The Sun. — London, England, 1833-03-01 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. .In promising to describe our own impression of the speeches delivered by Lord Althorp and Mr. • Stanley, on Wednesday evening, - .in support ()fettle Irish coercive Bill, we .reckoned on undertaking a more diffieuult task than, upon further examination, we find it. - However copious the detail. pre sented by those two Ministers, the outline of each of their speeches is extremely simple, and may he characterized in a few short lines. Lord Althorp affirmed the necessity for some strong measure of coercion, grounded on an u nvarnished statement of the last less outreoes by which Ireland has long been oppressed, and of the circumstances which proved, to the Noble Lord's belief, a connexion in the na ture of cause and effect between agitation and out race. His Lordship then proceeded to vindicate the fitness of the present measure as a restraint upon both tho-e evils. Mr. Stanley traversed the same wide field, with a great display of skill, power, and effieiency, in so far as concerned the horrib!e state of Ireland. He traced the crimes of the miserable peasantry, with no hesitating hand, to the machinations of more criminal. and, far more artful abettors; and inveighed with stern indig nation ageisst the baseness which, after working up the multitude to fury against the law., and all who seek protection under them, would save itself from sharing the risk and punishment of its own credulous dupes by a mock admonition " to beware of doing anything unlawful !" Nothing, indeed, could he more masterly arid triumphant than Mr. Stanley's development of the whole character of the agitation system, in its connection with the pre. valence of barbaroue and brutal crimes ; nor was there ever a more striking contrast exhibited than between the scornful spirit of the Irish Secretary's attack upon the agitators, and the confused and mortified attempt at explanation which was wrung from one of them by the deafening outcries of the House. indeed, if it were to be wished that Hon. Members had so far repressed their natural feelings of resentment and disgust at the apparent prevaricae eons by which a certain charge of violating the free d , m of Parliament was, albeit somewhat nnsuccess frilly, register]. ft is not wise to interrupt an enemy 111 a bad, and otherwise, fruitless de fence; but with regard to the merits of the present Bill, as a cure for the evils which it claims to re medy. or as corresponding with the species or de gree of the necessity on which it is justified by Al•nistere, Lord Althorp, and what is more Mr. Stanley, left the matter exactly where they found it. Neither the Noble Lord nor the Secretary for Ire land said one rational word in answer to the ob jections which have been made to the courtsmartial and domiciliary-visit clauses of this harsh measure. We admit that a case of necessity has been made out—we did so from the first—for strengthening the hands of lawful authority in Ireland by some addi tional measure. We do riot deny that nothing can be more absurd or more disgraceful to the cause of "free discussion" than to confound that high and in estimable right of British subjects with sham discus sions, held for no seeming purpose but to subvert all government, and to endanger the life and property of every honest man in the kingdom. The agitation manoeuvres, leading directly to crime, though as suming falsely the veneral attributes of constitutional discussion for redress of grievances, ought to be put down, or they must dissolve society, but let them be put down by recognised law. But what of courtsmartial ? Barristers, it ap pears, are unfit to form courts for the trial of offences under the new Bill, because they are persons who may look for promotion to the Government I And are military men, we pray, so much more inde pendent in that respect than lawyers? Is there no desire for promotion in military breasts—and at whose hands does an officer look for his advance ment ? But to employ the judges might be incon venient to the despatch of ordinary legal business, and a had precedent, forsooth ! And what sort of precedent is a military court for the trial of criminal offences ? Not inconvenient, to be sure, not at all so to the officers it may be a resource against the crime of idleness. To the poor devils ignorantly or stupidly convicted of being twenty yards from home after nightfall, there may be some trifling inconvenience in eternal banishment from their wives, parents, and children : but what - signifies that ?—lnconvenient i For the forcible house-entry power, we have yet seen no shadow of justification, either in necessity or reason: but we must resume the subject to-morrow.—Times. The debate on the Suppression of Disturbance in Ireiend Bill is not yet concluded, and we may ventnre to say that the country will be wearied with the discussion before it arrives at its termina tion, unless; it should call into action talent of a superior order to that of the men who last night, we avi:l not say cur iged the attention, but occupied the time, of the House of Commons. Mr. Shed, it is true, proved himself quite a match for the best of the Ministerial orators, arid Mr. Macaulay proved himself quite a match for Mr. Shell ; while Mr. %lr. Fergus O'Connor, Mr. Carew, Major Beaucierk, Mr. Clay, Mr. Leonard, Lord Ebrington, arid same other Members with names as yet un known to fame, severally did their best in support of their respective opinions ; but yet the discussion was, it must be confessed, poor, meagre, shallow, and unsatisfactory, in comparison with the dullest arid most ineffectual debate that ever took place in the unreformed Ruliament upon any, even the most unimportant and uninteresting, subject. It is evident enough, however, from the discus elm), so far as it has proceeded, unworthy as it has been of the importance of the occasion, that our present Ministers are equally incapable of devising a good measure and of defending a bad one The principle of their Bill is incontesrible, under standing it to include merely the necessity of rein forcing the power of the executive Government in Inland for the purpose of restoring and maintaining t h e dominion of the law. To this extent, notwith etanding their deplorable incapacity in Council and in debate, Ministers must prevail, for to this extent they are sure of the support of a party with respect So which it can no longer be deemed flattery to say tha t : it comprehend' all the Statesmen in the coun try. But, having upheld the principles of the Bill to this ex , crrt, it will be the duty of the Conserva tive party to .substitute for its present provisions others of a nature et least rational, sober, moderate, anti prudent enough neither to require nor admit of so monstrous a defence as that which has been the leading topic of the Ministerial advocates—the de fence, that, having found it necessary to depart from the ordinary practice and the established principles of the Constitution, the wider the deviation the better.