The Sun. — London, England, 1845-04-09 00:00:00

rtirtr Vtlition SUN OFFICE, Seven o'clock. BANKRUPTCY.—(THIS DAY.) (Before Mr. Commissioner FANE.) IN RE JOSEPH BEAUFORT CULLEN. This insolvent came up for his discharge this morn ing. He is an Irishman, and formerly resided at Norfolk street, Strand, and latterly at Old Cavendish-street, Cavendish -square. By giving himself out to be a gen tleman, and by the use of accommodation bills, he managed to get into debt to the amount of 5,1691. 16s. 2d. For several large sums included in this amo unt he had legal proceedings instituted against him, and, judgment being taken out, he was thrown into prison, where he lay till the 24th of December last, when he made application to the Court for its protection. He was then opposed by several of the creditors, and, after an adjourned hearing, he was ordered to be detained till the present. He now came up for his disehlrg,o. To-day he was again opposed by two of the creditors, Mr. Malims appearing for Mr. Day, of Bull-street, Manchester-square, and Mr. Sturgeon for John Clements, solicitor, of Fenchurch-street. Mr. Cooke appeared for the insolvent. The objec tion urged by Malims was, that the debt of 74L 10 owing to Mr. Day, his client, was on an accommodation bill drawn by the insolvent, and accepted by a Mr. Rapier on behalf of the former. It came out in examination that this was not altogether the truth, and the objection was overraled by the Court. The ob jection taken by Mr. Sturgeon was of a similar character, the Learned Gentleman representing the insolvent as a person without visible means, niaing money when ever he could upon accommodation bills, for which, in some instances, he was in the practice of allowing almost cent. per cent. discount. There were no assets to meet Vie debts set forth in the schedule. Mr. CooKE, on behalf of the insolvent, entered into a long statement, how the latter had been involved in some unfortunate trading expedition to India in 1842, which laid the foundation of his subsequent embarras rnents. His HONOUR did not think the insolvent had acted from fraudulent intentions, but that he had been exceed ingly imprudent. The punishment he had already re ceived he thought sufficient, and he would therefore grant him his protection from that day. CRIMINAL COURT.—(THIS DAY.) W COURT. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) STEALING A COAT.—Samuel Oxford, aged 21, de scribed as a japanner, was indicted for stealing a coat, value 183., from the shop-door of Mr. Edwards, a tailor, in Newgate-street, on the 19th of March. The coat was fitted on a " dummy," which stood at the prosecutor's shop door, and on the day in question it was knoelsed down by the prisoner, who stripped the Coat from it, and made off at the top of his speed, but was immediately stopped and taken into custody. The prisoner stated that he was passing by the shop door, and found the coat laying on the pavement; that he picked it up and walked away with it. The prosecutor denied that the " dummy" could have fallen down by accident, as it was fastened to the wall with a string, and said that the prisoner ran as fast as his legs could carry him. The jury found him Guilty. The COMMON SERGEANT (to Mr. Jonas, the person having charge of the prisoner in the dock)—Do you know him? Mr. Jonas—He is not known in Newgate. The CoMMON SERGEANT (to the prisoner)—Do you know me? Prisoner—No, I do not; I have never been here before. Mr. Jonas said he understood that the prisoner had been convicted at the Surrey sessions during the last six months. A police-constable said he had been convicted of steal ing two coats at the Surrey sessions, and had been out of prison between four and five months. The Common SERGEANT—I am certain I have seen you here before. However, as no one appears to know you here, I shall not act upon that. After having sen tenced the prisoner to six months' imprisonment, he said, now it is all over, tell me what I tried you for ? Pri soner—l really never was here before. STEALING Two CHESTS OF TEA.—Richard Lanydell and F 1 ede, ich Payne, labourers, were indicted for break ing and entering the warehouse of Mr. John Symonds, proprietor of the Saracen's Head booking-office, Ald „gate, and stealing 1901bs. of tea, value 35/., and Thomas Etter idye, a cab-driver, was indicted for receiving the game, well knowing it to have been stolen. From the statement of the Counsel for the prosecution, Mr. liaise, and from the evidence adduced, it appeared that Langdell had at one time been in the service of Mr. Symonds, as ostler, and was well acquainted with the pre mises. Payne had obtained permission from Mr. Odell, the bookkeeper, to put up dogs now and then in the yard. On Thurseay, the t3th of March, Langdell was observed to go to the warehouse door, to take the key out of it and make an impression of it in red putty, which he had in a small tin box. During a great portion of the day following he and Payne were observed to sit at the window of the " tap" attached to the booking-office, which c :mmandeda view of the warehouse door, and where they could observe all the goods