS trusted that this would be an example i❑ future to the Government, to make them alive to com pelling their officers'to account for the sums advanced to them. Mr. G. DAWSON perhaps had to come extent become a party to some degree of blame in this affair; but, know ing his connection with Sir G. Hill, he had not taken the question into his own hands, but had put the papers into the hands of the Assistant -Secretary of the Treasury, with directions to him to pursue the subject with all dili gence. It was, however, but due to the Treasury to ex onerate that dep irttnent ; and he must reluctantly admit the blame of the transaction rested with Sir G. Hill. Mr. R. GORDON was not at all satisfied with the statement of his Right Hon. Friend. lie thought that his Right Hon. Friend oueht to have insisted on Sir G. Hill settling his accounts before he went to the West Indies, or to have sent a whole statement of the case to the Colonial-office, where nothing of the affair could be known. Mr. HUME said, that if the doctrine laid down by the Right Hon. Gentleman was allowed, it would be fol lowed by the most disastrous consequences ; if the Right lion. Gentleman would read the debates in Mr. Pitt's time, he would find it laid down that no one had any right to take any portion of the public money for his own use, however accurately and entirely it might be accounted for at a subs-Anent period. Mr. O'CONNELL said that the Right Hon. Member for Harwich had accused him of committing a blunder, hut the blunder was on his part. The Knight of Kerry could know nothing of the matter, and the Right lion. Gentleman had committed a blunder himself, for it was his fault that the public money had been wasted. What had come of the 2,0001. ? Sir George Hill had had it without any authority, and spent it. The matter called loudly for the interposition of Parliament, and if no other M e mber moved for the Address to the Crown to remove that officer, he would do it himself. Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN censured the plan of givirr , a man who was a defaulter another situation abroad, that he might pay his default out of the other money he received from the public. Mr. G. DAWSON explained. The facts on which the Hon. Members had commented were made known after Sir George Hill had been appointed. They were wise, therefore, after the fact. He took blame to himself (or not having seen Sir George Hill's accounts ; but not having seen them, the Treasury could not know he was in arrears. It was bard and unjust to assert that Sir George Hill had embezzled this money, which was merely unac counted for. Mr. R. GORDON thought the Right Hon. Gentleman bad been most unsuccessful, whether he meant to defend himself or defend Sir George Hill. It was an aggravation of the negligence of the Treasury to assert, that for five years the Treasury had not had this officer's accounts be fore it, and yet had appointed him to another office. It. was clear that the money was not now at the comtnted of the public, and therefore it had been improperly appro priated. Mr. STRICKLAND hoped the Hon. Member for Kerry would move the Address he bad spoken of; for he could not conceive the offence imputed to Sir George Hill amounted to any thing but embezzlement. In private life, at least, it would he called embezzlement. Mr- HUME had a right to call Sir G. Hill an em bezzler, and his conduct embezzlement. When the prin ciples on which he had acted were defended, it was the duty of that House to investigate the matter, anti bring the whole question to a trial. Mr. HUNT complained of this—the second discussion of tie question. The present and last Governments both wished to shift the blame off their shoulders. lie, as t h e representative of the public, wished to know how the public was to be indemnified ; and he should suggest that 2,000/. less than the vote should be granted. He moved that 2,1001. be taken off from the vote. The Secretary of the Treasury m i g ht then sto p the mone y o ut of his own salary.