—Morning Post. The debate on the Irish Local Disturbances' Sup pression Bill is once more adjourned. Throughout Wednesday night and last night, positions were ad vanced, of which the application ought not to he confined to the present measure. Mr. Stanley, in order to prove that military tribunals would answer better than civil, observed—" If a strong oppdsition was made to the Insurrection Act as harsh and odious, surely the evils would be aggravated by re ferring offenders for trial to the local Alegistrates, who were open to so ninny objections, who - wet e so generally accused of deciding with a view to gratify their private ends, of consulting - their individual interests alone, and, in short, of constant malati. ministration in their office. Whether such charges were true o r no t wa s not for him to say, but Me evil caused by so general an impression was nearly equal to any mischief that could result from. Me reality. * * It was not necessary for him to repel the charge . brou g ht against military tribunals by the HOD. Member for the City of London--a charge wholly without foundation, and contradicted by all who had experience on vie subject. That Hon. M em ber asserted, that military tribunals were in general harsh and oppressive ; but the accusation was negatived by t h e people of I re l an d themselves. How often had not some Hon. Gentlemen, when they wished to cry down the police, declared that the People looked to the presence of the army as a control and beneficial superintendence over the po lice r --(Cheers.) How often had they not asserted that the peasantry looked up to the soldier as a friend, and the officer as a protector.?—(Cheers.) Had it no been said that the retired officers were favourite Magistrates ?"'\ But if the gen t l y of the country are so unfit for aciing, when the country is in a disturbed state, on account of the general belief in their partiality and their interestedness, do not the same qualities unfit them at all times for the posse4sion of authority ? Partial and interested men are as little fitted to preserve tranquillity as to restore it when lost. In admitting that the Magi stracy, of Ireland are naturally opposed to the people, Mr. Stanley' , admits that it is the duty of Govern merit to select impartial mon for Magistrates, and not men who exercise authority for the furtherance of their own ends. Mr. Macaulay took up the same line of argument— _ _ " He ceuld not (he said) refrain from giving it as his opinion, that the alteration recommended by the Hon. and Learned M. , mber who spike last (Mr. Shed) was the most objectionable proposition of all. He proposed that offenders should be tried by Juries composed of the aristocracy and gentry of the country ; and, in doing he stood a10e..-, for no other Hon. Member of the House had made such a proposition--(Hear.) Such a proposition was noting less than proposing that offenders should be tried by a Protestant magistracy, against whom they were told the Irish peassntry felt the deepest and most rooted antipathy. —(Nn, no, from the Iris!' Members ) He spoke with confidence when he said that such antipathy existed, and that it would be most dangerous to intrust the Irish gen try with the power the Hon. and Learned Gentleman wished to see delegated to them. Giving them such powers would be fatal to the pacification of Ireland, and would for ever preclude the application of beneficial mea sures to that country." ' Thus, then, the Irish Gentry are to be shelfed ; for if it would be dangerous arid fatal .to the pacifi cation of Ireland to intrust power to them, it would be equally dangerous to hHsard the pacification, when it has been effected, by intrusting power to them. .Let us hope that the system of making parties judges in their own causes will be departed from,and that just and impartial men will be set over the people. The Bill will be carried by a large majority ; and we are not sure that such a measure of severity, for the execution of which Ministers are responsible, would be improved by the substitution of Judges or Barristers for ofticerA. It may be true that the offi cers will not be free-from the influence of the gentry, the men whose hospitality they will enjoy, but still the officers will be Englishmen and Scotchmen, and generally more free from partiality than natives. Upon the whole we should prefer officers. Our re g ret is not so m uc h th at t h e measu r e i s severe , as that we fear its severity is to be a substitute for justice to the people. The Government, by shrinking from poor laws confess that they have not the courage to do justice to the people. All that they propose to do is mere tinkering. When the law arid the people of a country are against each other, as was well ob served by Mr. Clay, there is a prima facie case against the law. Bat us we yesterday observed, the Government is leagued with the Squirearchy against the unfortunate people. They feel for land lords—they feel for sinecure persons ; but for starv ing peasants they have not yet learned to feel.— Morning- Chronicle. Nothing can be less satisfactory or less states manlike than Mr. Stanley's avowal of the inability of Government to make up its mind on the impor tant subject of the application of a system of poor laws to Ireland; for what does the Right Hon. Se cretary, in effect, say, but that, because there is a difference of opinion upon the subject among the representatives of Ireland, therefore the Government is unable to decide ? Who, then, is to decide ? or is Mr. Stanley prepared to lay down and stand by any thing so preposterous as that no public measure is to be brought forward in Parliament upon which all men are not agreed ? The very difference of opinion, on the contrary, shows the necessity of there being a commanding mind somewhere, capable of dividing the Gordian knot. No wonder that Ireland is in its present unsettled state if those to whom its destinies are confided, instead of them selves suggesting the remedy, declare their inten tion of waiting till all men are agreed as to what they ought to be. Such solemn trifling as this was baldly ever heard of on a subject of great public interest ; and the sooner Lord Grey's Government disabuses itself of such a state of indecision, the sooner will it possess that general confi , lence, the want of which must ever impede the progress and effect of the very best intentions.—Morn, Herald. `'ICE-CHANCELLOR'S COURT, FEB. 27. JUDGMENT••••••TZOSCOr. V. it AVE Z•ISC :10FT• 1 1 The VICE-CHANCELLOR this mornisig pronounced judgment in this case. His HoNova said the bill had been filed under these circtim , tances :—Previous to 1815 a partnership had been carried on betw.en Strethill Wright the eider, Strerla Might the younger, and Mr. Durravile, as attorneys, at Knutsford, which continued until the retirement of Mr. Dumvile in 1816. It was then carried on by the fattier and st,n till 1822, under the firm of Wright and Son. In the beginning of 1823 Mr. Roscoe, the plaintiff, was taken into partnership, and continued so until the dissolution of the partnership, which occurred in June, 1826. Mr. Wright, jun., died in 1823, and a commission of bankrupt issued against Mr. Strethill Wright in 1826. The plaintiff was first taken as a managing clerk, upon the sudden dis missal of toe person whose duty it was to attend to the cash accounts, he was requested to keep the books in addition to the general management of the partnership itffairs. The accounts which were the subject of the present suit were contained in six books produced in the cause, and it was contended by the assignees that Mr. Roscoe stood in such a situation