The Sun. — London, England, 1863-07-22 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARIMEENT HOUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening. The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'clock. The Earl of lIARROWBY presented petitions from various places in and around London in favour of the inter position of England in favour of Poland. THE WEST HARTLEPOOL DOCK BILL. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE called attention to an article published in the Stockton and Hartlepool Mercury, which accused him of corrupt motives in performing his duty as chairman of the committee who considered the West Hartlepool Docks and Railway Bill. The article asserted that he had been biased in his conduct in the chair by reason of a kinsman of his, Sir Henry Christmas, having some interest which was affected by the bill. Earl GRANVILLE said that the noble lord's conduct, instead of being biased, had been highly creditable. The usual course in these matters was to call on the printer and publisher to the bar, but as the newspaper in question was so little known he thought no further notice need be taken of the matter. Lord REDESDALE said the editor ought to feel in debted to the noble earl for not moving that he be called to the bar, as the attack was altogether without foundation. The Earl of DONOUGHMORE then stated that he should follow the suggestions of the noble earl, and take no further notice of the circumstance. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed : New Milford Docks—Hadlow Railway—Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway— Bonelli's Electric Telegraph Company —North-Eastern Railway (Hull and Doncaster branches) —Scottish Central Railway—and Dundee, Perth, and Aberdeen Railway. NAVY PRIZE AGENTS' BILL. The house then went into committee on this bill, when several amendments were made, and the bill was reported. ALKALI WORKS REGULATION BILL. Upon the motion for the consideration of the Commons' amendments to this bill, The Earl of DERBY, on the motion that the amend. merits made by the House of Commons in this bill be taken into consideration, said that although the changes made were of a most serious and extensive character, yet he would rather allow as many as possible of them to stand, than that no bill on the subject should pass this session. Still there were some of the amendments so objectionable that he could not consent to them, and he was happy to find that his noble wa s not disposed to press friend (Lord Stanley o f Alderley) them. The noble lord then went into the amendments seriatim. A long discussion ensued Lo , in which Lord S rd Chelmsford, Lord tanley Eger of Alderley, the Ear l of Derb y , ton of Tatton, and Lord Cranworth took part. Some of the Comons' amendments were agreed to; but u pon the clause (A) w m hich i m posed penalties upon the work- man, The Earl of DERBY said that the master alone should be held liable. He therefore moved that the house disagree to that amendment. The house divided. For the Earl of Derby's motion— Contents Non-Contents Majority for disagreeing with the Com mons' amendment, Clause A —23 Several amendments were then agreed to. FISHERIES (IRELAND) BILL. The report of amendments on this bill was brought up, and a fresh discussion took place on the question of com pensation to persons .who had acquired rights under the Act of 1842. Lord WENSLEYDALE moved a clause to save exist ing rights. Earl (MANVILLE said that the motion of the noble and learned lord would have the effect of utterly destroying the effect of the bill. The house divided— Contents l7 Non-contents . Majority against Lord Wensleydale's amendment The Public Works and Fisheries Acts Amendment Bill went through committee. The following bills were read a third time and passed : Piers and Harbour Orders Confirmation, Misappropriation by Servants, Indta Stock, Sydney Naval Mint. The Vaccination (Scotland) Bill was reported with amendments. The following bills were read a second time :—The Charitable Uses, Union Relief and Acts Continuance, Com panies' Clauses, Turnpike Trusts Arrangements, and the Exhibition Medals. Their lordships adjourned at ten minutes to eight o'clock during pleasure. ASSENT BY ROYAL COMMISSION. The Lord Chancellor, the Earl of St. Germans, and the Duke of Argyll, returned shortly afterwards robed, and took their seats as Royal Commissioners. The House of Commons was then summoned to hear the Royal assent given to the following bills :—Poor Law Con tinuance, Loan Societies, Regimental Debts, Police and Improvement (Scotland) Provisional Order, Growing Corps Seizure (Ireland), Volunteers, Waywarden's Contract, Prisons (Ireland), Greenwich Hospital (Provision for Widows), Metropolitan Main Drainage Extension, Officers of the Royal Naval Reserve, Public Works (Manufactur ing Districts), Land Drainage (Provisional orders), Sir Robert Hutchin's Charity, Ruthen's Charities, Local Go vernment Supplemental (No. 2), and several private bills. The house adjourned at twenty minutes after eight o' clo c k . HOUSE OF COMMONS—Last .Evenin' g. The Spnitican took the chair at a quarter past twelve. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The Lords' amendments to the Kettering and Thrap stone Railway Bill were considered and agreed to. The Aston Estates Bill, the West London Extension Railway Bill, and the Wicklow Copper and Hibernian Nines Companies' Bill were read a third time and passed. The Isle of Wight Railways (Extensions) Bills, the Put ney and Fulham New Bridge and Pier Bill were considered and ordered for third reading. On the order for consideration, with a view to third read ing, of the Newry and Greenore Railway, Pier, and Wet Dock Bill, Mr. HORSFALL moved, as an amendment, that the bill be read a third time this day two months. Mr. ADAIR, as the chairman of the committee to whom the bill was referred, explained that an application w as made for the recommittal of the bill by the committee themselves, and this seemed to be the point on which diffi ed the house would allow th e bill culty was raised. He hop to proceed to another stage. After some conversation, in which M. Massey, Sir H. Cairns, Mr. C. Fortescue, Mr. F. S. Powell, Mr. Morrison, Mr. D. Morris, Mr. S. Fitzgerald , a nd other gentlemen took part, the amendment was negatived, and the order for third reading was agreed to. CONSOLIDATED FUND APPROPRIATION BILL. Mr. PEEL moved the second reading of this bill. Some remarks having been made by Sir H. Willoughby, the Chancellor of the Exchequer a nd Mr. A. Smith, the bill was read a second time and 'ordered for committal to morrow. PROMISSORY NOTES AND BILLS OF EX - CHANGE BILL. This bill was read a third time and passed. LAND TAX COMMISSIONERS NAMES BILL. This bill, as 'WU amended, thirdconsidered and ordered for reading to-morrow. AUGMENTATION OF BENEFICES BILL. The house went into committee on this bill. Lord 11 0 TRAM inquired whether under this bill the Lord Chancellor would be able to sell a vacant living. The SO LICITOR-GENERAL said certainly not. That would be a simoniacal proceeding epposed to the ge neral law of the land. Mr. AYETON moved, as an addition to clause 2, that the Lord Chancellor should not be permitted to sell any living to a person other than one interested in the parish, and a member of the Church of England. He considered the bill a moat vicious one, and that it would be a great scandal to the Church. Sir G. GREY thought that such restrictions would de• feat the bill, Th e SOLICITOR - GENERAL said the on l y object of the bill was to do that which had alread y namely, to been done under th e Church Building Acts, re turn for endowmen ts . tran s fer patronage in Mr. HENLE Y considered that t he principle advocated by Mr A .yr ton was a sound one. A. v ery long discussion on the point ensued , and at length the committee divided — For Mr. Ayrton's amendment l7 Against it Majority —2B The amendment having been lost, the clause was agr ee d to. Clauses down to 30 were agreed to. On clause 31, relating to secretary of presentations, Mr. C. BENTINCH said the office was worth £4OO a year, and it was a mere sinecure. He had held the office himself when Lord St. Leonards was Chancellor. This clause provided for an increase of salary, and he moved, as an amendment, that it be struck out. The SOLICITOR -GENERAL said the new bill would cr eate a large amo unt of duty, and the increased amount of stipend would be merely temporary. All the bill did was to enable the Lord Chancellor to remunerate the secretary for any additional duty h e might be called upon to perform, The committee divided — For the clause ........................ 