—(A laugh.) Mr. SPRING RICE said, that the motion of the Hon. Member was nonsense and gross injustice. How any gen tleman should think of stopp i ng 2,0001 . front the salaries of the clerks at Dublin and London, in order to recover money from Sir George Hill, he could not conceive. The present Government had no blame to throw off its shoulders. Mr. HUNT respectfully denied that. He did not know any step the Government had taken to recover this money. Mr. D. W. HARVEY saw no difference between the purloiner of public or private property committed to his charge. lie thought there was much more to plead in mitigation of the errors of a poor and industrious clerk, with a family, than in favour of a titled man of rank, who had no other excuse than his own extravagance. In our Criminal Courts it was not allowed to compound a felony after it was detected. It was not enough, therefore, that the friends of Sir G. Hill offered to reimburse the pubic. That satisfied the civil party, but public justice ought also to be s aisfied. Unless the matter were followed up by some spirited individual, it w. uld end where it began He thought it ought not to stop there. Ti e imputations thrown on the individual demanded an inquiry. If they did not institute such an inquiry they would neglect their duties as trustees of the public money. Sir GEORGE MURRAY said the House had•received the assurance of the Right Hon. Meilber, the Secretary of the Treasury, that the Government would follow up this matter if the balance were not paid up as had been promised. He thought the conversation might be dropped. Mr. JAMES thought the trion , l , might be stopped out of the pay or out of the pension of Sir Georg e Hill. Another way was, for the Right Hon. Gentleman to give security for it. Mr. SPRING RICE repeated, that the Govern an nt was taking strong and pressing means to recover tl:e money. It it were not recovered the Government wou!d take measures to proceed against Sir George Hill. In answer to a question from Mr. O'Connell, be stated, that the letter written to Sir George ILII was written the very day tide communication was received from Ireland. The vote was then agreed to. The next vote was for 1,6801. for the Teller of the Ex chequer in Ireland. Mr. SPRING RICE explained, that this office had been transferred from the Civil List.—Vote agreed to. 46001. for printing statutes, proclamations, &c. was the next vote. Mr. SPRING RICE explained, that in this vote a re duction of upwards of 5.000/. had taken place, and he hoped more reductions would take place. A conversation of some length ensued on the expediency of adopting the recommendation of the Committee of Fi nance, that the proclamations of the Irish Government should be published only in the Dublin Gazette, and wit in the Irish newspapers. With a view to carrying that recommendation into effect, Mr. HumE moved to reduce the grant by 1,500/. ; and Mr. O'CoNNELL moved to re• duce it by 1,000/. On the assurance of Mr. STANLEY, however, that the subject was one which should lie taken into consideration!by the Irish Government, and that in the mean time the recommendation of the Committee of F - nance should be the general rule of their conduct, and any little deviation which necessity might require only the ex ception to that general rule, both amendments were with drawn, and the original resolution was agreed to. On the resolution granting a sum of 50,000/. to defray the expences of Criminal Prosecutions and Crown Pro ceedings in Ireland, Mr. G. DAWSON expressed an opinion that the 2,4001. a year paid to Major Woodward and Major Farmer, as visitors of the gaols of Ireland, might now be readil dispensed with. The objects for which those gentlemen were appointed had long since been accomplish d, and the propriety of abolishing the offices had engaged his atten tion while he was in t.ffice. He feared, however, that an Act of Parliament would be found necessary to abolish the situations. Mr. RICE said that he had urged the abolition of those offices, and divided the House on the ,uhject. The re• sponsibility of keeping them up rested therefore with