The Sun. — London, England, 1839-01-24 00:00:00

ABOLITION OF THE CORN .LAYS, GREAT MEETING IN EDINBURGH. (From the Edinburgh Observer.) A public meeting of the inhabitants was held yesterday, in the Waterloo Rooms, in pursuance of a requisition addressed to the Lord Provost, to consider the propriety of repealing the present system of Corn-laws; the Lord Provost in the chair. Besides the speakers, we observed James Erskine, Esq., of Cardrona ; Mr. Miller, of Dalswinton; William Weddel, Esq., of Easter Moffat; Angus Fletcher, Esq., of Dunans ; Sheriffs Jardine and Hunter, Colonel Skene, Bailie Stark, Councillors M'Laren, Faulkner, Duncan, Anderson, Lindsay, and Young ; George M'Callum, Esq. ; James Browne, L L. D.; A. C. Dick, J. M. Bell, and J. H. Burton, Esqrs., advo cates ; Andrew Millar, Thomas Ireland, and James M'Donald, Esqrs., merchants ; William Tait, Esq., bookseller ; James Donaldson, Esq , accountant; C. J. F. Orr, George Logan, Phineas Daniel, J J. Darling, James Peddie, jun., and Peter Crooks, Esqrs., Writers to the Signet ; and William Dal rymple, S. S. C. The room was crowded in every corner, and many went away unable to gain admission. There may have been, however, from 1,500 to 2,000 persons present. The LORD PROVOST, in opening the meeting, said—The meeting had been called in consequence of a requisition ad dressed to himself, to call a public meeting to consider the propriety of petitioning for a repeal of the Corn laws. This was a subject. they would perceive, of vast importance. and involving very great interests. He was sure they would all agree with him in thinking that the prosperity of all the various classes of the community were identical, and that the depression or the prosperity of one would affect the welfare of all the rest. He trusted the meeting would proceed in this matter with a due regard to the interests of these various classes, and that they would take an extended and enlightened view of the benefit of the whole community. They would also remember that this question involved great and important in terests, that there were points of it on which the best friends of the country were entirely of different opinions, and there fore they would take care to do nothing rashly—nothing that could not be undone without injury to many classes of the community. He did not feel it to be his duty, on the pre sent occasion, to express any opinion of his own ; but the moment that he received a requisition requesting him to call the p esent meeting, he thought it was his duty immediately to comply—( Hear, hear)—for he considered it to be the right of the inhabitants of this country to express their opi nions on every measure which might affect their interests, and that they were only using a Constitutional right in petitioning Parliament with respect to any measure which they might feel themselves aggrieved by. He further thought, besides agreeing to call the meeting, that they had a right to expect that he should sanction the meeting with his presence. That he thought was due to the inhabitants of this metropolis ; and be should endeavour to follow that rule in relation to every public question.—( Cheers.) lie would now only call upon them to hear the resolutions which would be proposed for their adoption.—( Cheers. ) Sir THOMAS DICK Latmea, who was received with great cheering, said—l am disposed to think that many of my bro ther lairds may be somewhat astonished, and, perhaps, even a little out of humour, to find that I am coming forward to give my best assistance to promote the object you have in view— the demolition of those most obnoxious laws. But most of you who now hear the know that when I conscientiously arrive at an opinion, I am not the man to be deterred, upon any consideration whatever, whether private or public, whether personal or political, from giving an open avowal to that opi nion honestly and freely when circumstances call upon me so to do.—( Cheers.) The opinion which I now hold, Gentlemen, is one which I adopted many years ago, and I have continued to hold it up to the present time ; and every year that I have continued to hold it, it has grown stronger and stronger within me, and I have never hesitated to broach it when the occasion required me so to do.—( Hear, hear.) Gentlemen, I am one of those men whose sole dependence is on land, my sole de pendence throughout my whole life has been upon land ; it is, therefore, not very unnatural that I should, at a very early period of my life, have taken a deep interest in this question, and that I should have taken every means to inform myself thoroughly upon it. I may say that I read almost all that was either written or spoken upon it ; and I remember very well, amongst other works, I went through the whole of Mr. Jacob's report, and followed that gentleman on the map over every one of those foreign districts to which he re ferred ; and the result was, that I came to the decided con viction that those laws are not only unjust to the manufac turer, but absolutely useless to the agriculturist.—( Loud cheers.) This opinion being taken up at that period, was deeply engraven on my mind, and remains still engraven there with the strength I have told you, although many of the facts and arguments by which I arrived at it have long ago escaped my memory. But although fresh facts and fresh arguments are springing up every day around us in support of our cause, I do not mean to read you a lecture en this most intricate question in political economy, seeing that my much valued friend, Mr. Wigham is to follow me—a gentleman who has, by the able speech recently delivered on this subject in another place, proved that be has gone deeply into the con sideration of all the minutiae of this question. Gentlemen, I conceive the good that I do your cause this day is by coming forward and presenting myself before you.—( Here there was some interruption, arising from the crowded state of the room.) Gentleman, I was proceeding to say that I conceived the most effectual use that I can be on the present occasion, is by the exhibition of myself here—(Cheers and laughter)— were it only to prove that there is at least one landed pro prietor who sympathises with you in your wishes—( Hear, hear.) You must not, however, suppose that I am a rare avis in terris—l shall" take the liberty to give a free a free transla tion of this phrase—a rare bird among the clods ; for I can assure you that I have great satisfaction in telling you that I know a great number of my own personal friends, men of sound judgment and enlarged views, amongst the landed proprietors and amongst the tenantry, who think with me in every particular.—( Loud cheering.) Gentlemen, I am prepared to contend that if you once prove that tbose Corn-laws do injury to the manufacturing interests, com mon justice demands that they should be repealed, even although it should be supposed that they may be beneficial to the agriculturist. But, Gentlemen, how is it possible that they can be beneficial to the agriculturist—how is it pos sible that anything can be beneficial to the agriculturist which is prejudicial to the manufacturer, :when all of us know that manufacture and agriculture are so closely and intimately linked together that it is quite impossible to do injury to the one without doing an injury to the other? It is a common error, and an error which is extremely injurious and very dangerous, to set up the agricultural and the manufacturing interests in opposition and hostility to each other. Nothing can be more erroneous than this—in the old fable of the body and members there is absolutely not a sufficiently strong illus tration to show the absurdity of this.—( Hear, hear.) I would say, Gentlemen, that agriculture and manufacture should be welded together with commerce, in order to make out the entire and the eternal ring of British prosperity. Before I sit down, permit me to say one word by way of en deavour to destroy those phantoms of the imagination which have so bewildered many of the agriculturists in considering this question. In the course of discussing it, they are too apt to imagine that the fall which must necessarily take place upon agricultural produce, when the Corn-laws are done away with, must amount to the whole quantum of the difference between the home and the foreign price; but this is a very erroneous view; for, on looking for relief for our manufacturer, it must arise from the increase of the price of food to his foreign rival, as well as from the fall in our markets giving ease to himself at home. If the agriculturist would only consider that the comparatively small diminution that would take place in the price of his produce would be more than compensated by the improved steadiness of his markets, and look forward for an immense prospective improvement which must be created for the sale of his produce, by the great stimulus given to manu factures, and so to the manufacturers of his country, who form the largest portion of his consumers—if they were to look at this, instead of complaining at the prospect of the Corn-law being done away with, they would join with us in rejoicing at this prospect, and hail it as one of the happiest circumstances that could take place ; and I would hope to see them in our ranks, calling on the Legislature to open to us, as speedily as possible, as large an increase of freedom of trade as our rela tions with other States might, in prudence and in sound policy, enable them to grant us. Gentlemen, that this con summation may arrive is my most ardent wish; and, es far as an humble individual can assist in promoting it, my most strenuous exertions shall always be used for the purpose of effecting it.