placed therein the course of that day. Amongst other articles placed there on Satur day, for the purpose of being sent off on the following Monday, were two chests of tea. Payne and Langdell ware in the " tap" during nearly the whole of Sunday, and were last seen there between seven and eight o'clock in the evening. About nine o'clock a rumbling noire was heard in the warehouse. About that hour a cab driven by the prisoner Etteridge, came into the yard. Soon after Payne and Langdell were seen standing be tween the cab and the warehouse door, which drove off. Payne went with it. Langdell went to his dogs, liberated them, and ran after the cab. The whole of the prisoners were taken into custody in the Blue Boar-yard the same night. Etteridge said he sera engaged to drive Langdell and Payne and two sacks (the tea was taken out of the boxes, which were broken lap and left in the warehouse) to Pettieoat-lane. He had some drink with them at the White Horse, and left them and the sacks at the corner of the lane. Payne had 71 on him, and it was proved that the day before the robbery . ..he had asked a person whom he knew to lend him 6d. Mr. O'BRIEN and Mr. BALLANTINE then addressed the jery for Payne and Etteridge. The jury fond Payne and Langdell Guilty, and ac quitted Etteridge. The C031310N SERGEANT said he was bound to fulfil the intentions of the Act of Parliament, and that it was his duty to sentence them to transportation for ten years. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. FROM THE EVENING PAPERS OF THIS DAI. GLOBE.—The detention and opening of letters at the Post-office was last night again the subject of an in teresting debate in the House of Commons. All at tempts having failed to obtain redress, through the medium of Parliament, for the individuals who had com plained of the serious infraction of their rights by the in terception and opening of their letters, the necessity for terminating the practice by legislative enactment becomes the more necessary. Mr. Thomas Duncombe —whose prudence and perseverance in the manage. ment of this great controversy with the Government merits commendation —last night brought the question before the House, on motion for leave to bring in a Bill to secure the inviolability of letters passing through the Post-office. The debate was conducted with singular calmness and dignity. The acerbity which on former occasions was painfully perceptible in Sir J. Graham, and which was, doubtless, caused by the severity of the animadversions to which his conduct in the trans actions had been subjected, was no longer visible. The question had, in a great degree, become divested of the personalities which were mixed up with former discus sions ; and the high constitutional principles involved iu the practice sought to be abolished were brought out with prominence and effect. The debate was thus rendered both dignified and impressive. The warrant of the Secretary of State . secures indem nity to the Post-office authorities against the conse quences of detaining and opening the letters of indi viduals. The production of the warrant would be an answer to any action or criminal proceeding insti tuted in consequence of detaining and opening any given letter committed to their charge. But this does not establish legality to the Secretary of State's Warrant. That point is still questionable. The Chief Suatice of England, from his place in Parliament, has given it as his opinion, deliberately formed, that a general warrant issued by the Secretary of State, autho rising and directing that the letters addressed to an indi vidual specificially named shall be detained and opened at the Post-office is an illegal warrant and that a special warrant for the opening of each letter is necessary to authorise the Post-office authorities to details and open the letters of any person in their pas sage through the Post-office. While the law of the case is doubtful, the practice is universally eondem of former As ned. a measure of police— to which th e Governments days had recourse under extraordinary circumstances of peril to the public security, and when the ordinary police w as far less efficient tha n it now is—the power claimed is no longer n ecessar y ; while the e xtension of informa tion, and the j ealous y which p ervade s the public mind on all questions relating to personal liberty, render the employment of such a power a source of disquietude and alarm throughout the community. The removal of the invidious and odious power which is now claimed and exercised, would also relieve the Government from the applications now made to it by the am . bassadors agents of Forei g n States, to interce p t the correspondence of individuals in this country whom they may suspect of carrying on a secret correspond ence with persons in their territories. The answer to sueh applications would be prompt and decisive. Mr. Dancombe put this po int with considerable ,effect :- 44 If any minister or agent of a foreign den& should come stanciering and sneaking to their doors, the Go vernment would be able to say to him—' This power no longer exists.' Whatever redress