with regard to the accounts as to make himself responsible for every payment and receipt during the period he kept them. An action was brought by the assignees, alleging that in 1815 Messrs. Wright had em ployed the plaintiff to keep their accounts, anti that he was responsible for the balances, and at the beginning of the action the plaintiff filed a bill, insisting that he was not responsible in the common sense of a cashkeeper who keeps an account betwe,n himself and the firm, and on the corning in of the answer an injunction was granted. He was of opinion the injunction should he continued, and an account taken of the partnership from 1823, when it commenced ; but until the Master had made his report no thing should be done. The matter had been involved in so much obscurity, that he could not give the costs. COURT OF KING'S BENCH, FEI. 98. SWEETE r. FAIRLIE AND OTHERS. This was an action to recover 5,0001. on a policy of insurance , ffected with the Globe Insurance Company. The plaintiff, Mr. Sweete, of Oxilen-hall, Devon, had, in April, 1827, made an agreement with Mr. Laurence Palk, for at, assignment of a lease taking in the life of Mr. Thomas Abraham, a Barrister, and he effected an insur ance on Mr. Abraham's life with the agent of the Globe Insurance Company at Exeter for 5,0001. Mr. Abraham had, from family circumstances, for some time before, aboured under a depression of spirits; but at the time of thkleffecting the insurance he was in exce!lent health, with occasion ,1 slight exceptions. Mr. Abraham died in IS3O, and on application at the Globe office, the payment of the insurance-money was refused, on the ground that, at the time the insurance was effected, Mr. Abraham was known to be deranged. After hearing evidence the Jury found a verdict for the plaintiff—Damages 4,462/. deducting the premiums, the amount of which hal been paid into Court. ADMIRALTY COURT, FEB. 28. JUDGMENT.--THE. KINNERSLEI CA STI.E• Sir C. ROBINSON gave judgment in this case, which was agreed on list Court day. The L+•arned Judge said this was a question as to the validity of a bottomiy bond, which Was opposed on the ground that the vessel had been deserted, and the whole advances in relation to her re pairs were made under the responsibility of the under writers, for whom the advances were made. The vessel was freighted from Ireland to Nova Scotia, to take in a cargo of timber, which she loaded, and was proceeding on her homeward voyage, when she struck on a rock, and became almost a total wreck, being waterlogged, and was compelled to put back, and land her cargo and passengers. The master proceeded home to consult his owners, and the vessel was abandoned to the un :erwriters. There was nothing to impeach the bond, and it was therefore the duty of the Court to support it for the inter,s-s of com merce. He pronounced for the bond, with interest and costr, IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OP LORDS, FEBRUARY 28. The House met to-day at three o'clock, when the claim of Lord Rokeby, to vote tor Irish Representative Peers, was considered in a Committee o' Privileges, and allowed. The House resumed at fiveo'clock,when petitions, praying for a legislative enactment to enforce the better observance of the Sabbath, were presented from the city of Chiches. ter, and the parish of Walton, in Sussex, by the Bishop of Chichester; from Cr inbourn, by the Bishop of Bristol ; from a parish in Londonderry, from Dublin, from Ed monton, and places in the counties of Argyll and Derby, by the Earl of Roden. Lord KING presented a petition from St. Paul's, Shadwell, against the house and window duties. Earl RODEN presented a petition from the parish of Swishy (as we understood) praying for the appointment of a day for a national thanksgiving, for mercies received in answ,r to the national prayers. Lord KENYON presented a petition signed by 4,400 inhabitant hou•eholdera of the parish of Mat ylebone, pray ing for the abolit,on of the house and window taxes. E,rl of RODEN presented a petition from the Rev. Sir Hircourt Lees, which, on the motion of the Noble E trl, was read by the clerk. He (the petitioner) stated that the evils which now pressed upon Ireland were caused by measures that had been passed by their Lord ships, as he had often told that House, and that now, as he had foretold, the Church was about to be destroyed. He congratulated the House upon the power they had given to the roost hum ,ne Government which bad ever ruled Ireland, in order to put an end to all murder, conspiracy, &c.—(Hear, hear.) He stated that there would be no peace in that country till the Ro man Cati , olics were again altogether excluded from the Legishture, for all which causes he prayed their Lordships to repeal the Roman Catholic Relief Bill, passed in 1829. Lord WYNFORD brought in a Bill to reduce the expenses in Courts of common law. The Noble Lord said a similar Bill had passed their Lordships' House last session, therefore it was unnecessary for him to enter into any details. The Bill was read a first time, and ordered to he read a second time on Thursday. On the motion of Earl GREY, the Irish Venue Bill was read a third time, and passed. The E irl of RODEN moved for returns of the number of applications made to the Board of Education io Ire land, with the names and persuasions of the clergy making such applications ; also the number of those applications which had been complied crith,—Ordered. The House then adjourned till to-morrow at ten o'clock. MOUSE OF COMMONS, FEBRUARY 26. _ . The balloting for the Committee on the Bath Election, and the receiving of the report of Members absent at the call, prevented the opening of the gallery until half-past four o'clock. The Gloucester Road Bill, and several other private Bills, were passed a stage. Mr. LITTLETON brought up the report of the Com mittee appointed to propose at rangements for the receipt of petitions. He stared that tie Committee had gone mi nutely into the subject, had classified the petitions, and pre pared a form by which the nature of each petition, the place from whence it emanated, and the number of signatures, would be seen at one view.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. FINCH presented several petitions from places in Westmoreland, for the better observance of the Sabbath. Mr. GROTE presented a petition from a citizen of London, praying that in any alteration in the Charter of the East India Company, a provision might be entered for the better securing to the seamen employed in the service, the prize money that might become due to them. The Hon. Member then presented a petition, praying that an alteration might be made in the laws of arbitration, so that a power might he given to summon witnesses. He also presente I a petition from a number of respectable men who came under the religious denomination of Separatists; they prayed that the same immunities might be granted to them, in relation to the taking of oaths, that had been extended to others.