24 A g ainst it .......................... 37 Majority .................... --13 The clause was thus lost. It being now 4 o'clock th e sitting was suspended. At 6 o'clock the house resumed. TREASURY OFFICE. Mr. B. COCHRANE gave notice that next session he would move for a select committee t o inquire into the mode of conducting business in the Treasuly-office, Whitehall, and its connection with, and control over, the other depart ments of the Goternment. NEW ZEALAND. Mr. W. FORSTER gave notice that on Thursday next be would ask the Under -Secretary for the Colonies whe- ther a despatch had,been received confirming the statement in the public journals that the Governor of New Zealand had sent a request to the Governor-General of In to send Sikh troops to aid him in suppressing the dist lances in New Zealand. ESTABLISHED CHURCH IN AND, In reply to Sir H. BRUCE, Sir R. PEEL said with regard to the le' ns connected with the Established Church in Ireland, and which had been moved for by Sir F. Heygate on the sth May, there was a great deal of difficulty in obtaining them. They had however obtained returns from the registrars of 12 dioceses —returns for 11 other dioceses were in course of prepara tion, and it was expected the whole would soon be completed. CLOONE LOAN FUND. In reply to Mr. W. 0. GORE, Sir R. PEEL stated that the report relative to the Cloone Loan Fund would be presented on Thursday next. PROMOTION IN THE DOCKYARDS. Mr. FERRAND asked the Secretary to the Almiralty why the board had promoted a person named Waymouth, lately for_ man of shipwrights, at a salary of £250 a year, at the Devon?cid yard, to be a timber inspector at Deptford yard at a salary of £350, in contravention of their own order limiting the age for promotion to 50 years, Mr. Way mouth being upwards of 68 years of age. Sir A. BULLER wished, before the noble lord replied, to ask whether there was not a covenant in theind them of apprentices in the dockyard of Devonport entitling f to be regularly entered and employed In one o nur her Ma jesty's yards. he L w o a r s d C r a . t be A r G su PE, r T pr i i s n e d r e pally theing to a ss t h u e m p fi t r ti s t n q m u e a s d t e i o n b , y said tb e hon. member ; for, if ha had referred o o the Admiralty m w o a y s ed exa f m or in b e y d h a i b m o v s e e l f a , r h e e g u w l a o u t i l o d n haveswhicahoonhathdaltatneol y p b El e rs e :ll certain age, namely , f rom 15 to tain situations in the dockyards 5. which th w e e r r e e w g e i r v e en c . e t r o .. persons without examination, who, though not eligible fo r promotion in other respects, were deemed to be deserving of o o f r thparticular appointments. Mr. Weymouth had been foreman in the yard, and these foremen were eligible to be.. come timber inspectors and assistant master-shipwrights. To become assistant master-shipwrights it was necessary to undergo an examination, because their duties required men of high qualifications. But when a foreman possessed great experience, and had no longer the activity to become a master-shipwright, it was open to the authorities to give him the appointment of timber inspector. Mr. Waymouth had been appointed timber inspector as a reward for past services, and it was an appointment he was capable of filling, though a man of considerable age. The hon. member had asked if Mr. Waymouth had been examined before his appointment as foreman; but he had received the appointment before 1847, when there was no regulation requiring examination. With regard to the question whether it was intended to bring Mr. Waymouth back to Devonport after a short time, at the highest salary of £4OO a-year, he believed nothing of the kind was contemplated. Now, as to the question put to him by the other hon. member for Devonport, he had merely to state that in 1859, when the present Government came into office, they found there was an Order in Council establishing a certain number of artificers in her Majesty's dockyard, and giving the number at 9,621; but they found there were 10,850 employed, or about 1,100 men above the number specified in the Order in Council. Accordingly they set about reducing the number to that specified, and they did so in this way—that was to say, when vacancies occurred they did not fill them up in the ordinary way, but employed hired men who were not entitled to superannuation. They found, however, that so long as the practice prevailed of filling up the places by appointing the apprentices, it would be impossible to reduce the number to that of the Order in Council, and accordingly it was decided that the apprentices when out of their time should be continuously employed as hired men ; and whenever a vacancy occurred in the regu lar number, if their conduct was goad, they were placed on the establishment. The hon. member seemed to think that there was a breach of faith with regard to the appren tices, but there was nothing of the kind. They were em ployed continuously, and taught their business, and no ap prentices in private yards were allowed the same advan tages. THE RECENT REVIEW AT ALDERSHOTT. In reply to Col. STUART, The Marquis of HARTINGTON said he was happy to state that there had been some exaggeration with reference to the casealties which it was alleged had taken place at the recent review at Aldershott. It so happened that Sergeant gray, of the 7th Fusiliers, had died on the march of his regiment to the parade ground in the morning; bat, ac cording to the report of the surgeon, after a post-mortem examination, the deceased had been suffering from disease of the heart of long standing. No other man had died upon that day. With regard to the other question of the hon. and gallant member, he begged to inform him that, although there was not as much accommodation as might be desired, no more than one family was lodged in one room. THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY . : EVENING, JULY 22, _1863. the laws of Japan. Her Majesty's Government then wrote to those who were supposed to have most influence in Japan with the merchants, and asked them to put a stop to their proceedings, and he hoped that by this time an improved state of things prevailed, and that those who had outraged the feelings cf the Japanese had left the country and given place to a better class of men. Now as to the Japan out rages, they wet e not committed alone against Englishmen. The first was the murder of a Russian officer and seaman— a murder not yet redressed. This was followed by the mur der of the American Secretary ot Legation, and shortly afterwards one of Sir R. Alcock's interpreters was murdered at the door of hishouse. Then the outrage upon the Eng• lish followed. Mr. Oliphant was wounded. Shortly after two marines were killed. This country had means of de manding redress, but the demand was most moderate. Her Majesty's Government were inclined to treat the Japanese Government with consideration. The Japanese had sent over an embassy. That embassy was treated with the greatest kindness. Their object was to induce the British Government to make concessions—in fact, not to insist for a time on the opening ot all the treaty ports. Did her Ma jesty's Government refuse? On the contrary, they con sented to postpone the operations of the treaty, and it was the example of her Majesty's Government that induced the other Powers of Europe to make a similar concession. Shortly afterwards a murderous assault had been committed on four British subjects in Japan, who were walking at the time on a public road, to which foreigners had access. Was not the Government bound to demand redress for this wan ton outrage ? It had been asked whether they were going to make war. By the last accounts they had hopes that the demands of the British Government would be acceded to, and that Prince Satsuma would be compelled to make repa ration for the outrages his retainers had committed. Whether he would be compelled by the Tycoon or by the British forces the next mail would probably show ; but the English Government had throughout treated the Japanese