or protection he might demand, that they would be able and willing to give, according to the law of' England and the law of fle xions ; but with regard to this species of treachery, should he solicit it at their hands, they would be able to say—pointing to the new Act of Parliament—' Such power is no longer at our command.' "—(Cheers.) Sir James Graham admitted the odious and justly un popular character of the power possessed by the Exe cutive, bus; was not prepared to consent to its abrogation. The entire tone and tendency of the Ilight Hon. Baronet's speech were subdued and con ciliatory. It is obvious that though the law remain un altered, the practice has receive d a death-blow. No Government will again risk an exposure and disgrace so humiliating as have been caused to the present Ministry by the detection of the practices to which allusion has been so often made. STANDARD.—The important, but extremely diffi cult question raised by Mr. Mackinnon's motion, will continue to recur in Parliament until it shall be satis factorily set at rest by some law for the regula. Wm of interments in cities and large towns. We can scarcely hope that horrors like those of Spa fields can be obviated by prosecutions under the existing law, when we see the monstrous obstructions thrown in the way of the prosecution now depend ing. We cannot help thinking that the first step to be taken is scarcely a step in legislation, though it would do more to correct the present abuse than any law, it is to provide a sufficient number and extent of decently inclosed free cemeteries, if not actually in, at least conveniently near to, the metropolis. The excess once drained off in this way, there would be little difficulty in making arrange • meats for the existing churchyards and cemeteries ; but without some such drain as we speak of, we defy the wit of man to guard by law against abuses. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS EVENING.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. RAILWAYS. Mr. ALDAM presented a petition in favour of the Leeds, Dewsbury, and Lancaster Railway Bill. DUBLIN PIPE WATER COMPANY. The SPEAKER announced that the Committee on this Bill reported that the Standing Orders had been complied with. GRAND JUNCTION RAILWAY. The SPEAKER stated that the Committee reported that the Standing Orders had been complied with in the Grand Junction Bailway Bill. EREWASH VALLEY RAILWAY BILL. Mr. BARRY BALDWIN moved the second reading of the Erewash Valley Railway Bill. Sir F. FRENCH said he would not oppose the second reading of this Bill; but at the same time he should say that unless some arrang ement were made by which pro tection would be affordd to those whose property would be very seriously and deeply affected by the line, those parties should endeavour to protect themselves. Mr. BARRY BALDWIN did not know why his Hon. Friend should have made this statement, for no petition had been presented against the Bill. BRIDGEWATER NAVIGATION RAILWAY BILL Mr. DIVETT presented a petition against this Bill. SOUTH WALES RAILWAY BILL. Mr. PARKER presented a petition against this Bill ; the I etirioners prayed to be heard by counsel. LEEDS A ND . LIVERPOOL CANAL. Mr. BECKETT presented a petition against this Bill HARROGATE AND RIPON JUNCTION RAIL. THE SUN, LONDON, _WETINES - DAY EVENING, APRIL 9, 1845, WAY. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition against this I Bill from the North Riding of Yorkshire. MIDLAND COUNTIES RAILWAY EXTENSION. The SPEAKER said that before the conclusion of private business he wished to state to the House that his attention had been drawn to the:provision in this Bill, which had escaped the observation of the Committee on the Bill, and: which appeared to have done so by soms surreptitious management. The Bill had been read a first time, and stood for the second reading to night, and it was for the House to judge whether the order for that second reading should be discharged, in conse quence of a violation of the standing orders of the isouse. By the 15th clause of that Bill a power was given to owners of land within five miles on each side of the railway to dig for coals, limestone, and other minerals, and form railways for carrying them to the main trunk of the line. If this power . were given to these land owners, they would obtain authority for taking the lands of others on each side of their own at the valua tion of the jury. Under these circumstances, it was for the House to consider whether the order for the second reading should be discharged. Mr. GREENE said that his attention had been drawn to this Bill, and he thought that, under the circum stances, it was a duty to move for the discharge of the order for the second reading. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE would be glad to know whether this railway had been favourably reported on by the Board of Trade, for without that report he supposed it was impossible that the Bill could have come into Par liament; and he thought that so gross a violation of the standing orders ought to be inquired into in order to ascertain how far the Board of Trade had a share in it. Mr. STRUTT said that he was anxious that the order for the second reading should be discharged, for not only was be Chairman of the Committee on the Bill, but he was also, he found, a landowner within the prescribed distance of the line. It was utterly impossible for a Committee to read through the whole of the Bills presented to them, and there was nothing, he presumed, through the omission o • the Parliamentary agent, in the marginal readings, as was usual, to draw the attention of the Committee to this provision of the 15th clause. Lcrd GRANVILLE SOMERSET thought the atten tion of the House ought to be turned to the conduct of t'ie Parliamentary agent, that it might be inquired into. He believed that Parliamentary agents were employed t ) comply with.the standing orders, and if they were to nave no responsibility laid on them, the sooner the sys tem was altered the better. He did not suggest what the House should do, but he hoped they would do some thing to punish such conduct. Mr. ENTWISLE said he would take another oppor tunity of calling the attention of the House to this Bill. The order for the second reading was then discharged. Mr. SHERIDAN presented a petition praying for an alteration in the laws relating to bankruptcy. The pe tition, in consequence of its being lithographed, could not be received. MAYNOOTEL Mr. BROTHERT6N and another Hon. Member pre- sented petitions against the grant to blaynooth. COPPER ORE. Mr. M. GIBSON presented a petition, signed by the pincipal merchants of Manchester, for a repeal of the duty on copper ore. SMALL DEBTS BILL. The HON. MEMBER also presented a petition in favour of the Small Debts County Courts Bill, introduced last session by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary for the Hone Department, and praying that a similar mea sure might be introduced this session. Mr. BANNERMAN presented a petition from apiece in Scotland against any alteration in the Scotch system of banking. Sir GEORGE STRICKLAND presented a petition from Preston, signed by 700 persons, against the sale of intoxica inz drink on Sundays. Mr. CHRISTOPHER presented several petitions from Lincolnshire against the grant to the College of Maynooth. Mr. B. FERRAND presented a petition from the wood sawyers of Manchester, Salford, Paisley, and Bury, in Lancashire, complaining of the privations they suffered from the existence of saw mills ; and two pe tit" ons from Glasgow, in favour of a Ten Hours' Fac tory Bill. LAW OF SETTLEMENT. The HON. MEMBER also presented a petition from ,wo guardians of the Newbury Union, against the new aw of settlement intended to be introduced into Parlia ment this session. Several Hon. Members presented petitions against any further grant to Maynooth. Lord J. RUSSELL presented a petition from the in habitants of Glasgow, praying for the limitation of the time of labour to ten hours a day. MAYNOOTH COLLEGE. Mr. 0. DUNCOMBE presented a petition against the proposed grant to Maynooth. Lord BERNARD presented a petition from the grand jurors of the county of Cork, praying that the national funds for the education of those belonging to the Estab lished Church may be respected. He presented petitions from Cove, Churchtown, Bandon, and several other place, to the same effect ; and also a petition from Youghal, against the intended grant to Maynooth. Mr. BARING presented a petition from the Wes leyan Methodists, against the Maynooth grant. Mr:HAMILTON presented three petitions against the ingreased grant to Maynooth ; also eleven petitions in favour of Church Extension. Mr. PLUMPTRE presented a petition from Kent, signed by 19,000 persons, against the increased grant to Maynooth ; also several petitions from other places to the same effect. Mr. WARD presented seventeen petitions to the same efflct. Some of the petitions opposed the grant to Maynooth, on the ground that it was but a etep to wards Pol ory 4 others oa the ground that the Roman Catholic religion was idolatrous and unchristian; others because they were opposed to all State establishments. Mr. HINDLEY presented forty petitions from the following places against the Maynooth grant .—From the inhabitants of Prettswell. Essex ; Southend, Essex; Pershore, Worcestershire ; Whetstone, Middlesex ; the Independents of Pendleton, Lancashire ; the Protestant Dis!e ,ters of Marlborough, Wilts ; Grove Chapel, Cam berwell ; Wivinhoe, Essex ; Wingham, Essex ; Salem Chapel, Leeds ; Braintree, Essex ; Burton-on- Trent, Staffordshire; Primitive Methodists, Slade Cha pel, Ilkstone, Leicestershire; Langley, Hants; Baptists, King's-road Chapel, Reading ; Lymingto n, Hants ; the Committee and Teachers of the Sunday School Union, Colchester ; Bewes, St. Mary's, Suffolk ; Halsted, Essex ; Lion-walk Sunday School, Colchester ; Helveden,Essex; Mawrington, Essex; Stockwell Chapel, Sunday School, Colchester; Layer Breton, Essex; Ded ham, Essex; Hoelgate Chapel Sunday School, Colches ter ; Tollesbury, Essex ; Great Oakley, Essex ; St. Osytb, Essex ; Grinstead, Colchester; Harwich, Essex; Nayland, Suffolk; Weileyan Sunday School, Colches ter; Brightinghea, Essex; Baptist School at , Thorne-le- Token Essex. _ . Mr. S. WORTLEY presented petitions'from places in Yorkshire, against the grant to Maynooth. Mr. T. ISLINCOMBE pre. ented a petition from Stoke Newington, against the grant to the College of Maynooth. Mr. FORBES presented a petition against the Scotch Central Railway Bill. Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from Hereford against the Jewish Disabilities Bill. IMPEACHMENT OF SIR R. PEEL. Mr. FERRAND gave notice that he would, on Friday evening, present a petition, signed by 2,000 members of the Dublin Protestant Operative Associa tion, charging Sir Robert Peel, the First Lord of the Treasury, with high crimes and misdemeanours—(G reat l a ughter) — and praying for his impeachment.—(Renewed laughter.) AUSTRALIAN CORN. Mr. HUTT moved that the petition which he had presented from the merchants of London, on the subject of Australian corn, be printed. PAUPER LUNATICS. Sir C. NAPIER moved that the petition of the Chairman of the Vestry of St. Marylebone, for inquiry into the treatment of pauper lunatics at the Asylum at Hanwell, be printed. LUNATICS IN SCOTLAND. Mr, F. MAULE moved that the petition from the Prison Board of the county of Fife, respecting criminal lunatics in Scotland (presented Bth April), be printed. INTERMENT IN TOWNS. On the order of the day being read, Lord EBRINGTON said that the subject of inter ment in towns had recently occupied the attention of the House and the country to a eonsiderE.ble extent. He wished to read some extracts from a report of the Com mittee of that House regarding churchyards in this metropolis.—(Order, order,) The SPEAKER said the Hon. Member was not in order. The subject was then dropped. THE NEW ZEALAND COMMITTEE. Mr. AGLIONBY requested the attention of the House to the subject before mentioned. An article had ap peared in the Times newspaper reflecting on his (Mr. Aglionby's) conduct as a Member of that House. These remarks were founded on a letter written by him to the Chairman of the New Zealand Company. He hoped the House would bear with him whilst he made a short statement. He did it with regret, and would not upon merely personal considerations have intruded the matter on their notice. He did it because when a leading newspaper commented strongly and severely on the character and conduct of the Members of that House, the honour of the House was as much, if not more, involved than the character of the in dividual Member. Ile held in his hand the letter upon which these remarks in the 7';mes were founded. It was an extremely long letter, and the article itself was of a more serious nature. The article alleged two offences against propriety—that he (Mr. Aglionb) ) being a shareholder of the Company, should no' be an arbiter in the affairs of the Company.t He was not conscious of any impropriety in this respect. He had done his utmost to avoid being a member of the Committee, on the ground of bias and interest. He had mentioned his objections to the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Lincoln), to the Under Secretary for the Colonies, and numerous other lion. 111 , mbers, but he was told that he could not avoid being a member of the Committee. That it was necesssry for the conve nience of the Committee that he should be a member of it. He then proposed that he should not have a vote, but that, too, was rejected. He did not act in that Committee either as a partisan or an advocate, and he believed that every member of the Committee' would bear him out in what he stated. The second charge against propriety was his having an interview with one of the witnesses who was to be examined before the Committee. Every Honourable Member must know how desirable it was that witnesses whose testimony was unimportant should not be brought before a Committee.—(Hear, hear.) Now if he had sought an interview with an individual to induce him to alter or vary his evidence, it would have beep highly improper, but the fact was, he had never done anything of the sort. He certainly did see Mr. Carrington, but not about his evidence before the Committee, although that gentleman frequently alluded to at Mr. Carrington's had a claim against the New Zealand Company, and he was extremely anxious that Mr. Carrington should obtain justice, and he saw him over and over again on that subject. Captain ROUSE said that Mr. Carrington had gone out at the request of the New Zealand Company, and had done his duty in every respect to the satisfaction of the Company, when, without any fault even alleged against him, the Company had thought fit to dismiss him from their service. They alleged that their expenses were increasing while their funds were decreased and de creasing, and for that reason they were under the necessity of dispensing with the services of Mr. Carrington. Now, the Company had at that time the sum of 100,0001. in their pockets. With respect to the letter, all he could say was, that if the half of that letter was true the New Zealand Company had forfeited their Charter. He conceived that whenever any person was attacked in this House, it was the duty of every Member to