— (Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member supported the prayer of the petition, and expressed his gratification that the Hon. Member for Cambridge was about to bring in a Bill to remove those disabilities from all religious classes, of whatever de,ornination. Mr. O'CONNELL thought that cases in point were of equal consequence, as bearing upon the subject, as abstract principles. In a case which came under his own know ledge, a jack in office had refused the testimony of a con scientious witness, because, as a Separatist, he would not tike the oath. Mr. HUME called on the Hon. Member to wipe away this stain. Its effect was to injure conscientious and moral men, who could not make a sacrifice of religious princi ple ; and to advantage those who were not over honest, hut ready, without scruple of conscience, to swear to whatever might serve them.—(Hear, hear.) Sir FRANCIS BURDETT and another Hon. Member, supported the prayer of the petition, which was ordered to he printed. Mr. GROTE presented a petition from certain voters in the borough of Chatham, complaining of undue Mu enc.• h i.ving been used at the ;ate election for t , •at borough, and pr tying for the protection of the (tabor.—(Hear.) The pe , ition w ts sign,ll by 490 person-, of whom 250 were registered voters. They stated that of the 667 registered voters in Chatham, 153 were in the employ went or Go vernment, SS were receiving halt-pay, and many others were in some way or other connected with the Govern ment, making 401 voters who were subject to undue in fluence and intimidation. They stat , A, that during the late contest, complaints had been made to Governtnent of the exercise of that undue influence, hut that no steps had been taken to cheek it ; on the contrary', many persons who could not conscientiously vote for the Go vernment candidate were requested to refrain from voting at all ; and the petitioneis added. that if that influence and intimidation were not done away with, it would 1.)- much better to invest the officers of the dockyard and others in the employ of Government with the whole power of election. It was evident that the electors of Chatham could not rx,rcist. their franchise freely with out the protection of the ballot, and the Hon. Member hoped that it would be granted to them, as the only means of securin•2; their honest and flee votes. The petition was read, and ordered to be laid on the tWIe. The Hog. MEMBER. then presented a similar petition From a plate, the name of w bleb we could not hear, in the county of Carmarthen, signed by upwards of two hundred freeholders. Many electors of thrt county had teen induced by threats to vote Con trary to their conseience, and they ,prayed either fur the protection of the ballet, or that they might be dim franchised. They also prayed for a repeal of the Septen nial Act, and for triennial Parliaments. He also presented a petition from Richard Gayor, for. ,an alteration in the law of patents. FACTORIES BILL. Mr. HARDY presented a petition from Bradford, signed by 9,700, in favour of the Factories Bill. The Hon. Mem ber, in presenting the petition observed, that the great evils that arose Irons this spier!' were to be attributed to masters having in view only their own individual interest, which made them anxious to put as much labour as they could on the poor and helpless children. He could ❑ot agree with the statements made by the Hon. Member for Middlesex on a former occasion, that they arose from foreign compe tition. 11Ir. STRICKLAND, in supporting the prayer of the petition, observed that he could never be brought to believe that making children work till their limbs were distorted could he productive of any good to a nation like Great Britain. The facts which had been brought before the Committee in the last Parliament were of such a con vincing nature that they never could be entertained. Mr. COBBETT regretted that, notwithstanding all that had been said upo❑ the subject, no true cause had been assigned. It was natural to wish to see matters like tie present left to he settled between the mast. r and the fathers of the children. What was that House going to do ? Why, to pass a law (which he should support fur the reasons heshould state by and by ) not to prevent the master pursuing the course he was now doing, but to prevent the parent from doing so. By that means the House would be saying to the w'ot Id, English parents were so cruel and unnatural that the Legislature was obliged to interfere and prevent them from allowing their children to work as they had hitherto done. Now, what was the real cause why parents thus acted? Why it was this, that they were so forced by taxation, every thing they used was so loaded with taxation, while the rich escaped it almost altogether, that they were obliged to resort to those means to dr..g out their existence. He should vote for the Bill, pinning his faith upon the sleeve of his Hon. Colleague, who, being a great proprietor of cotton mills, understood the matter perfectly wed, which he (Mr. C.) did unt.—(Laughter.) Ile did not say that he dni not understand the cause, hut he did not understand what spinning jennies were.—(Laughter.) He did, how ever, know that the great weight of taxation drove English fathers and mothers to be cruel to their own children.— (Hear, heir.) 31r. AIETIMEN was astonished to hear such lin guae night after night, hour after hour, question after question, and often when there was no question before the House, proceeding from the Honourable Member for Oldham.—(Hear, hear.) It might do very well for I ) . litical Registers and twopenny trash, but it was wholly out of place for that House to be toll that the great object of the rich in this country was to grind the poor.—(Hear, bear.) This was the ground upon which the Honourable Member for Oldham always stood—the sum and substance of all his arguments, and, as an English gentleman, he (Mr. Methuen) could not sit silent under the imputation which he was thus constantly endeavouring to cast on that class of society to which it was his pride to belong, and who hail as sin cerely the benefit of their country at heart as the Hon. Member for Oldham, with all his professions. They might not have the advantage which the Hon. Member for Oldham possessed of spreading abroad their opinions, and holding forth their brother Members to the obloquy of the country; but they were not less sincere and strenuous in their exertions to better the condition of the people. lie deprecated such speeches as were m +de night after night by the Hon. Member (Mr. Cobbett) and he was persuaded if they had not for their object, they would have for their end, the creating of a convulsion among the different classes of English society.—(Hear, hear ) Mr. O'CONNELL did not join the Hon. Member for Oldham in any imputations upon any class, but when he (Mr. Cobbett) had demonstrated the other night, out of the Acts of Parliament themselves, that taxation pressed infinitely heavier on the poor than on the rich, even the Noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had acknow ledged the grievance. Now the case ought to have been precisely the reverse. As to the Hon. Member's (Mr. Cobbett's) compositions, he had a right to his own opinions out of doors, and it was not a little creditable to England that a person who had began life in the humble situation, he (Mr. Cobbett) did, by the un aided force of his talents and intellect, had raised himself to the proud situation he occupied as a Member in that House. There was no other country in Europe where that could have happened but England.