—( Cheers.) Mr.JonN WIGHAM.—After having so lately come forward in a public manner in another place. it was not my intention to have done more on the present occasion than merely second the resolution. But it has occurred to me since I came into the room that I might, with some advantage, say a few words to the working classes. From speeches at Manchester and elsewhere, I suspect it may be supposed, in repealing the Corn-laws, that the rate of wages in this country will be reduced to something like the continental level. Now, I sins cerely believe that what we are wanting will have no such ef fect as this. My views are these—the demand for labour en tirely regulates the rate of wages.—( Cheers.) If I am right in this position,. it follows, of course, that if the country is raised, by the abolition of the Corn-laws, higher in the scale of manufacturing industry, it is impossible to say exactly what will be the effect on wages,- but, generally speaking, it ap pears to me, if it puts the country into a state of pros perity, the result will be good wages ; but whether wages be increased or diminished, one thing is clear-- that if the present system of Corn-law is continued, and the manufacturing interest placed at great disad van t age , t h e con sequente will be a diminution in the demand for labour, and the working man would be the first to suffer, whether corn be high or low.—( Cheers.) What I contend for is perfect fair play over the whole world, and what more can any working man or operative ask ? If the Corn-laws were repealed, the price of food will be equalised here and on the Continent ; and with the advantages of capital, machinery, and the supe rior skill of our workmen, the manufacturer will surely be able to produce his goods as cheap as the continental manufac turers. This I would call fair play; and if we could not com pete with foreigners, with all our advantages, then it is our own fault. The only other point on which I wish to say a few words, is to the farmers. I have many of my most intimate connections among the farmers, and would not willingly do anything to injure them. In this part of the island it is usual for farmers to have leases. Such is not the case in England. Hav ing been impressed with the idea that there might be cases where a repeal of the Corn-laws would be injurious —where, for example, farmers had entered on nineteen years' leases, under the pledge of high prices guaranteed by the Corn-laws, and had expended large sums in improving land, and in bring ing waste land into cultivation—l shall suppose that low p: ices will follow the repeal of the Corn-laws, and that such farmers are injured, if held to their lease. I hold that the Legislature must make provision for the leaseholder. I would not merely be satisfied with declaring it competent in the farmer to renounce his lease; he must be reimbursed by the landlord for the amount of capital expended in improving the property. I have no doubt but the Legislature will take this part of the question into their serious consideration, and provide a remedy by a fair grain rental,—a mode of adjustment now well understood in the country. He concluded by second i-g the resolution. APLaeasi now presented himself, and was received with great cheering. I have, said he, much pleasure in proposing the resolution which has been put into my hands. It appears to me that nothing is of so much importance to the prosperity of manufactures, or of the country at large, as a complete and thorough repeal of the Corn-laws. The general principle has been well stated by those who preceded me, so that it only re mains for me to show the practical working of the Corn-laws on the manufacturing interests ; and I am persuaded that, with any unbiassed individual, the effect will be to convince him that a change in the present system ought to take place. The resolution is to the effect that in consequence of the operation of the Corn-laws our manufacturers are removing to other countries, where, under a more favourable Govern ment, or rather by the operation of fair play, they are spreading and flourishing. I shall begin by reading the resolution. This is the proposition to which I am to ask your consent—a proposition which is very appalling. but is as true as it is appalling. No one who knows anything at all on the subject will deny what is here stated to be going or, rapidly every day—that the manufactures with which foreign countries used to be supplied are now falling off, that our ex ports are diminishing, and that a large proportion of our pro duce which is now exported is not, properly speaking, manu factured goods, but rather the raw materials, from which fo reigners manufacture themselves. This portion consisted of cotton, flax, and woollen yarns, bar iron, &c., and their value was increased, by their manufacture in other countries, two, three, ten, twenty-fold, thus depriving the working-man at home to that extent of a market for his labour which he would have had if he had, as he used to have, the manufacture completed in this country. It requires very little trouble to show that this state of things is entirely owing to the existence of the Corn-laws—that we cannot compete with foreigners, because we have Lot fair play, as my friend expressed it ; and what we want is to get fair play—to have our manufacturers and artisans placed on a fair footing with the natives of other countries. With that measure of favour, or rather of strict justice, I have no doubt that our artizans would be able to compete with and to beat the manufacturers of every other country in the world.—(Cheers.) With a view to show the present state of things more clearly, I beg to state a few facts with regard to the diminution of our exports; and to the increase of those in foreign countries. It appears from the Custom-house returns,. which arc perfectly unexcep tionable, that, in 1820, the export of cotton goods to Russia alone was thirteen millions of yards. At the present time the quantity exported to that country is only about. three quarters of a million of yards, which is a most enormous decrease. In Prussia matters are much worse ; there our manufactures are entirely excluded. In 1820, we exported to Prussia five millions, and now the ports are literally shut against us, there is not a single yard admitted.—( Hear, hear.) To the Ger man States, the quantity exported, in 1820, was forty-seven millions of yards—it is now thirty-eight millions. In short, I believe there is hardly any foreign country with which our trade has not diminished in the exports of manufactured goods. The result, in money, of the diminution of our exports for the last few years, to the North of Europe alone, amounts to seven millions sterling a year, independent of the diminution in other parts of the world. The decrease is not peculiar to the article of cotton—it has taken place also in woollens, in flax, in cutlery, and in all manner of Birmingham and Sheffield goods. In the exportation of all these there is a decrease, and a consequent decrease in the demand for skilled labour at home. But though I have mentioned only the di minution which has taken place in the North of Europe, the same remark applies in nearly the same degree to other fo reign countries. The state of matters is the same in North and South America; and it is the same in the Italian states. There the exports have greatly fallen off, and all this has taken place, not because the people of these countries are not rich enough to buy our goods ; if that were the case we might have little cause to complain, and rest contented in the hope of better days ; but it has arisen from the people of of these countries manufacturing for themselves. They now come to us to purchase such kinds of machinery as they cannot yet manufacture for themselves, or at so small an expense. They purchase likewise other articles partially manufactured, such as cotton yarn. Just as the exportation of our manufac tured goods has decreased in quantity, in an equal or a still greater ratio the export of cotton yarns has been on the increase. In 1820 we exported eight millions of pounds of yarn to Russia ; we now export twenty-four millions. Ger many and Prussia then took seven millions ; they now take thirteen millions. In the Netherlands the increase has been most enormous; at that time we exported to them less than a quarter of a million ; they now take seventeen millions and a half. To Italy we used to send one and a quarter of a millions ; we now send nine millions. To Turkey and the neighbouring countries we sent half a million; we now send four millions. The result of the whole is, as regards the ar ticle of cotton-yarn, that the quantity exported has increased since 1820, from twenty-three millions of pounds' weight to a hundred and five millions at the present time.