get up and defend him. Mr. AGLIONBY said a few words in explanation. Lord EBRINGTON said that it would be in the re collection of the House that a Committee made a report with reference to St. Margaret's church-yard, which stated that it could be no longer used as a burial-place, the noxious effluvia arising from it having been the cause of three deaths already. The Com mittee had no hesitation in unanimously expressing its determination that the churchyard of St. Margaret's should be removed. He would ask the Right Hon. Baronet whether it was the intention of the Govern ment to act upon that report ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that he was not aware that it was intended by her Majesty's Government to remove St. Margaret's church yard. FIELD GARDENS BILL. Mr. ESCOTT hoped the Hon. Member who pro posed this Bill would not persevere in it. He (Mr. Es cott) had looked through the Bill only this morning, and he should say he felt astonished at the compulsory pswers contained in it; and he would be still more asto nished if it should be persevered in in this state. It con tained many provisions of an extraordinary und novel character, such as he conci ived were strongly compulsory; for instance, it gave a most stringent and compulsory power to field-wardens over the occupiers of land, a power by which they could determine upon the manner in which they should deal with land taken by them, and which might be either to the detriment or the advantage of the parish, and yet with a power so undefined they were to be endowed with it for a period of three years. In cases of inclosures the Bill gave the power to demand from the Commissioners, under an inclosure Bill, a perpetual lease. On these grounds he did hope that those Hon. Members who gave this Bill their sup port on the ground of its being a beneficent measure, would well consider it, at least before it received the third reading. But what did it also do ? Why, supposing the scheme should turn out ruinous—supposing the benevolent objects should not be carried out, the Bill allowed the drawing en the parish fund to pay the tithes, rei.ts, and taxes. He should think that the Hon. Member would hardly contend for such a proposition. The Bill in short gave the Commissioners extraordinary powers, it not only gave them power to fix the rent of the land, but who should hereafter be the owner of it. But supposing that the concern should should no: be a losing one. What then ? Why the field-wardens were to pay over the profits to the poor rates. He believed that there was nothing so objection able as mixing up land with the relief of the poor. He thought that the interference which this Bill occa sioned with the parochial authorities, because he thought that it was very likely that the expense would be thrown on the parishes. He was glad to say that the condition of the labonrers had been very much improved since the Hon. Gentleman had first taken them under his hand. But he thought that the voluntary system had answered so well that it was unwise to introduce any compulsory measure ; and he, therefore, moved that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. W. COWPER said that the Hon. Gentleman had stated that he had read the Bill that morning ; but he thought that he had not had time to consider its provisions. One of the main reasons for making those provisions compulsory was that they could not be carried out without the consent of the parishes. The Hon. Member then proceeded to discuss the details, and defend the principle of his measure. The object of this Bill was to afford relief to a vast num ber of those who deserved the consideration of this !louse, a vast number of agricultural labourers and artisans, who depended upon their daily labour for their livelihood, would be benefited by it, as a rood of land would afford sufficient food for a labourer and his family. Mr. M. MILNES anticipated only one good effect from the measure of the Hon. Gentleman—the applica tion of waste lands about towns to the most profitable purposes. The agricultural population would not be at a:1 benefited, nor did he think that the general advantage of these allotments was sufficiently established. After some further observations from several Hon. Members, strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when there appeared— For the second reading Against it Majority for second reading —74 The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed. The Scotch Infeftment Bill passed through Committee, and the report was brought up. (LEFT SITTING.) IRELAND. REPEAL ASSOCIATION. DUBLIN, APRII:T.