Govern ment with the greatest consideration. The principal object was to get the English merchants to conduct themselves with ordinary prudence. They were, unfortunately, the first to cause disputes, and then, when in difficulty, they turned round upon the Government and demanded the assis tance of the naval and military forces to protect them. After few words from Mr. COCHRANE, the motion was withdrawn. POLICE CHARGES. Upon the motion of Mr. WHALLEY, a return was ordered of all the cases of charges made before police ma gistrates in petty sessions or at police-courts, and dismissed, together with the amounts paid by the persons so charged for costs from Dec. 31, 1862, to June 30, 1863. DISSENTING CHAPELS. Mr. NEWDEGATE moved for a return from the chief officer of police in every town 01 Great Britain, showing every chapel belonging to other sects than the Church of England, and every monastery, convent, or religious house used or occupied to the month of August, 1863. After some discussion the motion was withdrawn. CIVIL SERVICES. Mr. PEEL moved for a general abstract of the grants for civil services for 1863-4, compared with the grants for 1862-3. THE lONIAN ISLANDS. Lord J. MANNERS asked the First Lord of the Treasury whether instructions had been sent to our naval authorities off the coast of Greeee refune protection to the lonian subjects of her Majesty ; and whethar, as the Bth article of the Treaty of Paris, Nov. 5, 1815, invited the accession of the Ottoman Porte to that convention, as welf as that of the Powers which signed the treaties of May 30, 1814, and of June 9, 1815, it was the intention of her Majesty's Govern ment to invite the Porte to attend the conference about to be held on the proposed cession of the lonian Islands to Greece? Lord PALMERSTGN said that no instructions of the extraordinary kind alluded to had been sent to the mili tary, naval, or diplomatic agents of the British Govern ment, and for the obvious . reason that no change had taken place in the relation of the lonian Islands to Great Britain.. They were still' under the protectorate of the British 'Crown, and therefore there was no reason why, in anticipation of 'an event that had not yet happened, the lonian Islands should be withdrawn from the protection of Great Britain. With regard to the second part of the question, it was quite true that by the first treaty between England, France, and Austria, it was stipulated that the accession of Austria, Turkey, and the Two Sicilies should be invited. For reasons of his own, and from a disinclina tion to mix in European affairs, the Sultan at that time de lined to be an acceding party ; but a few years afterwards there was a convention for the concession of Baba, to which her Majesty's Government renounced all claim, and in re turn for which the Government of the Porte agreed to acknowledge the lonian Islands a possession of the British Crown, and to treat with the lonians as possessing all the rights and privileges of British subjects. Tbat being the state of affairs, Turkey had not been invited to become a party to the cession of the lonian Islands to Greece. Mr. B, COCHRANE wished to know whether the noble lord thought the'recent - occurrences in Greece would cause any 'delay the arrivarof the King at Athena. left to det ermine for h t himself s a,, i w Sir the period of his arrival in his awn dominions--but ons_ e d noreaso m n u for sE an u y A d i e . In lay, re ft p . reply to PEEL i t RI NSIaINDUSTRIAL s s , GREGORY, u n deference to the hno op tl i n ' t n hd i ing o s n i s sreis o a- f l s m io a n n y p l r r o i s p h o r t ra h b e er a s i , :a t a h lg o Governmentaraationo outhwellrdis Museum withinthe Dublin Royal Irish Society, nor would such amalgamation take place at any time without the E POTS session. called consent of Parliament. M BRITISH Mr.sT E z X G P E O R R A T L S D F s R a O d R that F some DE time AL last E the attention of the Government h a d b een call tothoet circumstance that the Federal authorities at the port o o r d d s s New York required from British subjects exporting a bond that no portion of those goods should afterwards fall into the hands of persons connected with the Con federate States. The noble lord at the head of the Govern ment then spoke of the requisition as a breach of the treaty between the British Government and the United States, and some correspondence took place. That correspondence had not been laid upon the table, bat it had been reported that the course alluded to was still persisted in, and that the consuls at Federal ports refused clearances unle ss th ose bonds were entered into. He wished to know, therefore, whether the noble lord's attention had been called to the continuance of that practice by the. Federal authorities, and whether any further correspondence had taken place. Lord PALMERSTON said her Majesty's Government considered that that practic e was not in accordanceupon with the international rights of this co untr y , as foundedthe ordinarytreaties m r a u d l e e s w f i o t r h he United the in te ceu rsst States. t o e f s . n a n t l e o i : s o ril romi e a r a d n u o p e o ss n wd t e h tre e therefore made, and the Federal G overnment p h: give orders to put an end to it. He feared, however, that orders had not been made very effe ctual, because very recently an intimation had been given of an instance In d which that practice had been repeated. Application he thereupon been made to the Federal Government, and he hoped that, when the matter had been again brought under their consideration, the practice alluded to would be put an end to. had dn r. e FITZGERALD said the correspondence of last y ear Produced, but n o t i n a com plete form. He wished, therefore, to know whether the further correspondence would be laid upon the table. Lord PALMERSTON Id, as far as possible, it should be. RUSSIA AND POLAND. Mr. HENNESSY asked whether the Govern ment ware in possession of the despatch from Prince Gort schakoff, in reply to the French Government, with regard to the six points, and whether it would be laid before Parlia ment. Lord PALMERSTON—The Government are not in possession of it in a way that will justify us in laying it be fore Parliament. VOTING BY PROXIES IN PUBLIC COMPANIES. Mr. D. GRIFFITH moved the following resolution That the present amount of stamp duty on proxy voting papers, involving the necessity of procuring a stamp of a particular amount, not always easily accessible to the voter, and thus impeding the exercise of a franchise, and also, according to the analogy of draft and receipt stamps, ex cessive in amount in comparison with such stamps, andnot involving consideration of importance to the revenue,might conveniently be reduced to one penny." The motion having been seconded by Mr. WHALLEY, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the Government had at all times shown a disposition to facilitate the exercise by proprietors of joint-stock com panies of their privilege of voting by proxy, and at various intervals they had proposed the reduction of the tax from 30s. to 6d., at which sum it now stood. He trusted that the effect of the motion would be to elicit an expres sion of the general feeling amongst the proprietors of these companies, and thus place him in a position on the part of the Government to submit a proposal to the house on the subject. On this assurance Mr. GRIFFITH consented to with draw his motion. LIEUT. TINLING. Col. SYKES called attention to the despatch of Admiral Kuper, dated April 14, 1863, reporting the death of Lieut. Tinling, of her Majesty's ship Encounter, at the siege of Showshing, and moved for papers. Lord C. PAGET read a correspondence relating to the circumstances under which Lieut. Tinling had met his death, from which he drew the conclusion that as Lieut. Tinling had gone beyond the radius of 30 miles, and engaged in opera: ions against the Taepings, which British officers had been strictly ordered not to do, he would not be justified in saying that the gallant young man had died in the ser fvice of his country. Mr. WHITE warmly reprehended the conduct of the Secretary to the Admiralty in not affording to the family of Lieut. Titling the poor consolation that the unfortunate youth had died in the service of his country, seeing that he had accompanied his captain on the occasion. Atter a few words