—( Hear.) This sufficiently accounts for the decrease in the export of manu factured goods—for the decrease in the demand for skilled labour at home, and for the subsequent diminution of wages, and I believe if a change were made in the Corn-laws, that in place of exporting partially manufactured materials, the articles would be wholly manufactured at home, the demand for labour would increase, and wages would advance, as compared with the price of corn. No person who wishes to state the case fairly will deny that a diminution in the price of corn would, to some extent, cause a diminution in the rate of wages. But if the demand for our manufactures were doubled, which it might be, wages would in consequence keep higher in comparison to the price of corn than what they are now—the state of the working man would be elevated to a considerable ex tent ; and of course the state of all other classes, for every one knows that all classes in this country hang together, and that whatever is detrimental to the working classes is detri mental to those who employ them. But in case these should be thought general statements, and instances should be sought of the injurious working of the Corn-laws in encouraging the manufactures of other countries, I beg to mention that the small State of Saxony exports three and a-half times the quantity of hosiery that we do to all the world. This is a very important fact, for England used to supply the demand for hosiery to all the markets in the world ; but so completely have we been beaten in this article by the operation of the Corn-laws, that our manufacturers now send yarns to Saxony, get them manufactured there, and then they come back paying a duty of twenty-five per cent., and yet our manufacturers are undersold with these goods in the very country where the yarn is made. Nothing can more clearly show the working of the Corn-laws than this fact. Four fifths of the value of these articles (for they are chiefly very light goods) arises from labour, so that if the manufactured article be worth 1001., the outlay for wages will be 801., and if the workmen can get their living for half the expense at which it can be had in this country, it becomes at once manifest how they can undersell us. I am happy to be able to say that our exports are still greater in amount than they were twenty years ago—they arc greater, but that is all. Our exports in 1815 amounted to fifty-one millions and a half, in 1836 they amounted to fifty-three millions. But in America in 1815 their exports amounted to twenty-eight millions of dollars; they are now sixty-six millions of dol lars ; so that their exports have increased two and a half fold, while ours have remaiaed nearly stationary, being not more than an increase of three per cent. In France, in 1815, the exports amounted to twenty millions of francs: they are now seventy-four millions of francs, being an in crease of nearly fourfold.—( Hear, hear, hear.) What has been said ought to convince every dispassionate man that there is something which cramps the energies of our manufacturers ; and the man who denies that that something is the Corns laws is bound to tell us what the real cause of the injury is. I have never heard of any other cause; and it is clear to me that unless there be an immediate and sweeping change in these laws, the manufacturers will carry their capital and skill to foreign countries; and the landowners as well as all other classes will lament, when it is too late, the effect which this will have on the prosperity of the country. If the in habitants of this country make a proper demonstration—if they show the Legislature the justice of their claims, I have no doubt that they will succeed.—( Cheers and cries of " No 1") I speak most sincerely when I say that I have no fear they will succeed, if they be united on this point, what ever differences they may have on other points. Other indi viduals may think other measures more important, and they are entitled to meet and to advocate those opinions, and to take such steps as may appear to them just and right, to get them carried into effect ; but if they believe that this measure —though it may not be so important in their opinion as others —if they believe it to be beneficial, and calculated to improve the energies and resources of the country, then it is my opi nion their duty is to act with those----(The cheering that fol lowed prevented us from hearing the conclusion of the sen tence.) We fortunately live in a land where all have a right to state their opinions, and their petitions to be heard with respect by the Legislature—where every facility is given to the expression of opinions ; and therefore we ought not to have any difference on this subject.—( Cheers.) He concluded by proposing the resolution. The Hon. J. E. MURRAY said, It appears to me that the present system of policy which subsists between the agri cultural and the commercial communities of our country has in it much of the character of a civil war, and it is a policy which, if of much longer continuance, will prove as disastrous to the prosperity of our native land as if the members of those communities were in reality in the same situation as the Carlists and Christinos in Spain.— ( Hear, hear.) Ruin, misery, and starvation are the at tendants of civil war, but they are not less so the evils which the prohibition of the importation of foreign grain is fast dis seminating throughout the country. It is from ignorance and prejudice alone, my Lord, that such a system is per mitted to exist ; for we have only dispassionately to consider the real bearing of the Corn-laws as they affect our commer cial and agricultural prosperity, to be convinced of the real and permanent injury which, through them, both of those interests are sustaining.—(Cheering.) The gentlemen who have moved the preceding resolutions have very ably stated the bad effects of these laws on our manufacturing indus try, and they have told you the startling fact that we are now, in some of the staple manufactures of our country, undersold in the home market. I will not, therefore, my Lord, detain this meeting with further observations on that portion of this most interesting subject, but draw attention to the probable effects which a repeal of the Corn-laws would have on the landed proprietor and the agriculturist. —( Hear, hear,) In doing so I would beg this meeting to bear in mind that my opinions on this subject are not of yesterday, that I am not advocating the abolition of the Corn-laws because it may chance now-a-days to be some what more fashionable than hitherto to do so. I can with truth say, that it was the first political subject which ever occupied my attention, and that in examining its details, I became convinced that the policy which could alone be most conducive to the welfare of all classes of the commu nity, was that which should be bleed on the broad principles of unrestricted trade —( Great cheering.) Besides, my Lord, connected with the soil—aware that my children's bread, in great measure, depends on the value of its produce, it is not probable that I would be a party to deceiving the landlords or tenantry of the country on this most vital question.—( Hear.) Now, my Lord, what are the evils which the landed interest dread from a repeal of the Corn-laws? Do they imagine that foreign grain would then be imported at so low a price as to render the home agriculturist unable to compete with it? They have no cause to fear such a state of things.—(Hear.) The best evidence which, es yet, we have, as to the price at which foreign grain could be imported into this country, is to be found in Mr. Jacob's Reports. Mr. Jac b there proves that the mini mum price at which wheat imported from Dantzic could be sold in England is 48s. per quarter. This is the minimum price when the harvests in the grain-growing countries have been favourable, and when there iNo great demand for such grain. But a demand for foreign grain, equal to only one week'a consumption by the people of this country, would raise the price from 48s. to 553. per quarter. The average price of wheat, fret on bond at Dantzic for the fifty years preceding the year 1820, was 453. 4d. per quarter, and the expense of freight to England added to that gives the sale price in England 555. or 565. per quarter. A steady demand for no very great quantity of foreign grain would, no doubt, raise the price of suet grain materially. Foreign agricultural labourers would demand higher wages (for the peasantry of the corn-growing countries are now beginning to be paid in morey instead of grain), and then foreign rents must infallibly rise also.