the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. Since be (Mr. It.) came into office with the present Government he had directed his attention to the nature of the appointments, and found that they could not well he dispensed as ith, if they desired to keep the prison discipline in the good state in which it now was; but he intended to reduce the salaries to the amount allotted,at the time of the er,ation of the offices. Mr. O'CONNELL, applying himself to the subi'ct be fore the Howse, approved of the grant of .:iO,OOO/. fur the prosecutions, because it went to the constitutional admi nistration of the laws, through the means of Trial by Jury. He thought, however, that the Attorney-General should not, under the present Government, adopt the re prehensible practice of former Governments, and pa-s over the Senior Counsel on Circuit, in order to give briefs to men who were distinguished fur no quality but that of holding violent political opinions. Mr. STANLEY agreed with the Member for Kerry (Mr. O'Connell), in the propriety of keeping the Crown prosecutions free from the imputation of being conducted by political partisans, and believed the cases to be rare in which men of that character were called on to ace. On had, indeed, been mentioned, and he had given directions that such an occurrence should be avoided. With respect to the grant before the Committee, he f, ared that it would not meet all the expences. A long arrear had accrued from former years, and la , t year there was a balance left of 27,0001. although the grant had been as lar t ;e as the Fre, sent. He had hoped this year to reduce it, but the ex pence of the Special Commissions to Clare and other places rendered it impossible. After a brief conversation between Messrs. North, Crampton, Lefroy, IL Grattan, Leader, Maurice O'Con tied, Hunt, and Hume, and a few words from Mr. Daw son and Mr. O'Connell respecting the judicial capabilities of Mr. Justice D.,herty, the vote of 50,0001. fur criminal prosecutions and other law expences for the year 1831, was aareed to. The next vote proposed was 21,7411. 15s. for Non- con forming,Seceding,and other Protestant Dissenters inb eland. Mr. HUME of to the vote. He thought the Irish Church was rich enough to pay all Protestant Dissenters; and suggested, that if this grant were to be continued, it should be paid from a fine of 21,0001., which he stated might be levied upon the Bishopric of Derry. Mr. STANLEY, in answer to the Hon. Member, stated first, th it the grant was not a recent one. It was made in the first instance by Charles IL--(A laugh).— and increased by William 111., and afterwards during the Secretaryship of Lord Castlereagh. In the next place he could prove, if necessary, at the bar of the House, that the revenues of the See of Derry never did, during the incum bency of the late Bishop, exceed 12,600/. a year ; lastly, he contended, that, although the Legislature Lad the power of controuling the expenditure of the revenue of the Established Church as of any other Corporation, yet had it not the power of devoting them to any other pur poses than those for which they were originally intended. Mr. O'CONNELL said, that the Right Hon. Gentle man laid down a doctrine to which lie could not assent, when he (Mr. Stanley) Stated that the Legislature had not the power of controuling and directing the revenues of the Church of England. Ile maintained it had—inasmuch as it was from an Act of the Legislature the Church ac quired all its rights and all its prop. rty. He contended, also, that it appeared from the evidence of Mr. Leslie Foster that the revenues of the See of Derry amounted to 15 or 16,000/. per annum from lands, independent of Prebendaries and other sources of emolument in Derry, raising it altogether to 20,0001. a year. Mr. STANLEY admitted that Parliament had just a much right to touch the property of the Church of lrelar d as to attack that of any private individual, and no more. Mr. O'CONNELL maintained that church property was not like private property ; church property was public property placed in the bands of the clergy in trust for special purposes. Mr. SHEIL remarked, that the See of Watel ford only extended over 5,000 cultivated acres, which produced 5,0001. a year. The See - of Derry extended over 40,000 cultivated acres, and if, therefore, eight gave five, the ques tion was, what would forty give ?