from Mr. BAILLIE, tho motion for papers was withdrawn. MR. WILLIAM BEWICKE. • Mr. BERKELEY moved a resoluficn that the grievances suffered by Mr. Bewicke, as detailed in his petition of the 28th of April, were such as entitled him to the considera tion of her Majesty's Government. The hon. member ex plained that the petitioner had been sentenced to four years' penal servitude on a charge of firing a pistol at and resisting some sheriff's officers in the execution of their duty, and that subsequently he received the Royal pardon on its being clearly proved that his conviction was the result of a con spiracy. Returning to his home, however, he found that the commissioners of Greenwich Hospital had entered, seized his furniture, and sold it for less than one-third of its value as the property of a felon. The case was one of gnat hardship, that demanded a remedy, and proved con clusively that the law was not in a satisfactory state. Sir G. GREY contended that there was no failure of jus tice, as far as regarded the evidence upon the trial, which was perfectly satisfactory both to judge and jury. When the witnesses upon whose evidence Mr. Bewicke was con victed were tried and found guilty of perjury that gentle man was pardoned, and, as it was impossible to restore his property, which had been sold by the commissioners of Greenwich Hospital in the interval, they paid him the sum it brought. It was not in the power of the commissioners to make compensation ; but he admitted it might be matter for consideration whether a person convicted wrongly, and sub sequently pardoned, should not be placed in a more favour able position. Sir F. KELLY said the state of the law was disgracefully unjust, and that it was the bounden duly of Government to take the case into their consideration, and recommend the grant of a sum of money as compensation to Mr. Bewicke. The SOLICITOR•GENERAL acknowledged that the petitioner had been hardly used, though no fault attached to the law or those who had administered it; but he did not see how an exception could be made in this instance, or why it should be placed upon a different tooting from that of other cases where there had been a possible miscarriage of justice. The house divided — For the motion 2O Against Majority —2 BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY COURT (DUBLIN). Mr. VANCE called the attention of the house to the in , sufficient accommodation afforded to the bar, the suitors, and the public in the court in which the sittings in bank ruptcy and insolvency were held in Dublin; and moved for copy of any correspondence which had taken place between the judges of the court and the Government on the subject. Mr. F. PEEL said the matter was under consideration, and the Government hoped to be able to make satisfac factory arrangements for sufficient accommodation for these courts; but he was unable then to state whether it would be by building new courts, or rearranging other public buildings. After some remarks from Colonel DUNNE, The motion for the production of the correspondence was agreed to. DUBLIN AND EDINBURGH CORPORATIONS. Mr. VANCE moved an address for copy of any further oorrespondence between the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, Ulster King-of-Arms, the Howe Secretery, and Garter King. of •Arms, and of any other person on the subject of the precedence between the corporations of Dublin and Edinburgh. The motion was agreed to. JAPAN, Mr. B. COCHRANE called attention to our relations with Japan, and, in doing so, said that he was induced to bring the subject before the house at so late an hour of the night, and at the end of the session, because he thought it was undesirable that the house should break up without its being brought forward, and an expression of opinion ob tained from her Majesty's Government relative to the state of affairs in Japan. If we were not actually at war with that country we were likely to be so, and, judging from the results of the China war, this country was likely to find itself involved in an enormous expenditure. Our relations with Japan might be said to have originated in 1854. In 1853 the Americans entered into a treaty with the Japanese, and in the following year the same concessions were granted to England as had been granted to America. In 1858 Lord Elgin thought fit to go to Japan after the treaty of Tein-tsin, and in doing so he actually broke a condition of the treaty,which prohibited the anchoring of a ship of war within a certain dia. tance of Jeddo. In Japan the authority of the two sovereigns was completely overridden by the Daimios, who were the great merchant princes of the country; and until influ ence could be exercised over these princes treaties were of no avail. Lord Elgin, however, had insisted upon a commer cial treaty, in spite of the remonstrances made by the great council of the nation; and surely it was a very hard thing upon the Japanese to compel them in the first instance to make a treaty, and afterwards, when they found the state of their country was such that it was impossible to carry it out, then to declare war against them, He was aware it was the fashion to say that the Japanese wero barbarians, but all the beet authorities sp . oke of their high civilisation. Towards Sir Rutherford Alcock the people had evinced the utmost courtesy and consideration, and that gentleman bore testi mony to the goodness of their dispositions. On our side, however, no attention was paid to the wishes either of the people or their rulers. It was desired that the consuls should be located at Yokohama; but the diplomatic agents insisted on their being stationed at Kanagana. The Ja panese, however, objected, on the ground that Kanagana was on the great line of traffic which was traversed by the Daimios ; and as they were opposed to the commercial treaty there would be constant risk of encounters between them and the foreigners Well, the consuls stationed themselves at Yokohama, and the result was the unhappy encounter in which Mr. Richardson was killed. He asserted, upon the authority of every writer upon Japan, including Mr. Oli phant, that the Japanese were compelled to enter into a treaty with us. The house might not credit all that was stated in regard to the wealth and power of the Daimios, but that they were both wealthy and powerful could not be doubted. In this case they had a stronger weapon than wealth—they had justice. If British commerce could be promoted, while the feelings, nay, the prejudices of the Ja panese were respected, well and good ; but if it could only be done by shedding the blood of a happy, contented, and innocent people, then he should like to see the treaty of commerce torn in pieces, and our fleet withdrawn from the waters of Japan. (Hear, hear.) The hon. member con cluded by moving for papers. Mr. LIDDELL seconded the motion, and attributed the difficulties we had encountered in Japan to the Elgin treaty, which was a revolution in itself and had been obtained from Thehmdeeece much ohansue. but he was the Japanese by fear. Mr. LAYARD said he had listened with great attention anybody o u hbd n oey a ur bgtelhh, the necessity t o dhn see understand wensossudi ltdyevtbheeeuytt ablehwh efehro everything object ct of his speech. to f the speech of the hon. member for Honiton ; but he con fessed show the o ft p haas making , our u u r t e suggested no remedy. He (Mr. Layard) lamented as s p u o p si o t n ion Ja w p as an n w n hi av c o h id m a i b g i h e t p tdh o a ss t i w bl e y wenedrleinplhacoesdtiliin t ie m s e- presentnbd to 1854 were th is on y now the position against our wishes, and per forming an absolute duty. tipcountry had scarcely any connection with Japan. At thatti con vention was made between this country and Japan, me awhichsimply afforded protection to our ships. America and Russia had concluded treaties of commerce with Japan. British t r ade extended all over the wo r ld ; wherever there was an ything to buy or sell, there Englishmen were found. It was to this commercial enterprise that England owed much of its glory, its renown, and its wealth. Supposing that while Russia and America were developing the trade of Japan, England had been excluded, and her subjects ven turing to Japan had been repulsed and outraged, what would be the feelings of the country and the house ? Would not the Government be