—( Hear, hear.) Do the landlords, and the agriculturists of Great Britain ima gine that Russian, Prussian, or Hungarian proprietors will not take advantage of the increasing demand for the produce of their estates ?—( Hear, hear.) Now, my Lord, no honest, intelligent tenant will say that wheat cannot be profitably raised in this country—even with the present high rent, under 55s per quarter ; on the contrary, they will tell you that a steady demand at 503. per quarter, would be much more for their interest than the present fluctuating and uncertain prices ; they would then know what they were about when taking their farms, and their trade would not, as at pre sent, be a mere lottery.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Ano ther circumstance which greatly alarms the landlords, is the supposition, that by a repeal of the Corn-laws, a great proportion of the inferior soil of these kingdoms would be thrown out of cultivation, but in reality no such consequences would ensue.—( Hear, hear.) When the wheat of this country was selling, as I have seen it, at 40s. and 455. per quarter, the circumstance did not affect the cultivation of inferior soils, but, cn the contrary, the fact is notorious, that the general average of the price of grain has most materially diminished since the war prices, but that, never theless, land which was never under the plough, is daily being brought into tillage, and immense sums ex pended in improving it.—( Hear, hear, bear.) Nay, far ther, my Lord, the tenants of inferior soils were better off when the price of grain was 455, or 505., than they are when the price is, as in this year, at 80s. per quar ter ; and it may seem a startling fact, but it is never theless a true one, that should the price of grain be next year, and from the same causes, at 80s. per quarter, three fourths of the inferior soils of this country will then be thrown out of cultivation.—( Hear, hear.) The tenantry on such soils are in general possessed of small capital—so small, in deed, that one or two bad seasons render them bankrupt, and (what has not hitherto been noticed) those who pay their rents in grain suffer most.—(Hear.) Such tenants are this year suf fering dreadfully. Their rents have risen with the price of grain, but the bad harvest has afforded them little out of which to pay such rents. I know many, very many, of such tenants, who, after paying their rent out of their crop, if it will sell for as much, K ill have to purchase seed for the next season, and most probably borrow the money to do so.—( Hear.) In fact, such soils are only now cultivated on the speculation of getting a moderate price and an abundant harvest; whereas, with a more general demand for the real produce of such soils—mut ton and wool—they would become more profitable to their proprietors than at present. In 1835, the price of grain was lower than it had been for fifty years. The average price was then 395. 4d. per quarter, the same price as it was in 1786. Were either the landlords or tenantry worse off in 1835 than they are in 1839 ? The tenantry had plenty of grain to compensate for the low prices, and out of which to pay their rents ; but this year it is not so, and most landlords, if they insist on full rents, must take them out of their to tiaras' capital ; so that in 1835 we were better off with grain at 395. than we are in 1839, with grain at more than double the price, with grain at Ms. 6d., and the prospect of it still rising higher.—(Cheers.) It is the excessive fluctuations in the price of grain which are the causes of distress and ruin to landlords as well as tenantry, and nothing can counteract their bad effects but an importation from abroad, rendering the market price steady at home.—(Great applause.) But, my Lcrd, there is a fear which most oppresses the landlords, and if there were good grounds for entertaining it, then in deed they would have cause to be alarmed at the repeal of the Corn-laws. It is the effect which a repeal of these laws would have on public and private burdens, on the national debt, and the heritable bonds over their estates.—( Hear, hear.) There can be no doubt, that were the price of food to become so extremely low as to bring down with it the price of every other article, while the value of money con tinued the same as at present, that severe hardship would be the consequence. But, my Lord, as it is morally impossible that the price of home grain will fall with a tree foreign importation below that price which, in many years it has been in this country, we have no cause to dread the repeal of the Corn-laws on that account.— (Cheers.) We did not find the national debt a greater burden in 1815, when wheat was thirty-nine shillings, than we do now in 1839, when wheat is more than double that price. But, my Lord, I have still one other important part of this subject to allude to. It is the idea which many are endeavouring to instil into the minds of the working classes—(Hear, hear, hear)—that a repeal of the Corn-laws would instantly have the effect of reducing their wages, and that they would, in such - cir cumstances, be in no better condition than they are at pre sent. I would ask if there are any of the working classes within these walls ?—( Yes, yes.) Well, lam glad that such is the case, for I would tell them that a reduction of their wages would not follow a repeal of the Corn laws—( Loud cheering)—and that if I thought that there was any, even the slightest reason to suppose that this would be the case, then I, for one, would not stand here to advocate tile repeal of those laws. —( Great cheering.) If there is any one class more than another of the community who will be benefited by a repeal of the Corn-laws, it will most assuredly be the working classes —(Cheering.) But I will give you a practical illus tration of this fact—their wages have not been increasing since 1835 ; yet, in 1839, their situation is but one-half as good as it was then. In 1835, this was the size of the penny loaf.— (Mr. Murray here held up a penny loaf of 1835.) This is a penny loaf of the present year.---( H oldingup another.) Look just on this picture and on that.—(Great cheering.) I do not think that, with such a loaf—(the larger one)—and a bowl of milk, I could make a very bad breakfast; but see, my friends, what the penny loaf has come to this year, small by degrees, and beautifully less," it would scarcely be a sufficient breakfast for a child of a year old. —(Cheers. ) But while I advocate the repeal of the Corn-laws, I must de clare that the same Bill which repeals those laws, must, in justice to landlords and tenantry, repeal all other prohibitory duties, that equal justice may be extended to all. With these remarks I cordially second the resolution, and trust that ere long all classes of the community will become convinced that our national prosperity and place among the nations depend on our acceding to our fellow-countrymen equal laws and equal justice.—( Much cheering.) Mr. ADAM BLACK—I am sorry the resolution I have to propose— A CHARTIST (whose name we could not learn)—l beg to move an adjournment.—( Cries of " no adjournment," met by counter clamour of "to the hill, to the hill.") Loan PROVOST—There are no hustings on the Calton Hill, nor any preparation whatever. I am disposed to give perfect fair play, but we cannot adjourn. Mr. ADAM BLACK—Since I came into the room a letter from Mr. Horsman, M.P., has been put into my hands, which I shall read. (The substance of the latter was that Mr. Hors man highly approved cf the object of the meeting, but being in the west country and on his way to England, he regretted it was entirely out of his power to take part in the proceedings, otherwise he would gladly have lent his assistance.) In the absence of Mr. Horsman, I shall endeavour to say a few words in support of the resolution which was to have been intrusted to him. The advocates for the Corn-laws, when ad- dressing the mercantile and manufacturing . classes, ma i n t a in that these laws very slightly, if at alloncrease the price of provisions ; and when they address the agri cu l tura l c l asses they raise a n ou t cr y an d clamour against those who seek their repeal, as if it was to be the death-knell to agricultural pros perity, and the destruction of the whole farming interest. It would be well, if they would abicl . e by the one p ro p os i t i on o r the other. The Corn.lavvs either raise the price of provisions or they do not : if they do not raise the price of provisions, then how could their repeal injure the agriculturists ? and it is nothing but unmeaning obstinacy on their part to oppose their repeal.—(Cheers.) But whether they have raised the price of corn or not, there can be no doubt they were passed for the purpose of raising it 3 price, and there can be as little doubt in the mind of the dispassionate inquirer that they have had that effect.