—a rule of reason suni, which it would be very easy to answer.—(Cheers.) He adverted to the discordance of opinion between the Prime Minister in the other House and the Irish Secretary in this : for Earl Grey had distinctly stated on a recent occa sion, that the church property in Ireland was too great, and that the establishment was not adopted to the countr). Upon this point he also referred to the pamphlet of Mr. Senior, the Professor of Political Economy of the Univer sity of Oxford, which -vas written with equal know ledge and ability. As a Roman Catholic, he (Mr. Sheil) could not be friendly to the Protestant Church Establish ment in Ireland, but he was not therefore its enemy ; and he all Owed that it would be most unjust to diminish the receipts of a single Bishopric or of a single living in Ireland in the hands of the present incumbent who h id duties to discharge; but in places where not a single response was heard in the Church to the clerk's " Amen," and where the cobwebs, originally over the poor-box, defiled the altar, and even hung like a canopy over the pulpit, important and immediate reductions might and ought to be made ; justice, policy, humanity—the united voice of seven millions of people, and last, not least, the Professor of Political Economy in Oxford re quired it.—' Hear, hear.) The Bill of Reform showed that the present Goveininent possessed sufficient energy and power—for the Minister who was bold enough to storm the walls of G i tton, need not pause before t e gates of Derry.—(Hear, and laughter.) It was time to speak out, and he was determined not to be guilty of the hypo crisy of silence on a question of this importance, brought f)rward at such a moment. Two mitres had fallen already to Downing street, and it was unfit that they [thou d again adorn the forehead of the establishment. Mr. R. FERGUSON was able to state, of his own knowledge, that doting the life of the late Bishop of Derry, that see, in no one year, hid produced 12,000/. Mr. HUME proposed that tlse vote should be postponed for one week, to give time for cons deration. Mr. S. RICE said that the vote (or the Presliyterian Clergy did not at all fairly raise the question regarding ' l3 l Church Establishment of Ireland, which might be brunt' on hereafter upon notice. He objected to the distin ct' his Hon. Friend had drawn between Catholic, and P rr , testant Members. No such difference was known this House. Mr. SIIEIL and Mr. S. RICE explained upon the point. A MEMBER remarked that the only real question whether the Church Establishment of Ireland contribtar to the public benefit? Mr. WYSE insisted that Parliament was omnipoo, hut only omnipotent for good, and that it might deal asi pleased with the church property of Ireland, provided be advant q,e of the whole st tte were kept in view. Mr. BRISCOE l:ojeed that the strongly-prevalent to poet was not true—that it was the intention of M•O t c, to recommend an individual to fill the vacant see, cf n't he would say no more than that he was not distinzui or '' by the highest theological !earning and attainment o/ , (Cries of question Ince intert opted the Hon. IMetaber' and he sat down.) After a few words from Lord BELrAsr, Mr. HUME agreed to forego his amendment for r p tning the vote, as he understood that such a delay "" °11 : be highly inconvenient. He strongly protested agains t doctrine that Raliatnent 11,1,1 n ot a ri g ht to deal ' l° l pleased with the church property of Ireland. The question was then put, and the vote was a greed On the lot tion of Mr. S. RICE, a vote for 170/. 