denounced for not entering into a t re aty with Japan ? conc l u d e d? -why, under ai f n t s e t r ru al e l, ti b o y ns w fr h o o m m L w o a r e d th m e a t i r m ea e t s y ., bury. And when t he p resent t call Conservative s, osed all trade with were opposed to all progre ss. who was a party, he suppose d he urns They opp it was their duty to see thatl In Japan, Y, la u t n io f n or s t w un e a re te f i a y i , rly th a e n r d e h onoura bly carried out. foreigners ; but not all the Daimios were of that p arty. The Government had been aske d with whom the treaty been concluded. His answer was that it was concluded with the same authorities as those with whom Russia and Ame her d d rice had concluded theirs. He agreed w ith his hon. friend r that the conduct of some of the British merchants was h nd_ i ie g y hl s: y ubal d u i t, sgraceful, but his hon. friend had made an excep tione in favour of the individual who had committed the greatest outrages against Japan. That individual had shot on land interdicted to Europeans a bird sacred to the Jape fuoprohnabvieing hi cal . led . to . account . he shot a policeman. tux. Alcock Punished him, but subsequently had damages given against him at Hong Kong at the instance of the in ng,inflicting this punishment, infringed CAPE OF GOOD HOPE CONTRACT. - _ Mr. PEEL moved that the contract for the conveyance of the Cape of Good Hope mails with the Union Steamship Company be approved. Mr. AYRTON hoped this would not be drawn into a precedent, but that the contracts would be allowed to lie on the table for a month before the house was called on to con firm them. The resolution was agreed to, as was the following : " That the contract for the conveyance of the Brazil and River Plate mails with the Royal Mail Steam Packet Com pany be approved." THE GALWAY CONTRACT. Mr. PEEL then moved that the contract for the convey veyance of the American mails from Galway with the At lantic Royal Mail Steam Navigation Company be approved. Mr. DILLAVYN asked whether Galway was to be a port of departure for the steamers, or simply a port of call, the packets starting from some English port ? Mr. PEEL said the new contract was identical with that of '59, and that Galway would be the port of departure, THE RUM DUTIES. In committee of the whole house, Mr. PEEL moved that the Chairman be directed to move that leave be given to bring in a bill to reduce the duty on ruin in certain cases, He said that since the American war there had been a great increase in the price of spirits of turpentine ; but it had been found that rum could be used as a substitute for it in the preparation of paint, and the object of the preseat bill was to allow the use of rum for such purposes without being subjected to duty, No loss would be entailed upon the revenue, because the rum to be so used must he rendered unfit for general purposes. Mr. HENNEoSY asked why the same relaxation should not be extended to Irish whisky, which would answer equally well in th 6 preparation of paint. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the only representation made to him was to the peculiar fitness of rum for he purpose. Of course, if whisky would answer it would ba used. Leave was then given for the introduction of the bill. PETTY OFFENCES BILL. Theorder for the mond reading of this bill was discharged RAILWAY BILLS (No. 2) BILL. This bill was withdrawn. The Indemnity, Colonial Letters Patent, Jurisdiction of justiees, and Pauper Lunatic Asylums Bills were severally read a third time and p osed. The Clergymen (Colonies), Alteration in Judges' Circuits, and Superannuation (Union Officers) Bill, were read a second time. The Lords' Amendments to the Oaths Relief in Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Bill were considered and agreed to. The house adjourned at a quarter to 1 o'clock. THE ROUPELL FORGERIES. FIFTH DAY. (Before Mr. Baron Channell and a Special Jury.) This trial was resumed at Chelmsford yesterday morning. The case for the plaintiff having been brought to a conclusion 011 Monday afternoon, Mr. Bovill yesterday addressed the jury on behalf of the de fendants. Sergeant Stiee, before he did so, said th a t in con sequence of an observation that had fallen from his lordship on the preceding day, it had been thought advisable that Miss Sarah Roupell should be in at tendance, and she was now in court, and he proposed to examine her. Mr. Bovill said he should object to any further evidence being adduced after the case for the plain tiff had closed. . _ _ Baron Channe ll sai d he considered that the lady couid g ive important evidence, and in the interests of justice he should allow her to be examined. Mies Sarah Roupell was accordingly placed in the witness-box. In answer to questions put to her by Sergeant : Shee, she said was living at Aspen House when my father died, and for some years previously. This letter (the letter of instruction to prepare the deed of gift) was written by me. I remember writing it. It was at the request of my brother William. He was present , and no one else. My brother dic tatedl wrote it at the time it bears date, . I cannot remember that I ever told anybody nan y b. 08 to 1 me. 815 w 6 rote it. Cross-examined—l think I can swear I never told any one. Ido not mean I think. I will swear I did not. I never told my mother. lam not aware that my mother had given property to my brother William. I had not seen this letter for a year until it was put into my hands this morning. I swear that the letter was not shown to me yesterday. I have been in Chelmsford since last Thursday, and my mother also. Mr. Bovill—Are not these proceedings against the wish of your mother and your brother Richard ? The witness hesitated, and Sergeant Shee ob jected to the question. The witness then said she did not think they ob jected to these proceedings, but they would have been glad if any other course could have been adopted that would have saved exposure to the family. Mr. Liuklater told me that I should not be called as a witness if it could be avoided; and I was informed last night after the court had risen that I should have to give evidence about this letter in consequence of what the judge had said; but the letter3was not shown me. Baron Channell—lt was in my box locked up. (A laugh.) Cross-examination continued—As children the family were in the habit of scribbling each other's names, but did not mean anything wrong. I have signed my mother's name, not for anything wrong, but to save her trouble. I remember perfectly well that I wrote the letter in the drawing-room, and that my brother William dictated it to me. Ido not remember seeing anybody on the same morning, but I suppose my father was there. Mr. Bovill—Then your mind is a perfect blank upon everything else that occurred on that day, except the letter ? Witness—l do not remember anything else. Mr. Bovill then addressed the jury for the de ' fondants, and he commenced by observing that no thing was in his opinion more dangerous than to call a witness the last moment to prop up a particu lar case. If this letter was a genuine one, the wit- Sarah Roupell ought to have been called to prove it, but she had been purposely kept away. Why did they not call Mr. Whittaker, a respectable so licitor, who could have told them whether the trans action was a genuine one or not? Again, why was not Mrs. Roupell, the mother, brought forward, who could not only have proved that the plaintiff was the heir-at -law, born after wedlock, but also whether her husband had given away this pro perty or not ? These witnesses had been kept back, and the jury would judge with what object; but the witness Sarah Roupell, who had been as it were dragged forward at the lest moment, had con tradicted William Roupell in a most material point, for he swore that he wrote a draft of the letter and that his sister copied it, while she swore that he dictated it to her. The fact was that the whole story was a lie. William Roupell, the son of the old smelter, and brought up in the school of the old smelter, who had amassed £400,000, ?gad de ceived them ; or tried to do so, and if he succeeded he would go back and laugh in his sleeve at their credulity. What was the real state of the case ? His clients had advanced £12,000 upon the faith of the signature to the deed of gift being genuine, and the object of the present action