—( Hear, hear, hear.) See, then, how they operate on the manufacturer and the workman. If in the manufacture of goods which sell for 100 s. in the foreign market, 30s. is ex pended on provisions for the workmen employed in their manu facture, and if the provisions might have been had for 203. but for the operation of the Corn-laws, then the work men who have manufactured this 51. worth of goods have been taxed 10+. for th e b ene fi t o f tl:e landowner. Again, if the foreign man u f acturer cou ld employ the same work men at the same wages, calculated by the price of grain, he would furnish the same amount of goods at 10s. less than the British manufacturer. An attempt has been made to show that the whole of the British manufactures exported are of little consequence compared with what are consumed at home. Vague statements of this kind are often most heedlessly made, but I will not speak without authority on this subject, but refer to the last published Parliamentary Report on the subject, where it will be found that the produce and manufactures of the United Kingdom exported in 1836 was at their declared value 53,368,57 1 /., and at the official value 85,229,837/. If a tra d e o f this magnitude is undermined, every class in this country, the manufactur ing, the commercial, and the agricultural, is in jeopardy, Its destruction would unhinge the whole frame of society. —( Cheers.) But I will not talk of the immense pecu niary interests at stake ; I will take higher ground. I ob ject to these laws on account of their immorality—they are one unmitigated, superlative, and all-pervading evil.—( Hear, hear.) Their roots are selfishness, their trunk is oppres- THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY, JANUARY 24, 1839. sion, their branches are ramifications of injustice, and their fruit is poison.—( Long continued cheering.) From what do they originate ? They originate in the selfish injustice of the landowners, who, in order to raise a revenue to them selves from the rest of the community, lay a tax on the ne cessaries of life. Atter some further remarks, Mr. BLACK read the third re solution. Councillor JOHN RITCHIE seconded the resolution. Mr. PEDDIE, staymaker—l am an old Corn-law repealer, and rise for tho purpose of supporting tho prayer of the resolutions. It strikes me, however, that the resolution just read is not sufficiently explicit. It prays for the re peal of the existing laws, but does not say what ought to be substituted in their stead ; and, therefore, I intend to add an addendum—(Laughter)—to test the sentiments of this meeting ; as, whether justly or not, the working men do entertain considerable suspicions.—(Uproar.) The working classes do entertain suspicions, and the sooner these are put right the better.—( Interruption. ) Mr. Peddie went on at some length, and then moved two resolutions, to the effect that the petition to emanate from this meeting should be for the total abolition of the Corn-laws, and for the free im portation of grain in all time coming ; :and the second went to pledge the electors present not to support any can didate, at the next election, who would not pledge himself to a repeal of the Corn-laws. He urged the necessity of adopting his addendum that there might be no mistake or mis understanding hereafter. Mr. E. MURRAY said, if the Hon. Gentleman had waited to hear the next resolution he would have seen that at least a part of his addendum was uncalled for. The resolution was then carried by acclamation. Mr. PEDDLE insisted that it was absolutely necessary to have a pledge from the electors not to support any candi date that would not pledge himself to vote for a repeal of the Corn-laws. Some confusion ensued, which prevented our hearing whe ther Mr. Peddle found a seconder. Treasurer STODART—I submit that before Mr. Peddie puts his resolution to the meeting, he ought in courtesy to have waited till all the resolutions were before the meeting ; and if he had done so he would have found that the purport of his motion was fully embodied in the resolution which has been put into my hands.—(Cheers.) Here Mr. Stodart read the resolution. Mr. Psonis—As that resolution embodies the spirit of what I propose, I cordially second it. _ 'Dr. GLOVIM—I rise to more an amendment. Mr. PEDDLE—I am in possession of the chair. Dr. GLOVER maintained his place and went on, but a; he seemed to be wandering into matters not immediately con nected with the object of the meeting, Mr. BURTON rose to order. Dr. GLOVER—I am in order. Mr. BURTON—It is for the meeting to say whether the gentleman is in order. The cry becoming general to put the amendment and the motion to the vote, the Lord Provost called on those in favour of Dr. Glover's amendment to hold up their hands ; when we counted about fifty. The motion was then put, and we may say almost every hand in the room was elevated. Thanks were then voted to the Chairman, and the business of the meeting declared finished. Some of the Chartists, especially the individual who moved the adjournment, became very vociferous, complaining that they had been unfairly treated —they had been promised a hearing, which they had not ob tained. But, as few seemed disposed to listen, the meeting quietly separated. This was one of the most numerous meetings ever held in the Waterloo Rooms. The Chartists mustered their forces (their strength in Edinburgh is not great) and sustained a.de feat they will not soon forget. As a body they are more noisy than numerous ; and in any fairly called meeting, in which the public generally take an interest, the most effectual mode of silencing them is to put their motions to the vote, and to a certainty they will be in a miserable minority. The following are the resolutions at reed to : It was resolved, on the motion of Sir THOMAS DICK LAUDER, of Fountainhall, Bart. ; seconded byJouN WIGH AM, jun. Esq " That the prosperity of the country in a great measure depends on our trade and manufactures, and that agriculture cannot flourish if trade and manufactures decay." It was resolved, on the motion of Councillor M‘LAREN, se conded by the Hon. J. ERSKINE MURRAY. " That of late years great progress has been made in the establishment of manufactures on the continent of Europe, not only by foreigners, but by natives of Britain, who have transferred their skill, capital, and enterprise to foreign countries, in consequence of which we have already been deprived by foreigners of many neutral markets for several branches of our manufactures, and are beginning to be un dersold at home." Ic was resolved, on the motion of ADAM BLACK, Esq., seconded by Councillor RITCHIE,. _ " That the chief cause of the rapid and successful pro gress of foreign manufactures is the low price of food abroad, compared with its cost in this country ; that the high price of food in Britain, occasioned by the laws against the importation of corn and other articles of subsistence, inflicts severe suffering on the industrious classes, not only by the great proportion of their savings it absorbs, but also by ►essening the demand for labour on the part of our manufac turers, and thereby lowering wages ; and that, unless these laws be speedily repealed, our trade and manufactures must be seriously injured, and the sufferings of the industrious classes still farther increased." It was moved by Treasurer STODART, seconded by Mr. PEDDIE, and resolved, _ . . " That a petition, signed by the Chairman, be intrusted to Sir John Campbell, to be presented to the House of Commons, embodying the above resolutions, and praying for an imme diate and total repeal of all restrictiot,s and prohibitions against the importation of corn and other articles of food, for the re moval of all legislative obstacles to the unrestricted employ ment of industry, and for the establishment, to the fullest extent as reg ards both agriculture and manufactures, of the principles' of free trade ; and that Mr. Horsman, M. P., be requested to support the petition." JAMES FOREST, Lord Provost. THE CANADIAN PRISONERS. QUEEN'S BEN CH.