15 , t 5 ,' for the sal •rics of the Lottery Officers in Ireland, was t agreed to. Li Mr. S. RICE also moved that 2,6501. be grante d the expense of Inland Navigation in Ireland, for 183 1 . The resolution was then put and agreed to. The next was 20,8331. for defraying the expense Of tbi Polire Est iblislonent in Dublin. • f Mr. HUME hoped that the further consideration 0 1. , vote would be postponed, for the purpose of affording House en opportunity of discussing the propriety of tF Record?rship and the Reprt sentation of Dublin being no' in the same individual. After a few words fram Mr. RICE, Mr. O'CONNELL concurred iu the postponement . Mr. GItATTAN supported the vote, as did Mr. l' PuortEs. After some further conver , ation the vote was a greed tc ' The next vote was 3,754/. fur the expense of the Co missioners of Judicial Inquiry.— Agreed to. Also, 1,0001. for the expense of the Record Works n' t yet compl ted. P at The next wa, 40,0001. for the employment of the P and the relief of di , tress.—Agreed to The next was 1,100/. for the salaries of the Coma' ir sioners of Public Woiks.—Agreed to. The House then resumed, the CHAIRMAN reported Pro,", gr us, and obtained leave to sit again this day ; the rep to be received on Friday. GAME BILL. 0 1/ The amendments, on th e bringing up of the repot this Bill, were read a second time. It On the question that the Bill with its amenthnen engro, , el, Colonel SII3THORPE moved that the House do 0° On this amendment the gallery was cleared for a ds sion, but none took place, and the original motion agreed tn. of, 1. The otter ne ,er orders of the d.n• were then e Hour;•, at Half-past One, adjourned. lisposed LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CILANCERY, Auuusr 3 1 ' SMITH V. BRAIN. 0; 1 Mr. PEPYS was h ear d u p on a n appeal frog) Vice-Chancellor's order, by which the plaintiff directed to pay 'o the solicitors in thes nit the l b , which had been int:Hired in its prosecution. ;`, O plaintiff Jenied that h e h a d g i ven an y instrueo o ', for the proceedings which had been taken. Mr. WHITMARSII contended that the ordel 4( o ,' pealed agait;st was valid. Tne plaintiff's chil dre ig who were infant:, were entitled under a will , ,4 , tqwees of which declined to act. He cons ti V the solicitors as :o the mole by which his child ren n in erests could be best protected, and in the h e o f ing of a clerk, who had made an affidavit to 0, effect, directed them to do what they thought ` l l , most expedient for that purpose. A hid for iher o d pointment of new trovees was accordingly filed'', the plaintiff was applied to f 0 r t h e i n f or mation : 1 , 1 , quis:te on preparing the bill, when the nature 0f, 0 4 proceedings was expla;ned to him. Some ti e j arterwards the plaintiff's master, being dispie t '' t i at hearing of the suite, a notice was served his solicitor, Mr. Selby, countermanding l e . c , proceedings, but the plaintiff afterwards pressed his regret at the discontinuance ,/ :he suit. The affidavits used in the Court belt were read in support of this statement, and it ir therefore insisted that the plaintiff had given L : F.roc , ions and sanctioned the proceedings so slto make himself liable to the costs which he had b e directed to pay by the Court below. ut The Leann CHANCELLOR said, he could no' firm the order of the Vice-Chancellor. Lord had decided in a case " Wright v. Castle," (3 ) t , vale 1.20 aft, r full consid era ti o n of t he authori tl, that where the client denied that he gave it;'-' 4 , u ; tions, and the solicitor alleged that be recei; them, the solicitor must produce his authori l i.,•. krriting to counterbalance the client's neg at i His Lordship was of opinion that this ca se.", binding, and unless tin authority in w rit rl could be prod uce d by th e pl a i n ti ff , or ti tri e ;}' he could p rove sortie act sanctioning the pro' . ings, such as the payment of money on account d, them, or the swearing o f an affidavit in the he pnistnutrion must be in favour of the client; rr Lordship was of opinion that the balance of Oil in this case was rather against the authority 4 have been given, a nd h e was not satisfied ths' , o f plaintiff had perf o r me d an y ac t t h at amoo nted' o li recognition or adoption of the suit. He sh ° ot 11 b; therefore, decid e accor di ng to th e ca s e o f " and Castle," an d go by th e ru l e t h a t the autt o il of the solicitor might be general to defend, but ":yt be sp e ci a l t o i nvo l ve t h e c li ent i n li t i gat i on .