was to rob them of this large sum of money, which had been ad vanced upon the faith of a solemn deed. The plain tiffs were playing for a game of £200,000, and they cared little what became of the unhappy ladies and their families who were the real defendants in this action, and who had advanced their money upon the faith of this deed of gift being genuine, or whe ther they were compelled to go to the workhouse or not. The plaintiffs did not dare to attack the great mortgagees who had advanced large sums of money upon what was called the Roupell Park estate, but they thought probably that these four ladies would not have found the means to contest such a ques- Lion, and that they would quietly give up posses sion of the property. They were mistaken, how ever ; and if the jury had not already grave doubts whether the claim of the plaintiff was not founded solely upon the fraud and perjury of William Roupell, he felt a strong impression that the evi- dente he should lay before them on the part of the defendants would completely satisfy them upon this point, and the plaintiff ought not to succeed in this action. The learned counsel then proceeded to call the attention of the jury to the proceedings that had taken place with reference to this particular pro perty, and said that if the actions that had been al luded to hadbeen tried as against the tenants, a great portion of evidence would have been excluded, and the real question in dispute would not have been brought before the jury, and he urged that every trick and contrivance had been resorted to. It was represented by Messrs. Linklater that they were defending for the tenants, which was not true; and the defendants ultimately recovered their rent, their claim being founded upon this very deed of gift, anti the tenants, o: rather Mr. Richard Roupell, the present plaintiff, who now set up that the deed was forged, had to pay the costs. After this Messrs. Linklater pretended that they were not the repre sentatives of Messrs. Springham and Haws, the tenants, but that they were really acting for Mr. Richard Roupell, and that it was only upon some technical grounds that the former action had not been defended. It was idle to say that they were not acting for Mr. Richard Roupell, for they knew perfectly well that their case rested entirely upon the question whether this deed of gift was genuine or not. The result of the proceedings he had re ferred was to leave the defendants in possession of the property; and if the present claim of the plain tiff were to be allowed to succeed he would ask them who would be safe. He believed, however, that he was safe in the hands of the jury, and although they might say there was doubt and there was suspicion, still there was moral evidence upon which they could rely, and they would not disturb the parties who were legally and honestly in pos session of the property. With regard to the evi dence of Mr. W. Roupell as to the will, it had no thing to do with the question. Ho was playing the deep game of confessing himself a perjurer and a forger in order to obtain £200,000 for his family, and he came into the witness-box with a lie in his mouth ; for he swore he had not been in communi cation with Messrs. Linklater, when it was clear that he had given them all the information they possessed, and that he had been in constant communication with those gentlemen, not only before but since he had been in prison. His es teemed friend Sergeant Shee was to tell the tale to the jury, and William Roupell was to prove it, and he, by his own account, had been a liar and a forger all through the proceedings. The jury would re collect that he had represented that shortly before these forgeries were represented to have been com mitted he was only in the position of a lawyer's clerk, when it appeared that at this very time he had four bankers; that thousands of pounds were passing through his hands every year; and that he had borrowed £40,000 from the Guardian Insurance Company and £12,000 from the London and West minster Bank; end that he had control over a most extensive property, of which the witness Truman, to whom he paid £3OO a-year salary, was the ma nager. He thought the jury would agree with him that William Roupell had deceived them at every stage of the inquiry, and that it was only now and then, and quite by chance, that the truth was eli cited from him. The learned counsel then proceeded to call the attention of the jury to the circumstances connected with the making of the deed of gift, and he said he should prove that it was in the possession of Mr. Edwin Whitaker long before the time when William Roupell and the witnesses Dove and Tru man represented that it was executed; and he should prove also that many of the witnesses, and particu• larly William Roupell, had contradicted themselves i❑ a great many essential particulars ; and that it was impossible that a great many of the statements they made could be true. He then remarked upon the evidence that had been given by Truman and Dove, and said that it was no doubt intended to in duce the jury to believe that their signatures to the deed of gift were forgeries, but when it was found that they could not deny that they had signed the deed as attesting witnesses, then W. Roupell turned round and said that they were genuine signatures, but that he had deceived them as to the nature of the instruments that they were about to sign. He contended that the story told by William Roupell of his having concealed a portion of the deed with a piece of blotting paper was absurd and could not be relied upon, and that this was merely peat of the fraud that had been concocted by William Roupell, and by which he intended to impose upon the jury. He then proceeded to comment upon the statement proved to have been made by Dove, one of the attesting witnesses to the deed of gift, to Mr. Coventon, which was to the effect that it was his genuine signature, and that he should not have signed it as the attesting witness if he had not seen the deceased execute it. His learned friend had pledged himself to prove that the signatures of the attesting witnesses were for geries, but he submitted that he had failed entirely to do so; and, under these circumstances, he asked the jury what evidence there was that this deed of gift was a forgery, and whether they would be justi fied upon that supposition in depriving the present defendants of their property ? He did not mean to say that there might not be some suspicion in refer ence to the transactions of this family, and that the truth had not yet been arrived at, and probably never would be ; but the question they would have to decide was, whether it was clearly established by evidence upon which they could rely that the deed in question was a forgery ? They had no doubt the statement of Mr. *William Roupell, but they would not forget that he had £200,000 worth of property, and probably a ticket-of-leave, in view, and that it was quite clear that he was ready to swear to any thing that was likely to effect the objects he had in view. He then reminded the jury that it had been proved that the old man stated to both the tenants of this property that he had given the Warley estate to his son William, and that they would in future have a lawyer for a landlord ; and he said he should produce a mass of evidence to show that the signa ture of the deceased to the deed of gift was a genuine signature, and ho should also lay before the jury the evidence of a number of gentlemen who were known as experts in handwriting, who would contradict the evidence of this class that had been given on behalf of the plaintiff, and who would tell the jury that in their opinion the signature was a genuine signature' The learned counsel then reminded the jury that Wm. Roupell contradicted his sister as to the letter, and he said that nothing was more improbable than that he should have got his sister to write a letter which must have led to his immediate detection. Fie asked he jury whetter, if the old man had given authority such a letter to be written, it would not have been talked about in the family ? If William Rou- pell were to succeed in this action, and to get the property for his brother Richard, what security had they that he would not come forward next year and declare that all he had stated before was false, and produce another will