-(YESTERDAY.) (From our Second Edition of last night.) JUDGMENT. Lord DENMAN—This is a motion for an attachment against William Batchelor, the gaoler of Liverpool, who has made a return to a writ of habeas corpus, by which he justifies for holding the body of Leonard Watson in his custody. The at tachment is moved for on the ground of his having committed contempt by deceiving the Court, in falsely setting out the warrant under which he received the body of that person, and I agree that, if there is anything like a wilful falsehood in bringing these matters before us that would be a subject for the severest punishment the Court could inflict. I also agree that there may be a degree of culpable neglect in the false statement which would also make it proper for us to visit the party who made it with displeasure. Upon the pre sent occasion there is no doubt that the statement is untrue. There is no doubt that it is incorrect to say that the letters patent of Sir John Colborne—which William Batchelor in the first place received, and described as the warrant under which he held Leonard Watson in custody—these letters patent in the mandatory part re quire the captain of the barque to convey that person over from Quebec to England. Now then, in the first place, I do not say that the party making this return is free from blame in having received the body of a man whom he was not, by what he treated as a warrant, instructed to receive. On the contrary, I think that it is the bounden duty of a gaoler to receive no man into the restraint of his custody without being per fectly satisfied that he had lawful authority so to do ; and I think there is a degree of neglect in the conduct of this person, which we cannot pass over without some degree of censure, when he imprisons Leonard Watson by virtue of what he conceives an authority to imprison him, in which the name of Leonard Watson never once occurs. One sees that in criminal proceedings the most dreadful con sequences might result from these mistakes; and I think that every man who is entrusted with an office in which the liberty of his fellow subjects is kept under his controul, ought to be care ful not to controul that liberty without being fully convinced, and taking the proper means to be convinced, that he has the right to hold them in his custody; but this is not the contempt which we are required to visit upon Wm. Batchelor. He is brought before us, not for having improperly imprisoned this person, but for having untruly trifled with us, and with justice, by stating an untrue fact before us, because he has said in the return he did receive this man, when in fact he did not. Now, whether the warrant be material or not, would not at all be decisive of the question whether we should visit this person for contempt, of Court, because he evidently considered himself to have truly returned it. But now, in a subsequent part of the case, the affidavits of these parties set forth the reasons by which he was misled on that subject. and I must say, when these reasons are considered, it is im possible to impute to him this once of having wilfully treated the Court with contempt in making a false return, because there cannot be the slightest doubt that he fully be lieved, and was satisfied, that what he did was authorised by the warrant. I think he ought to have made himself more sure on the subject ; but, at the same time, when he finds a list of a great number of names set forth in the letters patent of Sir John Colborne, and the name of Leo nard Watson in the number, it seems impossible to say that he might not have overlooked the name with the most complete persuasion that it was in the other part, as he had found it in the introductory part. Therefore, I must say that I cannot conceive he stands before us in any such condition, as that we should be at all justified in treat ing him with severity for the contempt he has committed. I cannot help adverting to that which was dwelt on so much, the supposed blame imputable to the individual in the course of committing the blunder, for such we must take it to be ; and on that subject also, though I feel that the Attorney-Ge neral, and all his coadjutors, have nothing to do with such warrant, except to say that the facts are properly stated, on general terms ; and with regard to the Learned Counsel who drew the return, I have no idea that he did anything more than copy, probably the first name, and that then some body filled up the names of the other parties ; but I must also say I do think there has been great neglect in some quarter in not comparing one document with the other, so as to be perfectly certain there is the most complete copy of it set out upon that which is produced to the Court as a true return and statement to the warrant. J cannot feel it is altogether to be passed over as a matter without blame, because I think the Court have a right to expect that the document that was brought before them stating that Leonard Wat son was doomed in Canada to be imprisoned in Eng land without somebody being responsibly called to com mit himself to the fact—that Sir John Colborne's warrant did contain such requisition. As to the materiality of the warrant, we gave our reasons on Monday for thinking that the warrant of Sir John Colborne was in no degree material to justify the imprisonment of this prisoner. We do not think it necessary to enter into any argument in defence of the judgment deliberately given, and which we formed upon en anxious consideration of the case, and with a deep sense cf our responsibility to the country. To enter into an argument or discussion, or vindication of what we have so done, we think would be unworthy of the trust reposed it. us, in the discharge of which we have pronounced that judgment which we are satisfied is consistent with law and justice. I a ill further say, that I do not consider it necessary at all to enter int, the question ,what more might be done on this occasion. I neit her assent nor dissent with regard to any of the propositions laid down on the subject in any respect, and I am by no means pre pared to say that if L. Watson, or any of these men had pledged his oath on affidavit that it is not true on any part of these mat ters, whether we should make that the ground of proceedings for wilful impropriety or not--whether we should make it a found ation to quash the return or not. I am not prepared to say that the falsehood of these matters being made in any degree probable before us, would not induce us to give the party an opportunity of having that distinctly proved, and, if so, I do not think it right that a writ of habeas is to be treated as it has been, as if it were a powerless weapon for the protection of the subject, or as if the Judges had been guilty of some fraud and collusion in put ting that forward as real protection which is said to turn out to be nothing but a mere subject of undeserved panegyric. It strikes me, in this most singular and peculiar case, for which it is not likely we should fled any precedent, that even if the remedy had been proved to have en tirely failed, that still the provisions made by the law for the liberty of the subject had been found for ages effectual to an extent which was never known in any other country, through the medium of this summary right, a hich is given through the medium of the law of habeas corpus. But, at all events I am not prepared to say that, even in the present case, where there is that statement before us, to which I give entire credence, of the legal proceedings which warrant the imprisonment of this person, that if any part of these proceedings could be impeached by the affidavit of the party implicated as untrue, I am not pre pared to say there might not be full inquiry, and the means of bringing the truth to appear. With regard to the amending it clearly follows, from what I have said, that it will be fit that the amendment should be made, not for the purpose of varying the nature of the case, because I certainly think the return is sufficient without it, but on the ground the Attorney- General took, and on the ground on which we granted this rule, that it is not fit and decent that any falsehood should appear on the face of the proceedings of the Court with our knowledge. Mr. Justice LITTLEDALE—The question more particularly under the consideration of the Court is the rule moved for by Mr. Hill, calling upon Mr. Batchelor to show cause why an attachment should not issue against him for con tempt of Court. Now certainly he had made in his return a statement which in point of fact is not true, and that is a justification for us to put in a course of inquiry, to see whether it be true or not, and next, if it be not true, whether we shall grant an attachment against him. It turns out that the state ment made in the return is not true in point of fact, then it lays upon him to show that it is owing to some mistake —some misconception, or something which may protect him from the proceedings of this Court against him. From the affi davit it appears there is some mistake in the return, owing to some misstatement in the warrant of Sir John Colborne; for, in the recital of the warrant, the name of L. Watson is mentioned—in the mandatory part it is left out. But all the parties were brought over here by the barque Ross, Captain Morton, and delivered into the custody of the gaoler by the authority of the Magistrates. Leonard Watson was delivered along with the other prisoners, and Mr. Batche lor, when he received them, had not seen the warrant. In the course of the day the warrant was delivered to him, and he afterwards delivered it to the Town-clerk. He, there fore, had a very slight opportunity of perusing the warrant ; at the same time he ought to have done so. But as he did not act under a wilful intention to impose on the Court, it appears to me he has exculpated himself ; and I say the rule for the attach ment ought to be discharged. With regard to the other parts of the case it is not necessary to enter into them. My Lord Denman gave the judgment of the Court on the general points of the case. It is sufficient for me to say that I think the warrant not at all material, because if these persons were under a Canadian Act properly under sentence of transportation, it was competent