—(Hear, bear.) He heartily concurred in that cheer—he received it grate fully. It was a proud acknowledgment of the great truth he had stated. As to twopenny trash, as it was called by the Hon. Member, he could only say that there was sometimes more wisdom in a few pages sold for twopence than in a folio volume nobly hound, richly ornamented, and filled with engravings. Whatever was the cause of such anomaly directly, it was made clear to them that parents in England could be in duced to sacrifice their children in factories, as it was proved they did; it was sufficient for them to know the fact ; it was sufficient to warrant the House in applying the principle of the law, which protected a child against his pa rents, to the case. When a child had property the Lord Chancellor interfered to protect it against its par ents. That was too expensive and tedious -a process to be had recourse to in the case of every factory child ; but the latter being as much entitled to protection against its parent as a child having property, the House was forced to interfere and apply to its case the same principle as that upon which the Courts of Equity acted. Lord ALTHORP said, he rose to explain what he really did say the other night, on the motion of the Honourable Member for Oldham.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member gave notice that he should prove the poorer classes were taxed forty times more than the rich. He did not specify any particular class of taxes that he meant to apply himself to, and he (Lord Althorp) ima• glued that he meant to argue the whole taxes generally. Mr. COBBETT—I said some taxes. Lord ALTHORP—But the Hon. Member should be aware, that in moving such resolutions as he did, it was the practice of the House for them to be printed before being called upon to argue them, and the Hon. Gen tleman was so sensible of the impossibility of the House applying itself to the resolutions he brought forward upon such little notice of their contents, that he ultimately , withdrew them to a future occasion. The Hun. Gentle man said than he (Lord Althorp) admitted the truth of his statement, and so he should to a certain extent, but he by no means intended to admit that the general taxation of the country was unequal. Mr. COBBETT—It was the assessed taxes you ad mitted. Lord ALTHORP—The assessed taxes did press une qually, and whenever a tax was of that nature he admitted it ought to be amended.—(Hear, hear.) But that was a very different thing from admitting the correct ness of the foundation of the statement made by the Hon. Gentleman. For instance, according to the scale, the Honourable Gentleman submitted that certain large bills of exchange, occasioually drawn by commercial men in this country ought to be on a stamp of 95/. Now it was utterly impossible such a tax could be laid on. Again, with respect to auctions, if the proportions were increased according to the scale of the Honourable Gentleman, the effect would be not the payment of a tax upon large sales, but the stoppage of a sale by auction. As, however, the Honourable Gentleman intended to bring forward the subj-ct on a future day, he would not now argue the subject. All he wished to do was to guard against its being supposed that he made a greater admission than he really did. Mr. O'CONNELL—I grant that the Noble Lord did not say all other taxis were unequal, but that other taxes were, and especially the assess el taxes. A+i Host. MEMBER Stud he thought it was no part of the duty of a Reformed Parliament to widen the breach hetwe n the tich and die poor.—(Hear, hear, hear. ) According to the information he had rec lied, the sta e of distress h„d been much exaggerated. The average amount of wages in the North of England, of persons above 16 years of age, employed out of factory s, was two shillings per day, and those employed in factories t. , ree shillings per d,y,—(Hear, bear, and cries of " Oh, oh !") Mr. GISI3ORNE was a M?mber of the Committee appointed upon this subject, last year, and the whole of the time of that Committee was occupied in hearing evidence to support the Bill. He admitted to the fullest degree, that it was within the power of the House to legislate for persons unable to legislate for themselves; but he protested against the factory evidence given before the Committee being talren as a test of the factory system in any measure that might be pissed. —(Cries of " Hear, hear.") He trusted that whoever might bring forward the measure, as well as the House itself, they would come to the consideration of the sub ject unbiassed by the exaggerated reports which had been so industriously circulated on the subject for some time past. Mr. HARDY said, that nobody could deprecate, more than himself, the system of making observations upon the presentation of petitions at such an hour as this. But he could not agree that the House had not ample power to legislate on this subject just as much as it hod to legislate on the subject of the employment of chimney-sweeps. Mr. COBBETI' rose to explain, but was called to order. Lord ALTHORP moved the 0 der of the Day for the further debate on the Irish Coercive Bill. Mr. O'DWYER submitted that it would be much more to the advantage of the public for the House to proceed in the presentation of petitions.--(Hear, hear, and cries of " No, no.") For his own part he had some of great im portance and of great urgency, which he was very anxious to have an opportunity of presenting without delay, it !emission were granted to him. Lord ALTHORP objected to this. He would be very glad to consent to any thing calculated to afford general accommodation, but it the House were to allow on this occasion Hon. Members to proceed in presenting petitions, it would lead - to a repetition of the system hereafter, and be just the same in a very short time, as regarded the commencement of public business, as if the House did not meet at twelve o'clock. ABSENT MEMBERS. The SPEAKER desired to know what the House wished to do with the Order of the Day with respect to the report of the ab s ent Members at the call of the House yesterday. Mr. O'CONNELL moved that the Report be brought up next Tuesday. The SPEAKER requested the Hon. and Learned Gentleman to say whether he would allow the Members who had appeared to-d.y, but did not appear yesterday, to have their ❑ames struck out of the list. Mr. O'CONNELL cons. nted. On the motion of Mr. SHEIL, the order of the day was read on the DISTURBANCES (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. SHEll—After the singular manner in which the debate on this important question had terminated on the preceding evening, the task he had undert.ken of resumins , that debate, and of necessarily alluding to the remarks which it had elicited, was one of an arduous nature. If his Hon. Friend the Member for Dublin had made his statement to a cool and unreluctant audience, it would have been differently received ; for his faculties of speech would have secured for him a better hearing. It was not a matter of surprise that the remarkable speech of the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland had created such a sensation.—(Hear, bear, hear.) Great credit was due to him for that display of his ability; but the Right Hen. Gentleman must pardon him (Mr. Sheil) it he declared, that in a matter of such importance, lie had not sufficiently confined himself to a statement of facts—that he had not followed the suggestions which had been previously made—or copied the example of those who had preceded him_but had gone into derogatory and superfluous matter, as it intended to produce an excitement, and to direct it towards the Honour able anti Learned Member for Dublin.