by which all the property was left to himself ? He would not deny that William Roupell had been guilty of forgery with reference to the leases, and this he said he believed was the foundation of the whole of the story ; for, knowing that he had been guilty of one forgery, he thought he might just as well say that the deed of gift was also forged, and thus get rid of the whole affair. The learned counsel then proceeded to call the at tention of the jury to various discrepancies in the evidence of William Roupell, and particularly to the fact, that although he pretended to have kept back the genuine leases for the purpose of copying the signatures of the tenants, the signatures he after wards put to the fictitious instruments were totally dissimilar, and there was not the slightest resem blance to the genuine signatures. His learned friend had, as he thought, most improperly and unneces sarily introduced the question of the will, with which the defendants had nothing whatever to do; but as he had done so, he should make use of it, and contend, on the part of the defendants, that unless the jury believed the evidence of William Roupell as to the existence of a genuine will of 1850, and that by this will the property was devised to Richard Roupell, he would net be entitled to a verdict in the present action. He then referred to the proceed ings of William Roupell in connection with the wills, and asked whether they could possibly be lieve that he did not look at the genuine will for a week after it came into his possession, or that he retained the document for more than six years, and did not destroy it until the 29th of March, 1862, the day before he left England. Again, the jury would remember that Mrs. Ronpell, the mother, was in the house in Cross.street every day for a week after the funeral, and she must have known everything that took place there, and yet she was not called as a witness. It was said that William Roupell was solely actuated by a feeling of sincere repentance. Sincere repentance, indeed ! Why, he did not say a word till the mortgagees of this property threatened to foreclose the mortgage, and he knew the forgery of the leases must be discovered, and then he attempted, first to shut the mouths of the attorneys by alleging that the deeds relating to the other pro perty were also forged, and having failed in this, he boldly resolved to tell the extraordinary story he had done, in order to get hack property of the value of £200,000 for his family. The learned counsel then next proceeded to argue that the will now alleged to be forged was a very reasonable one, and it was very likely that the old man should have left the property nominally to his wife instead of leaving it to William Roupell ; for the jury would remember that the property was alleged to be worth £400,000, and that if it had been left to the latter, he was illegitimate, and that the legacy duty would have amounted to £40,000, and this sum was saved to the family by the property being left to the mother. It being now past one o'clock, the Court was ad journed for a short period, and, upon the return of the jury, Mr. Bovill resumed his address to them for the defendants. The learned counsel then commented at consider able length upon the effect of the will, and he also remarked upon the evidence as to the handwriting, and said he should call witnesses from the Bank of England, from which establishment, they would remember, not a single witness had been called by his learned friend, although the old man kept an account there, and they would state their opinion with regard to the signatures to the instruments that were alleged by the plaintiff to have been forged. He then proceeded to make some humorous comments upon the slight peculiarities by which some of the " experts" had professed to come to a positive conclusion that the signatures were not genuine, and he said he should produce a number of receipts which were undoubtedly signed by the deceased, and they would find that every one of those supposed peculiarities were sometimes absent and sometimes present, and argued that this portion of the evidence was really worth nothing at all. The learned counsel, in the course of his further observations, urged that the whole case came from a polluted source, commencing with the smelting-pot of the old man, from which he had obtained £400,000, and that trick and artifice had been resorted to with a view to mislead the jury and to wrest a verdict from them; and he concluded by saying that the questions to be decided by the jury were—first, whether the deed of gift of January, 1856, was executed by Richard Palmer Roupell, in the presence of the attesting witnesses,Truman and Dove; secondly, whether the signature was genuine, although it might not have been signed in the pre sence of those witnesses ; and, thirdly, whether the will of 1850 gave the property to the plaintiff; and unless they were satisfied upon these points, the defendants were entitled to their verdict. He con cluded a most eloquent and able address by stating that if they returned a vet diet for the plaintiff upon such facts as appeared in the present case, it might be attended by the most dangerous and frightful results. The following witnesses were then examined for the defendants. Mr. T. West said—l was a tenant of Mr. Richard Roupell for 25 years, and I frequently saw him sign receipts for rent that I paid him. The deed of gift was then shown to the witness, and he said he believed the signature, " Richard Pal mer Roupell," was his handwriting. Cross-examined—My only reason for saying it is his handwriting is, that the signature resembles those to my receipts for rent. I perceive there are some slight differences between the two signatures, but that does not shake my evidence at all. In answer to questions put by the jury, the wit ness said that having carefully examined the re ceipts and the signature to the deed of gift, he was of opinion that the signature to the latter was genuine. Mr G. Lasty, another tenant of old Mr. Roupell's, gave similar evidence. He also expressed a posi tive opinion that the signature to the deed of gift was the handwriting of the deceased. In cross examination, he said he should much rather say that the signature was a genuine one than that it was an imitation of his signature by a skilful forger. He went to Doctors'-commons, and saw the will that was alleged to be forged, and in his opinion the signature to that will was a genuine signature. The letter of instruction to Mr. Witaker was then shown to the witness, and he said that the signa ture was a forgery. Mr. Shuter, a letter sorter at the General Post- Office, and who was also a tenant of the deceased, produced some receipts that had been given to him by Mr. Richard Roupell, and he expressed an opinion that the signature to the deed of gift was genuine. Similar evidence was given by other witnesses; a great number of receipts were put in, the object being to show that the deceased constantly varied his signature, and that very few of them were abso lutely alike. In one instance it appeared that the deceased had only put one "1" to the name of Rou pell ; but Sergeant Shea suggested that this pro bably arose from the deceased having begun to sign so close to the end of the paper that there was not sufficient apace for the final letter. Mr. Phipps, the secretary to the Lambeth Water. works Company, proved that the deceased was a shareholder in that company, and he identified two signatures to two transfers of shares that bad been made by him. He also produced several dividend warrants which had been signed by the deceased, and there appeared to be some observable differ ence between the signature. The witness then looked at the deed of gift, and he said the signature was exceedingly like that of the deceased, but he could not say.that it was his signature ; it was very like it. Some farther evidence of the same character was then given, after which tho Court adjourned. A Female Blondin Killed at Birmingham. •-•.,^ --__ ..------ The woman known as the Female Blo ndin has fallen a victim to t -Le m orbid taste for sensation performance. While she was crossing a high rope on Monday at Aston Park, :,simitigham, the rope broke, and she was dashed to the ground and in sttntly killed. Everything (says the local Gazette) seemed to favcur the Foresters' fete. The weather was fine, and the public, taking much interel,l in the festival, thronged the streets to see the p. .ocession as it passed. The Foresters assembled at B. 