for the Government of Upper Canada to give verbal directions to bring them to England without any warrant at all. Cer tainly the warrant does not seem a business-like document ; but, at the same time, I think it is not material to consider whether these prisoners ought to be remanded or not. It is quite proper that the amendment should be made, because it is a statement which is not true in point of fact. Mr. Justice WILLIAMS—The observations which have been made, and which certainly have been carried to a considerable extent, have for their object an application to a narrow compass. I allude to whether or not an attachment should issue against the gaoler of the gaol of Liverpool, and perhaps it may be admitted that the Learned Counsel in favour of the rule was well founded in his remark that it is not how far the individual L. Watson may or may not be affected by this particular error of which complaint is made, but the question is, I agree with the Learned Counsel, whether or no, in so doing, there has been an abuse of the process of the Court, and an attempt to treat the Couretvith disobedience and contempt. That I take to be the real question in the case ; but upon the discussion of that question, whether or not it was that the facts contained in the affi davits superseded all commentary, or from whatever ground, the Learned Counsel ( Mr. Hill) declined to enter into that which is substantially the main question—l mean whether this was or not a wilful error : I, says the Learned Counsel, will not discuss that, but leave it for the decision of the Court. If that be so, he was in the main retreating from the very question—why, before punishment was awarded, the Court should be satisfied there was some intention to treat the Court with disobedience and contempt. When we come to examine the facts, what reason is there for saying that ? I don't rest on the affidavit, which states that he was utterly ignorant of the error until the motion was made, but what is his conduct in other particulars ? Does he appear in any degree to have volunteered to take possession of this man, and abridge him of his liberty ? Not at all. For by the affidavit it appears he is acting immediately under the directions, and upon the authority of the Mayor and Magistrates of Liverpool. So that, in that particular, there is nothing to show that he has been stepping out of his way, for the purpose of showing_he was a zealous partizan, to deprive this man of any liberty to which he was entitled. But it has been said by another Learned Counsel (Mr. Roebuck), that in proportion as we attribute to this man all ve rity—all knowledge, and all certainty—that he should know things at any distance equally well with that which is before his eyes, that it is incumbent to watch him with a double degree of scrutiny. Whether or not this is in any degree new, is a matter into which I will not enter. The opinion of the Court was given. Its being canvassed is a matter that cannot be objected to ; but it may be that General Pitt, when he made his return of what occurred at Gibraltar, being in England at the time, was probably not more cognizant of every fact than was this man of what took place on the other side of the At lantic. With regard to the amendment, I concur in the re mark of the Lord Chief Justice on the necessity of accuracy and minuteness in all these cases; but that is not the ques tion—the question is, whether the party has been guilty of contempt and disobedience of the Court. I think he has not. Mr. Justice COLERIDGE. —I entirely concur in the decision to which the Court has come on the two points on which it has decided. One, whether the motion for an attachment against Mr. Batchelor should be made absolute; the other, whether an amendment should be allowed in the case of Leonard Watson ; and, agreeing as I do, almost entirely in all the reasons assigned by my Learned Brothers already, it is necessary for me to say ♦ery little upon the subject. Many irrelevant topics have, it seems to me, been gone into in respect of this matter. I don't think we have anything to do at present with the con duct of the gaoler, in the manner in which he received this man. I don't think we ought to determine the ques tion of this attachment by the materiality or immateriality of Sir John Colborne's warrant, for when we remember the point on which this rule turns, which founds itself upon a criminal and fraudulent return, and thereby a contempt practised by the gaoler, the question of the materiality of the warrant cannot be relevant, strictly speaking,nor do I think it ought much to be considered whether the inaccuracy, the confessed inaccuracy, was to the prejudice or not of L. Watson. There is confessed to be an inaccuracy for which I don't say the gaoler is wholly free from blame, because by greater diligence he might have avoided falls ing into it ; but he signed the return not being in the slightest degree aware of the inaccuracy of which he was guilty, and I have not the slightest hesitation in saying, the rule must be dis charged. I am clearly of opinion there is no foundation for this application, and it seems to me to be a case in which the merits are so much on one side, that it seems hardly possible fur any one to suppose when the motion was first made there was any serious belief whether it was possible to sustain it. With regard to the se cond point, I am clearly of opinion with the rest of my Learned Brothers, that we ought to grant this amendment. Mr. HILL.--Certain amendments have been allowed by your Lordships to be made in the return on the files of the Court. As soon as they are made we, of course, shall have copies of them. At that moment we shall consider ourselves bound to be ready to take our course, whether we will plead to the return, or make any other application to the Court, founded' upon what had fallen from your Lordships. Lord DENMAN—YOU, of course, will be at liberty to exercise your own judgment as to what course you will take with that return. ---- The crowd which had filled the Court then dispersed. On Monday night last a young girl, named Matilda Worms, daughter of Mr. Worms, appraiser and furniture broker, of No. 5, Brook-hill, Clerkenwell, was received into St. Bartholomew's Hospital, having susta i ne d some severe in juries by fire. She lingered in great agony until yesterday morning, when death terminated her sufferings. Yesterday an inquest was held at St. Thomas's Hospital on view of the body of William Henry Russell, aged 28. It appeared from the evidence that the deceased was a labourer, in the employ of Mr. Constable, farmer, of Dulwich, and that on the 27th ult. he was going with his master's cast, drawn by two horses, to Dulwich Pits for a load of gravel, when the horses took fright at a dog in a cart, and started off. Upon reaching the entrance of the pit, the poor fellow was in the act of getting off the shaft, when his right leg was caught in between it and the gate-post. The calf of his leg was torn completely off to the bone. On beis,g taken to the hospital it was found absolutely n ece ssary to amputate the limb. He, however, gradually sank, and expired on Friday last. Verdict, Accidental death. THE NEW FAITH. (From the Somerset County Gazette.) Two correspondents are very wrath at the notice we l'afe taken of this interesting subject. One asks us ‘. Who are this party powerful in numters ? He has never yet mentloi ea more than Pusey and Newman ?" We will answer him as briefly as possible. Among OS party are, in our own immediate neighbourhood, Mr. Aelanil, M. P. for West Somerset. Rev. Mr. Barnes, evening lecturer at the church of St. Mars Magdah.n, the principal church in Taunton. More The Bishop of Exeter. The Bishop of Oxford. Niue out of the eleven beneficed clergymen in Leeds. Mr. Gladstone, M.P. for Newark, the most ab!e of the Toil Members of the present House of Commons. This party publishes the following periodicals:— The Morning Post, daily newspaper. The Tracts, for the Times. The Churchman. The Church of England Quarterly Review. The Isis. We might extend this catalogue to any length Is the writer of the letter answered? We are challenged to prove the sincerity of our hostility to the New Faith by petitioning for the restoration of the Test Acts and the repeal of the Catholic Emancipation Bill. Let us state as briefly why we would not do so. Because we acknowledge the great principle that man Wig answerable to God only for his religious creed, his fellow-me ° , have no right to m a k e hi s r e li g i ous cree d t h e source e i t h e r 01 , injury or of b en efit t o hi m . B ecause we h o ld t h e f ree d o m °I thought to be an inalienable right. Because we are profoundly convinced that the arm of power will never destroy an opinion; that persecution is a crime against God, and inexpedient i° itself ; that out of the most perfect freedom of discussion com es TRUTH. Therefore would we suffer the Oxford Anti-Protestan tt freely to preach and teach their doctrines, opposing them 0 01 / by preaching and teaching doctrines which we believe to b° more true. But we would not permit them to do this in the name al : 1d under the authority of the Church. That is altogether ad" fercnt que s ti on f rom t h e f ormer. The Church was foun d e d t° support Protestantism—its pulpits should not be permitted t ° , be employed t o d es t roy P rotestantism. The Oxford PeP is!, ought to be summarily ejected from the Church ; indeed,' they have any sense of propriety, they will voluntarily resig the emoluments they have no right to hold, and throw theta" selves; like othe: Dissenters, on their own resources. THE MARKETS :ET—Jan. `,.3. ver "re7l. s. A Walls End Hettut 0 Walls End Lambton .0 Walls End stews?' ' s 0 Walls End Hattlepool ...... 