° ( of the Court below reversed with costs. e t!' His LORDSHIP rose a t t hr ee to attend his N-u.1 :1 and return of at about fiv e o 'clock. After .6 11 , 11 , 1P /1 i snort time the Cou rt a dj ourne d t il! seve n, W"",ao :notion which had been begun in the morning heard. HIMMERSLEY V. DUCKETT. His LORDSHIP gave judgment in this case, a I ,efr ing the decision below, and dismissing the al l with costs. The Court rose at half-past nine. r; His LORDSHIP having disposed of the wholelit of bankrupt and oilier petitions, and having few judgments to give, will sit to-morrow (title' purpo-e of pronouncing them, after which h e ise and sit no more in public during vacation. The cholera morbus has made its appe 3 l;i' at Revel: ep to the 12th inst. 31 military and .5 1 P r iti' l persms had been attleked—lt) of the former and 52 - latter had died. It has been reported. within these few, n V that the Lord Advoca , e will at no distant period reoft-,li high (Alice ; bad h e alth is assigned as the ca use. lo t. states that h e will b e succee d e d by Jr. JOHN A RCS' 1,0 ( Muttitav, the Solicitor-General declining to , Advocate. —Edinburgh Observer. J 1; SLAVES.— A runaway nen() is auver e, ,r Georeia, " the w hite of wlie,e eyes is red !"----1;) Carolina. B I ICPIL St" On the .'.7th ult. in Wilson-street, Mrs. William of a son. MA It RI ED. of Ao) • 'J o On the :Nth ult., at Ulverstone, by the Rev. WO , burner, Mr. Henry Andrews, of Manchester, to Hannah,' 0 daughter of Ralph Brewer, ' E.sq. of the former place. tea' On the 30th tilt. et Han ;well, Middlesex, W. Johns°, 9r,P Eaton-place, to Sarah Jane, only daughter of C. T urn 1 ` of Hanwell Park. e, f V t On the .20!It ult. at St. John's, Clerkenwell, the - -e Ab' Faulkner, P.D. Vicar of St. Sepulchre, Cambridge , t ° tl. r second daughter of the late J. thimour, Esq., of th e Compan's service. On the y 30th ult. at Lambeth, Mr. J. Stearn 4, o f Nee n t yll to Sarah Ann, eldest daughter of the late J. Pittrnaot Warwick-square. DIED. giOn the -`)Stli ult. at }la . :llford, Middlesex, aged 3 0, wife of G. Wells, Esq., of Cottage Grove, Wit:worth. On the 26th ult. in York-street, Portman-. 'laic, l gr stet% of Dunnichen, Forfarshire, N.B. aged tS. n et,," On the 21th ult. at the Manor-house, Teddingtun , given birth to a still-born son, the lady of J. Coul s on, ,`-',.‘„) daughter Cl the late Rev. E. Dawkins, of Portnudi-!;!.u.J, 4 On the:llst ult. Frances, the only daughter of ,31'. Upper Thames street, aged 20. 0 4' On the 2.)th at North Foreland Lodge, M. bac— , Greenwich, aged #52. 1 1 P.:4 ILD AND t 1.1.1.1,10 1.1 ,;U it.Dl.• • NU ' At Sum OVNICE, 111, STRAND, LONDON. /2- / I ll Oj for io th e 4n :1 a ee e t -1( ENGLAND, cd C GLE \ A° u , % ; : o N‘C at u n: DE :, af t sit °T‘retnhfaet pfurtphoesep r . a. fro t on the Bth in, r payment In orriur to fl r,,e,"'"rti will nice , 'HurisoAY the 8 MR EDIN Chief Cabin St-cond Ditto 1: 7 . .41 ,t,t,, : ._ 4(l ):3_ 1 at .tev, .. trl cii.ar r i. t. t, ,6, it.giuh,o c t \ ,l l E s e n V d r wss a i r: g : Which e, secured where new.ie ethzrkdices] ~ ,_ Stearn Wha `‘ Fen .are Tile Public are here_ aasengers ai ;:(15:aPi--- , °'ne°: ,,, Ll 4 ..:Ti:tl3 ,, ,wi e 'ichlei v elan° , :ir ti l r r°:: ,, B: l l. e :i e dio i n —— 13. e'l IhGrnvetall'ell'.:llo-itm.ets i°rreirl°°onif,:nelini'lj''ltnWir4l:,i•RiNtcr,t'lantth,a(tina.:l3:ldigk'cor'E;tasktell'iyr.r:l(‘' eNlat-istintly afford, ri L--Westi ..„............Ll'. and ' I., \ VAVERLI VOLUME I4bed counnene Ilaed , L . , 4. p. this nay, t 0. , :. The Tw 4i t i 1 :_ 1 n Sixteen : e° Pi'Als Nol rs,' 0 111111 E N ' 'lees the TAL A4l)l6hed. Londo n : N it tAVELS. 3 I) ESTIN I Iv;‘,4,T ROSCC 1 Illustratic Moi U NIP U ORM Ni the ist of Se SMOLLE Wal ier n l i o ° l)- n plj ri tlire. Orders ughout the . V ol• I. SAIL . t ' '°l • SNI,