'n g le y Hall before 12 o'clock—more than 2,000 of the m coming from Leicester, Warwick, Tamwortb, and ,Brierley Hill, as well as from Birmingham. They dispt:rted. themselves in their insignia and their regalia, and their chrystopes, and scarves, and helms, and every thing gave promise of a day of pleasure. The pro' cession was followed by crowds to Aston Park, and in the earlier part of the day thousands were amused by the volunteer bands and by nigger me lodists, dancers, clowns, anal gymnasts. A balloon ascent was watched with interest by a vast con course of people, and then all eyes were turned to' the rope upon which a woman, who was known to the public as Madame Geneive, the Female Blon din, was to perform extraordinary feats. She had been advertised in the newspapers, and by placard and handbill, as " the only real and legitinutte per former of Blondin's great feats of walking the rope shackled in chains, feet in baskets, blindfolded, en veloped in a sack," &e. Her coming was hera hied with all the sounding phraseology at the commal3d of the writer of the official programme, and tor appearance on the rope was looked for with eager ness. The crowd pressed around the space set apart for the poles and stakes by which the rope was supported, but the police kept the space clear. At half-past six Madame Geneive ascended the ladder, and taking the balance-pole in her hands, stepped. out on the rope with much confidence. She walked half way across the rope, and then returning ,she had two very heavy chains tied to her hands and feet. Her action was not impeded; for the. right foot was tied to the right hand and the left foot to the left hand, the chains being sufficiently long to allow her to make free use of hands and feet. The chains encumbered her only by their weight. Again she walked along the rope without the slightest trepidation. She walked the whole length of the rope, stepping over the point of the upright pole by which the rope was supported ill he centre. At the other end of the rope she re- ceived from a man who was in attendance a bag or sack, which she placed over head and shoulders. Again she went upon the rope, stepping with con fidence, and had only gone about a yard when there was a crash, and, before the cry of horror had died from the lips of the spectators, Madame Geneive had fallen at the feet of her husband, and was dead. The crowd rushed towards the spot, but the police were able to keep a small space around the dead woman. Everything that was possible, under the circum stances, was done with the view of inducing respira tion by artificial means ; but all was of no avail. Madame Geneive appeared to have died the instant her body struck the ground, her death having, oc• curred from concussion or rupture of the spine. She was six months advanced in pregnancy. Madame Geneive was in appearance about thirty years of age. She had, we believe, several children, who are still living, and who are of tender years• The name by which her appearance at Aston was announced to the public was assumed. She was the daughter of a man who was formerly known to some people in Birmingham as "Funny Joe." 1 1 $ was a showman in a small way, and his daughter o 9 of whom he had two or three—Madame Geneive, as we have said, among the number—were all reared to " the profession." They were very clever and very successful, and out of an income which at least one of them earned by risking her life, and by losing it at last, they made an allowance to their father during the last few years. COUNTRY MARKETS. .4. LE ED S-T TJESDA.Y. To-day there was a moderate supply of wheat, 9 0 c 1 fine fresh samples command is per qr advance on late rates. Foreign is held firmly, which checks sales. MARKET HARBOROUGH—TUESDAY. White wheat, 50s to 538; red,°.46s to 50s per 36 stone. Malting barley at —s to —s per qr. ; grinding, 29s to 3 a 4 , 8 per 30 st. Oats, old, 24s to 275; new,, 19s to 22s per st. ; beans, 38s to 42s per qr. LIVERPOOL—TUESDAY. At our market to-day there was a good attendance both of millers and dealers, and wheat experienced a good Sal e, at an advance of 2d per cental on the week. Oats mor e saleable, and oatmeal in better request. Barley and Pel at the prices of Tuesday last. Indian corn was 3d to 6 per qr dearer. Egyptian beans scarce, and is higher. NEWCASTLE—TUESDAY. Wheat was firm at Saturday's quotations. Flour steady and choice sorts scarce. Spring corn unchanged. Old white wheat..s4s to 60s I Old red wheat, , 53s to 56° New do. 50s to 56s I New do. 4ss to 500 Malting barley....37s to 42s I Oats. 22s to :3 0° Grinding d0.....29s to 32s I Beans 3ss to 4 SHEFFIELD—TUESDAY. The show of wheat was limited, and scarcely equal t 0 meet the demand. Last week's prices were made. d Red wheat, per load of 3 imperial bushels 18s Od to 19s Od White 2 f 2os Od to 218 Od 9 New red 160 Od to 17 0 Od I 18s Od to 19 s Od New white „ ff • 16s Od to 1 9 s Od Beans f) J) 458 Od to 56s Od Peas, per qr 30s Od to 32s Od Grinding barley, per qr Malting ditto, Oats Flou :' ;, ls .... . t • 0 : .2 , :8 .. 0 .. d .. .......... ;. t. . 0. . 1i . e2 3 .0 4 5 s 0 0 Od t t o o 2 38 7 5 s 0 0 ad MELTON MOWBRAY—TUESDAY. The following were the currencies :—New white wheat! 4 , 3 s Od to 54s Od ; new red, 43s Od to 49s per 36 stone! beaus, 39s to 42s for old ; new sorts, —s to —s per 38 El. barley, —s to —a for malting, and 28s to 30s per qr. Of grinding ; new oats, 20s to 25s Od per 24 stone. Aroun d here harvest prospects still continue exceedingly good. Foreign Mail. Packet List. MAILS DUE.. Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton. July 19 ' via Marseilles Aug. 13 ' Brazil and Cape Verds, by British packet. Aug. 4 ' Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena July 2 1 9 , : China, Penang, and Sin ga p ore , v i a S out hampton ju,IY 2 7, via Marseilles July Falkland Islands • • 000000000 Gibraltar, via South am pt on OO ......JulY 1 9 . 19. India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, vi a S ou th am pton .. Ju-Y , via Marseilles.. July .1. India (Bombay), via Southampton ...... July 26 ' n, via Marseilles July .4,' Portugal.... Aug. .:5,,' Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton July ~,'' via Marseilles July P." Newfoundland Oporto and Vigo .. .. U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet.... July 2 2 ' by U.S. packet.... by Canadian packet. July 24 ' 10 W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe .. Aug. Bahamas, via New York July 9 ' Mexico.. All parts of West Indies, including Chili, Peru 1 July 29, California, and British C01umbia....... , ..... ..., Births. MONTAGU.—On the 20th in s t„ rad', at Felixstowe, the -- Robert Montagu, of a daughter, prematurely, MOIR.—On the 18th inst.. at Leckie, Stirlingshire) the wife of Major Moir, of a son and heir. Lady SCOTT.—On the 18th inst., at 97, E a t on - a quare, Scott, of a daughter. WOMBWELL.—On the 12th inst., at 9, Upper Grosv o3°" street, Lady Julia Wombwell, of a daughter. Marriages. 1 , 0 fig CLARKSON—PRINCE.—O n t h e 21st inst , at St. Church, Herefo r d, Ri c h ard Clarkson, 'Esq., solicitor! °st Bewdley, Worcestershire, to Elizabeth Anne, the el ae e daughter of Pereg r i ne P r i nce, Esq., of B e l v idere o° llB Hereford. taint JICKLIN G — ALEXANDER.—On the 21st inst., at ~ t r George's, Bloo ms b ury, t h e Rev. Franc i s Ji c kling, '", u e r of Beeston St. Lawrence, to Rose Elizabeth, the P un° daughter of Major-General James Alexander, C.B. DA.DNit'lvSisTEOsng.t,haege2dosth6. iteta.,thsat FLORANCE.—On the 18th inst., at Portfield , Chichester, John D. Florance, Esq., aged 87. GARDINER.—On the 19th inst. , at Harpfo rd, Otter,' St. Devon, George Gardiner, Esq. , late o f Stoke Cau°l3' aged 68. ' St, John's-wood , Alien GREASLEY.—On the 18th inst., at 4, The Terrace, nington-park, Mrs. Greasley. HoILE.—On the 18th inst., John Iloilo, Esq., of Sand- with, Kent, aged 84. TICKELL.—On the 18th inst., at Dublin, Edward Vice Esq , Q.C., aged 84. London : Printed and Published by WILLIAM.A.ND OW,S ; of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at THE SUN office• No. II': Strand, in the Precinct of the 9avoy, in the ColuxtY Middlesex, —=Wednesday, July 22, 1863. ' 1