0 0 W allfr End So u th D ur h am • 3 0 6 Walls End Seym our T ees „,2 - '" 5 Wails End Tees ....... Walls End Tennant Hartley Howard's Netherton M a i n 21 R 3 6 Walls End West Tees 2l 0 Staveley Main "last market-eity, 110. Pc: 1 on. • I 9 -3 Holy w ell Man South Hartley l9 0 Wylain 0 Walls End Bell and Brown Walls End Clark and Co 2O 0 Walls End Hilda Walls End Newrnarch 2l 6 Walls End Northumberland 2l 6 Walls End Perkins Todd's 13ensham lB 0 Walls End Belmont Walls End Braddyll's Hetton 23 9 Ships arrived since COUNTRY C !ORN MARKETS DURING THE WEE Wheat. ' Barley. I Oats. Beans. pease' Per Quarter. s. to s. s. to s. s. to s. a. to s. s, to J . Abingdon 64 80 30 34 22 30 38 Andover 74 82 29 31 25 43 dirmingham--.... 63 80 30 40 16 22 33 -- ...., Bridport..* 73 80 32 36 26 30 39 Cirencester 61 81 27 32 20 25 32 40 -- Faringdon.----,-- 65 80 26 30 26 30 46 Guildford 68 80 28 35 20 30 4g -- „ Henley 72 78 26 32 23 26 43 -- Hereford 63 88 26 32 22 29 46 Highworth 64 70 32 42 28 34 51i Maidenhead 63 63 75 24 36 20 26 34 44 34 51onmouth.... ~ 61 74 32 34 22 29 31 40 Reading )4 75 25 35 20 27 33 42 35 Salisbury 64 74 30 34 20 28 41 46 Southampton ---,.. 65 75 33 40 28 32 42 Stroud Tewkesbury 8) —35 2'2 3 22 —4o- 4g Uxbridge 70 74 28 32 17 28 40 40 Wan tage W:.ltninster 67 70 27 54 22 26 36 40 . Windsor 76 21 22 i ip p Worcester ---. 61 70 32 36 30 32 46 46 CHELTENHAM MARKETS. Per Bushel. s, d. to s. d„ : Pet lb. a. to Wheat s 9 barley Oat, 3 9 661 Veal Be ins 61 70 132 36 CHELTENHAM _ s. d. to s. 96 10 9 : Beef 43 50 ; Mutton 3 9 661 Veal 46 6:0 ; Pork 50 56 Lamis 'V. 15s. to 4t. 10.. 0-1 per ton. HULL MARKET.—Jan, 22 Wheat, Old 68s 70s. 7 4 7, New 635. 70s --s' -- Foreign —s. ......ln bond... —s. —6 Oats, Poland , —3. 20s. 228 .....Old 23, 24i. -- Small or Feed.... —s. 17s. 18s —s 20 '• Foreign 8 —s . Barley, Norf. & Suf 305. 325. 335. Linc. & Wold —s. 30s. 3 34 ' -- Foreign - 8. 8. Beans 365. 38s. 423. Foreign 265. 28 30s. Pease, 36s. 38s 40s. Grey 263 28s. 30 , Tares „ 3Ss. 41s. 42s Foreign —s. —s- Ita,eseed. in bond none Free, per last LOl, Os 3.3,. rc,se hay , About seven o'clock on Monday morning a yole woman was found lying in a dit c h i n Waterrnan's-iel::: Woolwich, covered with bl oo d, an d h er d ress torn to p iec: j She was removed in an insensible s t ate t o t h e workbome, remained so till yesterday morning, when she pa r tial!) , t o , covered. She then stated that her name was Anne Mattbel v and that she was a teacher in a Di ssen ti ng sc h oo l . On Su l° day night, after her return from chapel, she had consented 0 accompany a young soldier, named Warden, to whom she 1( . attached, in a walk. Th e n i g h t b e i ng co l d W arden had iO, duced her to t a k e some re f res h ment at the Barrack Tavern-; and on returning through the fields began to take libert l ; # with her, which she resented, and in the struggle her dr e was torn to pieces. Ulti ma t e ly W ar d en knocked her (I° , and she became unconsci ous o f w h at subsequently pas'o There was a considerable quan tit y o f water in the ditchs,;g which she must have been lying for about nine hours, d'i a night of severe frost. She was found lying partly until, an arch thrown over the dit c h f or t h e purpose o f a ree d Warden has been taken into custody, and will be exam il l e o as soon as the girl (who is the daughter of respect! to parents, and bears an excellent character) can be removed give evidence. blind minstrel, a self-taught performer on the harp. Monday afternoon, a b ou t f our o ' c l oc k, three brienj layers were engaged on a scaffolding erected along the ser: t e story of a house w hi c h i s now un d ergo i ng repa i rs, i n Si more-street, Tottenham-court-road, when the supports s ° P , denly gave way, and the scaffolding fell with great vialelif b i precipitating th e wor k men to t h e groun d. O n removing .0(1 rubbish, they were f oun d i n a h orr ibly mut il ate d con di t i o n, a o f were instantly conveyed to Middlesex Hospital, where one. e d them, whose name was un d ers t oo d t o b e G eorge Willis, di n e a few hours a ft er . I n t h e case o f t h e ot h ers there i s li tt l e Mr of recovery. LADIES' FINE GOLD NECK.CHAINS, I I, A. B. SAVORY an d SONS, G o ld sm i t h s, No. Q, C o rs , f London (opposite the Bank of England), offer a large varieti b ig Ladies' Fine Gold Neck. Chains, of the matted, ring, and I r k patterns, a ya r d an d a quar t er l ong , a t t h e f o ll ow i ng pr i ces , a " ing to the weight : The weight of 3 sover e igns... £4 4 0 The weight of 7 sovereigns .Z 8 g 0 The weight of 4 sovereigns... 5 5 0 The weight of 8 sovereigns 0 Jo The weight of 5 sovereigns... 6 6 The weight of 9 sovereigns 1 0 , 0 The weight of 6 sovereigns... 7 7 The weight of 10 sovereigns I I I v o The most elegant spangled, star, and fancy link patterns, at Guineas more than their respective weights. A. B. SAVORY and SONS, No. 9, Cornhill, London>, ---- 6 GOLD SIGNET RINGS.—A gr ea t V ar i e t y o f the. t 5 O Useful and Fashionable RINGS, a re k ep t f or Selection, ‘4/or Cornelian, Amethyst, Topaz, and other Real Stones, suitable j, engraving. Armorial bearings may be referred to, or W i ' s t gratis, and can be engraved by an Artist of great taleetz er , T. COX SAVORY'S, G o ld sm ith, Sil versm ith, an d Watehno. 47, Cornhill, London (Seven Doors from Gracechurch-street). BIRTHS. On the 17th inst., at Egerton. Lodge, Melton Mowbray , Countess of Wilton, of a son. On the 19th inst., a t G reen llill, Oldham, Lancashire, - Edward Abbott Wright, of a daughter. On the 21st inst. Mrs. Gosehen, oa . On the 22d irht., , at Langham-place, the lady of Le Marc balit Thomas, Esq., of a daughter. On the 22d inst., in Devonshire -street, Portland-place, the I adl of Dr. Rutherford, of a daughter. On the 20th inst., at Everingham Park, the lady of Wil li Constable Maxwell, Esq., of a daughter. MARRIED. On the 15th inst., at St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, Mr. Al{ Leggatt, of W a tki n ' s -t errace , E a t on - square , surgeon, to Ann Eleanor, elds at daughter of the late Wm. Rice Holroyd. , On the 16th i ns t., at All S ou l s , M ary l e b one, Ch ar l es Stofi house, E sq ., o f F o l e y-pl ace , t o A nn L ucy L ew i s, second daughter of T. C. Lewis, Esq., of Charlotte-street, Portland-place. On the 16th inst., at Ilarttield, John Whiting, M.D., to Cr e , lotte, eldest dau g ht er o f the.late Rev. Henry Jowett, M.A., tor of Little Dunham, Norfolk. At llussell-Keudah, Madras, on the 19th of September I s st o ; Lieutenant William Middleton, of the 1 - ith Regiment Native ko fa ntry, second son of the late Rear-Admiral Middleton, to Barr i o ( Theophila, fourth daughter of the late L. H. Sterling, Esq. , Madras. On the 19th inst., at St. Martin's Church, Exeter, Mr. Thoe Hill Crampton, of York, to Sarah, y ou n ges t d aug ht er o f IS' Street, Cathedral yard, Exeter. _OO DIED. ' On Monday, the 21st inst., a t hi s res id ence , 66, J u dd- s tr u t ; Brunswick-square, E. Chatfi e ld, E sq ., muc h l amente d b y his 0 0 merous friends, afer a lng and painful illness. a l On the llth ins t t., aged 56, Baron Noleken, Lieutenant-00" in her Majesty's Service. At Clapton, aged 69, William Sikes, Esq. ti On the 17th inst., at Farnborough Lodge, Farnborough, s' e the Rev. Frederick Wilson Sisson, aged 28. On the 19th inst., John Hodgson, Esq., of Castle-street, Car ° lisle, and of Bo‘sness, Cumberland. On the 20th inst., at Great Berkhamstead, aged 77, S a of widow of Augustus Pe c h e ll, E sq., formerly Receiver-General her Majesty's Customs. On the 20th inst., Arthur Thomas, infant son of George Cre of the Western-road, Brighton. 4 On the 21st inst., at Islington, M. John Over, aged 75, years a clerk in the Bank of England. On the 21st i ns t., a t H ampstead, Uerbert Stephenson, the e ldegt son of Charles Freshfield, Esq., ag e d 3. On the 21st inst., at Catto,,, r Norwich, aged 38, the n e _ l l Dacre Barrett L ennar d, six'at son of Sir Thomas Barrett Lenn aT ; of Belhus, Essex, Rector o f S t. M i chael ' s-at- Pl ea, N orw i c h, i nea Chaplain to his Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex and V . Western. London: Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, or?!: 112, Strand, The Sun Office, No. 112, Strand, in the Ow" of Middlesex. — Tl'.utsday, January 24, 1839. s-,~-~ r _+; qlpi, !', COAL MAR Cc wl lat Ina