—(Hear, hear.) He hoped he should be able to maintain that spirit of calm expostulation which alone was likely to produce conviction, for he intended to confine him self to facts, and particularly to that piece of legislation which was - before the House. They might justly con sider this great and glorious island as the chief seat and residence, not only of the empire, but of the whole world.—(Hear, hear.) But he was afraid that he was almost justified in saying that he had looked for Judges in that House, and he had found none but ac cusers. He was of opinion, that a nation ought not to be taught to do that which it would never suffer to be done to it..—(Continued cries of " Hear, hear, hear.") The present Bill contained many clauses, embracing avast mass of penalties which were contained in other Acts of Par liament. There was a large addition of chastisement made to that Bill, but it was easy to draw the line of demarcation between that Act and the former ones. In that respect the Bill itself was a no velty, and such as had never been made before. On all former occasions, there were separate Acts of Parlia ment for the introduction of the Insurrection Act, for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus, and for other pur poses of penalty, which it was not necessary to go into. They all recollected that in 1819 the Six Acts that were then passed were said to be necessary, because Ministers could not combine and consolidate the whole mass of penalty in one Act. He could not tell for what reason the gentlemen on the other side of the House had combined so much in one Act, while they found them selves obliged to have a separate Act relating to the venue. He would now proceed to the consideration of what might be called the political parts of the Bill. In this respect the Bill followed former Acts, the difference being, it was more extensive. It was in effect an extended renewal of the Proclamation Act. The present Act, not only con tained all its provisions, but a variety of other clauses which far exceeded in severity what a Tory Govern. ment ever did. In what respect was it that the present Bill differed from some of the old ones—first, in the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act ; then the Lord Lieutenant had the power at once to proclaim the county of the city of Dublin. What would be the result of that ? No meetings could take place without the previous sanction of the Lord Lieutenant. The liberty of the press would at once be put an end to ; for the moment the proclamation was issued the editor of any newspaper might be at once incarcerated, because he might be charged with an offence committed in the pro claimed district. He might be imprisoned merely upon the allegation that he had published a seditious libel, and who were the judges of the fact whether it was a libel or not ? Why, the courtsrnartial, which were constituted the judges of the law of libel. The Bill was also retrospec tive. It extended to offences committed before the pro claroatien. There was no hint as to .;-- ; fee- there was a clear provision in the Bill that the courtmartial should have cognie ince of offences committed before and after the proclamation. Was this right ?—Would any H. nourable Gentlemen say that the courtsmartial should be made judges of what was a pure question of law, which even the Judges had refused to leave to the consideration of the Jury ? To say the least of it, and to use as mild terms as he possibly could, he must say that this was totally at variance with the whole case attempted to be made out by Government, as to the necessity of this Bill. By the Bill as it then stood, courtsmartial might be at once introduced into the city of Dublin. Lord ALT HORP dissented from that. Mr. SHEIL was speaking merely of the possibility of the case. As the Bill now stood, certainly in a single day courtsmartial could be introduced into that city. He would go the length of saying that he was willing to believe that the Right lion. Secretary did not intend, he would even say, would not go so far as to introduce the measure then, but how did they know how long he was to fill that office ? Did they know who was to be his successor ? Might not a Titus be succeeded by a Domitian ? They must not look at who was in office or who was not in office.—(Hear, hear.) They were not to look at the law and how it might be abused.—(Hear., hear.) It had been frequently said that a despotism was the very best form of Govern msnt, if properly administered; but who, on that ac count, would wish for an hour that a despotism should now be established?—(Hear, hear.) By the Bill, courts martial might be introduced into Dublin in a single day—into a city where not a single outrage had been committed, thereby putting an end to all common law, to the right of petitioning, and above all, to the liberty of the Press.—(Hear.) Much had been said during this discussion about the se ditious speeches which had been made at meet ings held in Dublin—(Hear, hear)—but he would ask, why hid not the Government instituted prosecutions for any such speeches, if they were convinced, and could prove, that such speeches were seditious ? and if they could nor, how dare they come before that House, and state them to be 80 ?-( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.'') A speech was delivered last night, or rather extracts from several speeches were read, by the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland, delivered by his friend Mr. Steele. Those speeches certainly produced the effect they were intended to produce ; but the Right Hon. Secretary for Ireland was probably aware that Mr. Steele hid delivered a spe e ch as strong as any matter that was contained in whot was reed last night, it not much stronger on a former occasion. Mr. Steele published that epeece hirneelf, put his name to it, and went of his own accord to the house of the Attorney-General, and said he was the author, — that he was ready to relieve the printer of all sort of responsibility, and was prepared to abide his trial. Well, did Government prosecute him ?—(Hear, hear.) Did they take any steps? Were they prosecuting now? Why did they not prosecute then, if there were materials for prosecution ? Why was it that they were prosecuting now if they 411 d not prosecute then ? They were availing themselves of speeches recently made, of the same charac ter, by the same gentlemen, because it suited their con• venience—speeches as if they were the basis of legislation —and half of the powerful appeals of the Secretary for Ire land were founded on such documents. He would ask why was it they had never prosecuted a single speech that had been delivered at the political union, or amongst the Irish Protestants? Perhaps they would say they could not get juries in Dublin. Perhaps the juries in Dublin selected from a Corporation of Aldermen would show some lack of that spirit of complaisance which assisted a Government in the administration of justice. He found that the Sheriff of the city of Dublin was in the interest of the Government, and that there existed there in every re spect the certainty of trials free from every intimidation. Indeed he chabenged the Right Hon. Secretary to say that justice could not be administered in Dublin. The Right Hon, Gentleman could not say that lie nail no evidence of what had been said at the meetings in Dublin, for he had employed a short-hand writer at every one of them. The fact of his not having instituted a single prosecution, looked very much like a willingness to permit discontent to thrive up to the point of official convenience, and then to produce the disturbed state of the country as the in• ducement of this House to pass an Act of Parliament, ad mitted by the Government itself to be perfectly unconsti tutional. The House would observe that this was no de clamatory exaggeration,—(oh, oh.) Wily so? The speeches have been read to the House, and trials may have taken place upon them in the Court of King's Bench in Dublin, but it was a fact that Government had never instituted any proceedings what ever. As he was now taking his leave of that part of the case which he considered political, he wished the House particularly to bear in mind those two positions—first, that the Government had not put the efficacy of the law to the particular test he mentioned ; and, secondly, that it availed itself of the fact to estaidish courtsm ,rtial in Dublin, extinguished the freedom of the press, and put an end to the exercise of the right of petition. It had been suggested that the meetings at Dublin were the causes 0! disturbence elsewhere, but where wee the proof cf this? Were those disturbances of recent date ? Let the House turn hack their attention for many yea ts , and they would find that disturbances prevailed to the same extent when associations were never in existence. Nay, they would find this remarkable circumstance, that at a period when a certain society in Ireland had acquired most power and dominion over the people, these disturbances had almost entirely ceased.—(l - fear, hear.) He would refer to a passive in the Annual Registers of 1819 and 1820, in support of the tact, and to which all who were anxious to do justice to Ireland, were bound to give a favourable at trillion [The passage which the Hon. and Learned Member read, stated that whatever might have been the motives of the association, its influence had been the means of subduing faction throughout Limerick, Cork, Clare, and many ottor disturbed districts, restoring in all of those places a degree of tranquillity that had seldom been known to these counties.] If then this was the fact, was it not fair to infer that the present prevailin4 disturbances had no origin or connection with the meetings winch hail taken place in Dublin ? If the House desired to know what was th e cause of these disturbances , it wou l d not be fair to put t h a t the n d answertiithey ivfrooutind, fi his nd M t a h j e e y s tyh'asdGboy encyeivpeerson in offi ce un d er them. Let receive Comignnieidttevveshioeth t h h a e tj H b t e m en se o g f iv C en ot b n y mo th n e s Av q el u er e n, ,,t ui o ee n rnst t , g o ,000 to or any N ntoo o a t in a s le ceea L rat o sa r it d nh , et i h i c r ea t a h c i u ß :se ht Hon. Secretary opposite. Ask yourselves this question—Have those riots and excesses ever existed without those societies? Go back to the year 1776 ; you will find the origin of the Whiteboy Act in the , tin 81° ' yeti, 10 desc c ip T ti r o a n ve o ls f oif state e hu Y o r ft o h u in n a g . ," w a i n i r al Col!too hour. He refers the outrages at that tun e o ,,j# (Cheers)....and he says that the Legislature efohsTill e Parliament which became the meridian f a t. , des , which, instead of permanently removing, nitigel disease into the vitals of the State. From tn:` _ t o, present, your perverse adherence unO anti-national establishment of Ireland, ha s _ b e lie to the earhe'results. Perhaps you requiree the 5 ,? to the n Too l for Ireland hear the evidence of the Con het? Forces—Sir Hussey Vivian was examineda9 re dence than mine. You shall have it. I, et °der' Committee on the state of Ireland, which ty i t fP August last. lie says—" The combinat i lietor against tithes at present, and if you could !Tooedirr range thet idle question, you would, I should re n g l e di land pretty quiet. I think it is in other . _ I rit 0 as it was twenty years ago. Get rid of the mss' excitement and you will tranquillize Lelan d _ vo s I tation."—(Loud cheers.) But what have nto s The Secretary for Ireland, deaf to all rem: 7,4 i sensible to every entreaty, although he was forbear, to wait at least for the reform!. , passed his Tithe Act, a t th e close of the ses si e l to oil on us with his English majorities, and tf-fee t 1 ,0 1 1 most in legislation to whi c h all our calaroitieda_reo referred. It is too bad, it is not to be en 'Lo him talk of the special commission in the Crosil having failed, when he himself enacts sue dbd would overthrow all peace in any countrYt a n ce tall the people to exc e sses, of w hi c h the conseq ueo l3o be on his head. The fault is with bin' t he measures, of equal rashness and impolicYi_a d would now be tranquil. H e first drives Irelan7,o, and then he calls for penalti e s for her c ore l a st him look back a little. Did h e not in M a .i ii , ja , that a special commission bad proved efficaelk°4l' instance, aria announce that Galway, Lirnerica? were among the most tranquil parts of Irelfin. , Mr. STANLEY—They are so now. V ° Mr. SHELL—What ! Is this admitted ?, , 0 ° ,od becomes of your charg e , th a t t h e Political Vnefittloo into cg tit Volunteers have thrown th e cou ntry (Cheers ) How do es it come t o p a ss that Cl ar v e aii where the battle of ema nc i pa ti on an d its e i o ct° ; r o l of 5 ,:: is quiet, if Dani e l O'C onne ll s h a k es t he bu r ' po Sv to the centre? Is Kilk enny an d i s the Que`cetlg the O'Connell county ? Can we on a map tr t tos t i tent and limits witb a red and green line of o il, power ? See into what inconsistencies yo b t iber' reason of certain districts b e i ng di s t u rbed iSt t 6 ,10 0 tithe was begun. The Special Commission' fruits the seeds of peace deep enough ; and before Old ill be produced, they were disturbed by a renew ° t o tation engendered by the Right Hon. Se er !. hoi 4 , kenny was the county in which the Fr ie l' obit' seized for tithes. Kilkenny was the countY 1° ,01 6 Priest himself was recently arrested for ritbesGeollte and in Kilkenny the effects of the Right Hon' l it genius for legislation are p e culi ar ly co nspicun na )o l l mits that three Special C o mmi ss i on s have 0 0 ; 1 needed. One—the last—h as , h e sa ys, fail s Hs' failure to counterpoise three instances of s ue o flt d that single failur e ar e we t o b u ild t h e desrt i° Oitg t), But read the last report of the Committee on Ireland. The Secretary was a member. Mr. STANLEY—I did not attend. D l)° / d e' Mr. SHELL—Not a t ten d ! G oo d GeV., pat correctly ? A Committee i s name d by Sir ' Of the midst of an emergen c y i n M ay l as t, to c a ontsiO state of Ireland ; the Secretary declares that C 1„ll be most important, hi s name i s t h e seco nd on t he ~ Commander of th e F orces i s exam i ne d, 0, ,,e, Gentleman does not cond escen d, or i s t o o 03" - To, occupation rather, to att e nd.—(L ou d c heers.) Asfl, precious mode of m anag i ng I r i s h b us iness• to r does he tell the House? Having neglect ed yet i ,: himself on the inquiry, he tells the Hou s b e i l'' quire. But what is most strange is I "„ rn it , ,i, quotes the report, and egregiously imisconce il- : sr, report states that a Special Commission bas 1 1 00 -rj e,',.., be efficient ; it recommends a continued Se alY t ail , ,, Jury, and then the Irish Secretary, not und er° boll' represents it as containing an approval of the a pill all Juries. Then comes the evidence of 1 , 11. ; 11 111 ,: ton, the Crown Solicitor, who declares t ua- dtbe j ' nary law is quite adequate to every purpose, a l l ie rsY, Justice's address clowns the whole; in whic h ' f ed; his convict on that the actual law will in eet h e i ge s 4 pose.—(Here Mr. Sheil read extracts from th e o ? i' , was the Attorney-General silent on that oeca a- ora l ; threw in his attestation to the firmness of tb e ; O, declared that a conviction had taken place i"joir of 39.—(Mr. Sheil read the Attorney-Geril r b s c o 4 n i What will you say to all this evidence? 11 ,ddieL produce a vile ballad, and fling the literary 1 1 ; fi d i l town of Clunmel in our faces, and you Willa int ef ,; moos letters from your miserable menials al ;„bieli r o terrorists in the police, and on documents TY oi a f o not be received as ev id ence i n an assault 0°1,1)0% of justic e . Y ou would pronounce sentenee . :/u stands as a culprit at the bar before Y u l ooti cheers.) You did n o t pro d uce a s i ng l e ducu o , t ''',,i a name that sou dared to read, e xcept' Pd tli? P. Bellew, th e Lord Li eutenant f or L eut b ; ° stoo l ...commend this abominable measure ?—(Ai, t ,l o Ll No ) He would nev e r d o it ; h e d etests it ; ",i ' barely that the Magistr a t e w ill not atten u ' o p because they are devour e d by j ea l ous i e s 5d od Rut what say the other L or d Li eutenants ? t Ha Ihterr from your friend Lord Wicklow—(Loud 13° , g iolfe l from Lord Lortim, or Lord Enniskillen ?-- - kc i of: Have these, your nat ura l aux ili ar i es , t he I ne i - rtil l i choice, who see I re l an d t h rough suc h an k il l ) ; oat; ilium, furnished y ou w i t h t h e i r v i ews ? ll a s 30 .'7 P Lieutenant, except Sir P. Bellew, addressed r° l sle have, tell us; if n o t, o f w h at use are they? :, name, who has advised this proceeding ? . 11 ' i n - t ea ne: consulted a s i ng l e i n di v id ual ? There is 11 ; : I man among s t t h em . F ew go to Ireland, elce,', tory absent ee , to pay an " angel visit " on t"- September and 25th of March. They know n °l country, but, in the face and teeth of the " will versed in Irish affairs, and of the most dence, they build their adventurous and lei ion on the miserable anonymous ( 30 ' us) correspondence of the subordinate the disturbed districts. But the Chancellor quer says, neither Juries will do their duty o a f attend. The onus of proof, like the smoke '. tioned in the Act, lies on him. By the by curious clause. It was recommended in am a lay Lord, one of tho,e friends who would Ministers so close as to hug A them to de sL cheers.) He recomme n d e d a clause making ,' -e prove that the smoke of his calio was not a insurree.ion. It is far more equit ble to put ',, celor of the Exchequ e r th e b ur d en o f proof a t " What is his first a d m i ss i on ? That no sin 4. : been injured.—(Loud cr i es of t" .,4 Hear.") '-' His next statement is, that every jury b u t on° - 7 Why, is this a reason for abolishing all juri, e iri . Carrickshaugh jury did perform its duty. Lure to say it did n o t, w h o was not pres ent Y judge of a witness without seeing him unde r g o 0 tiny of cross.examinat:on ? A look, a quivelr'o ing of the utt e r ance , may d ec id e a Jury. ' l , to an eye may save a hu man b e i ng . B ut I°' t he The first Carrickshaugh trial was during of ter of 1832. The Committee on the st 3t ;oril land reported in August. Not one to said of the unfairness o f t h e J ury . But g°os oases. There were t r i a l s f or combinatin tithes in Dublin, Clon toe l, K erry, Cork, " o , d ja case convictions w e r e o b ta i ned.—(Cheers . ) the idea that Juries will not attend. Suulo w- ri j, of the country : fi ne th em if t h ey do not site toil/ exemplary intimation of their duty, and they I to throng the ordinary tribunals of the conn t r; e t the evidence. B ut w i l l the courtsmart ial e oce e dente ? Th at i s qu i te unnecessary. Th e y Pr tbc marily—so says the Act—and icoatenee °II Provide y our w i tnesses with due protectio° :to emigrate, if n ee df u l, and you will have nothing This will cost money. Yes, but ret s in l' .t oo t price. But let us come to the Statute.- d'es it give, and to what tribunal? It ell' Whitebey Acts, and the Ist and 2d of William' 50th of G eorge 111., an d t h e 27t h G e orge 111 i ' in on e wor d , i t transfers almost the e ntire,c r &urn a Jury—to whom ? To a Judge ? N ° ., ; te rs • might b e spotte d , scar l et cannot . To hatr d t he their e y es are fixed on a gold e n perspectivel s: a l o " , but is at me end of every vista.—(Cheers.) hor n of men who ar e a b ove e ll i n fl u ence; t° v 7 it " promotion " is unintelligible ; calm in decision, cautious in inquiry; he° Y i Olt tra,cted, of course, no habits of rigour from fort nat e 0 rt . 4 4 4 k tL and by whom justice and mercy will be _ o foref f 'Cif ro. 4 4), Peel pered. We shall have no Magistrates,:what? 11 14 :e to lo Judges, no Barristers. We shall have lie gosS il it i lei P t I t ' 1 ) 04, 4 ! tains, forsooteers. The wig , t , , th e elig e l:n: ' 1 11 4 4 1 . band must give way to the sash, the s word, Tri o, ) _pi . ole o :, and then all the evils of the administration ols,tbiriogleYttiogN.l will be at an end for ever. There never wit . , ns t, .4 o . :t tts !! this. Such a tribunal impartial ! An L i g o h o V( t et ; i3f i r itil goes to Ireland—is visited by the gentlemen es the tf,44a,4!es!t hourhood—shares in their joyous hospitatiOcoretv tiit.,rie his f 1 r cq, goes round—imbibes opinions with . o inistrattott e proceeds next morning to the adus en.' mho DO aril `lijr.ohti,ile,. 1d po 00 at ? 1° otetfil 44 kil t 1 , Vote t i 4 Ci, iS P OI r 01,i,14,art: tt IY e xceP t i9 O r 4 the, , ati th pottoil f N i 14,1,,et4 e reporl,foti 4 iroP°' ,711‘,4411i,i4e of tyro° n ': 0 10 Va, (anorliv itief„ tlO autb°rffr a Jr of th e ,. / ty 110 f ,:lert)-1 ° kg a*'oll,ol be c bye, :,cd, t o another resv ild 0 debtb. at;ll'k,:, t li E Jag or 1 it 0e " a telesrag,or ,ut the ;0;11'412'1 I,y oo f as 1 J:ri'rto t v r 4 ri g le C 0 /INI, ; 510 NO, I.'°e') at\(l,"t „. t h 4 "er f3a (.1 4. 5 4' iri.eirgt:o ith:Viit4,lt n 1.13°61:4;k1,451. teebiVtltt fr E derg ° ‘vh e a ,l ive be r:l, 4t to iiir,,,tll 100 6 t be tq te4 •4141,t;t the bnite rd :1 4 t 1 a l 0 0 '`.°oo 01,::ettkt.N TF, LC 6° fig° , 141 4 0, 1r tk e .„: io e' e Dd iveig)eed,at t ap 1/000 fth atte nd, : V oo t ter ntY• 1 1,0 ~ b4 t Y kt,,tt,ll 1 Se`ej eiv proc ill h it)i);itk't 00 tbe it4kyt, ,141 ti ; le4 jteiklf,ll:l4 thing tO 11 1 / 4 , 604'1447t\ ha P, t r o t f,Y ta i t eggr. tIN t COO '. nth (I; k t , tin s Vto 4,t r)4kjti:. Ili., o ; etir;14,,,14,,tti, l'i lt ati„ ti ; ert he i'tl,ol4t INt rioter.? I),t tl/4t an d t he 1;6,4 oft),il':11:, ;o, bot 441'411,i horn t he riPigrti'44, I ( t t, e,i, itilPSAt t NllO ebilh, ( N. h lr sti il ti e guard- 0,), - f,..1?4,1 tlllp