--:-The weekly meeting of the Repeal As sociation, which took place as usual, in the Conciliation-hall, to-day, was very much crowded, and :most of the leading members were present. Upon the motion of Mr. O'Connell, Mr. J. O'Brien, M.P. for the City of Limerick, was called to the chair, and addressed the meeting at considerable length. Towards the close of the Chairman's observations Mr. R. 0. Porter, the author of a pamphlet on Federalism, which was published last year, and attracted much attention at the time, entered the hall, and was received with prolonged cheering. Mr. O'CoNNELL said that he had much happiness in mov ing that Mr. Porter, who had filled the office of High Sheriff of the county of Fermanagh last year, be enrolled a member of the Association. The motion having been carried by acclamation, Mr. R. G. PORTER said that he would lay before them, plainly and briefly, the reasons which induced him to join the Association. He had joined it with no feeling of ani mosity to the English people, but, on the contrary, with the strongest desire to promote harmony and intercourse between the inhabitants of the two countries.—(Hear.) Mr. S. O'BRIEN, M.P., expressed dissent from the views put forward by Mr. Grey Porter, and declared himself an un conditional Repealer. Mr. O'CoNNELL concurred with Mr. O'Brien in thinking that the union should to begot rid of in the first place ; when that was accomplished, he was ready to talk with Mr. Porter, and those who thought like him, respecting what they would take instead of it.—( Hear, hear.) Ile thought that now he might expect that the union would be repealed, and that Sir R. Peel would be the man to bring in the Bill which would effect that object. When they called to mind the manner in which Sir R. Peel had acted respecting Catholic Emancipation, their conviction of the approach of repeal would be strengthened. Hurrah ! then for Peel and repeal! —(Cheers.) On the last day of meeting he did not hazard any opinion with respect to the proposed Maynooth grant, and he had intended to be cautions this day , but having just read the Bill, he had no hesitation in pronouncing it to be most excellent, and the speech by which it was accompanied was as fair and manly as the plan itself was admirable. The sum of 30,0001. was to be at once granted for building ad ditions to the college, and otherwise improving, and that without any restriction or limitation whatever. The sum of 6,000/. was to be given to the president and profes i.ut p : a luto n dhb n oice e uh r ete , t eiaom restrictionnn dabh unobjectionable. H w e a s sort) to enable them to remain in the college, instead of going away . to country parishes, and the students were likewise liberally provided for. It was done in a noble and generous grateful for it. He repeated that the Bill was excellent in all its details, and quite satisfactory and Theofifr firmly yy increased kbienlid ev. ebdi i g tt r h a wa n ot t uflod : t a thh s aat t o t mv b ear e kye g grant them givennt give g n a p hint t ot h ob e l r ga ey n ato, i , ta T3 t h : anu n ; I: o a y r n o d u r e , piagitation repeal?—(Cr ies Repeal l ? Association (C ; 1. i e e s n of" b N i all ' " Conciliation hallohdheo p ot e ig ei ht w t a o s pray weii a f w or ar y e o o u f .;— he ( f L a a y u o g u (i ra t b er ic a i n m d p e r h es e s e i rs on : )whiSehirthße. Bill wogid produce on the minds of the people of this country, and accordingly the evening of the bringing it in he set the Americans at deilance.—(Hear, hear.) If he persevered in his present line of conduct towards this country Ireland would set them at defiance too. If justice were done to Ireland, America would not dare to attack Eng land.—(Hear, hear.) Ile wanted Sir Peel to buy the Irish people from him. lie bad done some good by the May nooth grant, let him give them an adequate representation and an extension of the franchise in the House of Commons, and see how many more mouths he should stop by that. — (Laughter and cheers) Mr. O'Connell proceeded to urge the necessity of labouring for the repeal as the only way to obtain concessions to this country, and concluded with an earnest entreaty to the people to desist from outrages, the perpetration of which could not fail to retard their approach ' to the goal of nationality. Messrs. Grattan, J. Kelly, M.P., and J. O'Connell, M.P., subsequently addressed the meeting. Mr. O'CONNELL announced the repeal rent for the week to be 33 . 3/. Os. 7d., and the Association adjourned to Monday next. TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE. DIVIDENDS DECLARED. W. Schofield, machine maker, Oldham--first and final div. of 33.5 d. in the pound, April 9, and any following Wednes day, at the office of Mr. Pott, Manchester. I-I. Port, screw manufacturer, Burton-upon-Trent—a div. of 6.y. in the pound, any Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Whit More, Birmingham. W. Wood, screw manufacturer, Burton. upon-Trent--final div. of 7 1 4,1. in the pound, any Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Birmingham. W. Wood and H. Port, screw manufacturers, Burton-upon- Trent—a div. of -Is. 6d. in the pound (upon new proofs only), any Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Birmingham. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basingball-street. J. Hook, contractor, Nine Elms, May 1, at one—L. Watson, smith, Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire, April 29, at one—W. E. Gould, carver and gilder, Finsbury-place South, April 29, at twelve—J. Palmer, draper, Lynn, Norfolk, May 1, at one—T. Herridge, builder, Wharton-street, Clerken well, April 29, at twelve—J. Davies and H. Edwards, linen drapwrs, Westminster. road, Lambeth, April 29, at half past twelve—G. Fielding, ironmonger, Thrne, Oxfudshire, April 29, at two—B. Reynolds, silk printer, Mitcham, April 29, at half .past eleven-LH. Thompson, timber merchant, King street, Clerkenwell, May 2, at half-past one—R. W. Robin son, sen., and R. W. Robinson, jun., grocers, Bedford, May 2, at half-past one. In the Country. T. Cartwright, banker, Heaton Norris, Lancashire, May 2 at twelve, at the Manchester District Court—W. Howell, bookseller, Liverpool, May 2, at half-past twelve, at the Li verpool District Court—J. Hawksley, merchant, Arnold, Nottinghamshire, May 7, at twelve, at the Birmingham Dis trict Court. CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the contrary, on the day herein mentioned. C. S. Haward, grocer, Colchester, May 2—W. E. Gould, carver and gilder, Finsbury-place South, April 29—J. 'Thorley, glass dealer, Northampton, April 29- - 4. Maudeno, market gardener, Grove street, Hackney, May 2—S. Smee ton, cattle salesman, Sibbertoft, Northamptonshire, May 2 S. Rugg, carpenter Southampton, April 29—C. Lee, miller, Wakes Collie, Essex, May 2—W. Belines sculptor, Osna burgh-street, New-road, May 2—T. Smith, hackneyman, Burrowes-mews, John-street, Blackfriars-road, April 29 J. Hall, cowkeeper, Wallsend, Northumberland, April 29 P. Wright, grocer, Leeds, May 2—J. Scott, paper dealer, Li verpool, May 2—R. Hill, currier, Exeter, May I—J. Dalton, joiner, Salford, Lancashire, May I—G. E. La n ha m, bu il de r, Southampton, April 29—J. Clark, carman, Brunswick-cot tage, City-road, April 29—A. Francis, W. Davey, and M. Francis, ironfounders, Aberystwith, Cardiganshire, April 29 —W. Moyes and T. Moring, carmen, Camomile-street, April 29—G. Bartlett, plaster manufacturer, Wellington-street, Goswell-street, April 29—J. Curwen, c heesernonger, Bridge place, Vauxhall, April 29—W. Blinkhorn. manufacturing chemist, Little Bolton, Lancashire, April 29—H. Wehnert, tailor, Leicester-square, April 29. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. W. Naylor, M. Mural], and J. Wood, machine makers, Bradford (so far as regards J. Wood) —A. T. S. Dodd and E. Leech, surgeons, Chichester—W. Milner J. P. Morley, and W. P. Morley, silk manufacturers, Leek,i Staffordshire (so far as regards W. P. Morley)—H. Jones and E. Hughes, licenced victuallers, Hosier-lane, West Smithfield—C. P. Pitt and C. Breese, japanners, Birmingham—J. Dawson, T. Curtis, and J. Haigh, cloth finishers, Leeds (so far as regards J. Daw son)—R. Crathorne and J. Stephenson, millers, Beverley, Yorkshire—W. C. Figes and H. Hallett, ironmongers—A. IL and W. Cockshott, chemists, Bradford—G. Buckwell, A. Buckwell, and C. D. Buckwell, timber merchants, Brighton —R. and. J. Bayley, packers, Friday. street—E. Ackroyd, M. F. Wilson, and E. J. Newton, colliers, Gildersome, York shire—J. Whitaker and H. Woreley, silk dealers, Hudders field—W. Major, James Radcliffe, and F. J. Gill, manufac.. turers, King-street, Cheapside— G. Davison and G. Roles, tailors, Sheffield—J. Moon, E. Moon, R. Moon, W. Moon, and C. Hopley, merchants, Rio de Janeiro—T. Haigh and C. Bell, stock brokers, Bradford—J. Brown, W. Morcom, and J. Stone, Manchester—C. E. and W. C. Bernard, West India merchants—E. Thorp, J. Thorp, J. Terry, M. Terry, J. Thorp, and H. Thorp, sawyers, Bradford (so far as regards E. Thorp)—W. Webb and S. Barker, nickel refiners, Bir mingham—P. L. Simmonds and F. Clowes, publishets, Corn hill—E. and M. Harrison, oil merchants, Liverpool—W. Bray and H. Edmonds, clothiers, Bradford—P. Craig and B. Saunders, milliners, Wadebridge, Cornwall—H. Deighton, W. 11. Deighton, E. Maude, and J. Deighton, wine mer chants, Otley, Yorkshire. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION. William Henry Keltie, grocer, Glasgow, April 11 and May 2, at twelve, at the chambers of Monteith, Glasgow. FLANDERS -MAIL BRUSSELS, APRIL s.—Mr. Stephenson, who came to Bel gium to visit some parts of the proposed railway of Entre Sambre and Meuse, set out yesterday for,Ostend, to return to England. M. de Bronckere, the Governor of Liege, displays extra ordinary activity in re-organising the public offices in the building which has been obtained since the disastrous fire and destruction of the hotels of the Government, so that business goes on as usual. The nine persons who were injured at the fire are doing as well as possible ; the two who were thought to be in danger are much better. The hotel was insured for 150,000 francs, and the furniture for 3,000 francs. The llfoniteur publishes a convention between the King of the Belgians and his Royal Highness the Grand Duke of Hesse, for the extraditions of persons guilty of certain offences. The Chamber of Representa ti ves met to - day, but not in sufficient numbers to proceed to business. BE LGIAN FUNDS.—BnussEts, APRIL 5. Actual Debt, 2% per Cent Rothschild's Loan, Five per Cent LoDanittoof ThroeT Ditto, ditto, 1 840 . • Ditto, ditto, 18 44 1844 • • • • Ditto of the City , 1843 • - lO3 ' Ditto; 1832 • • • • • • • • " • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • 1014 1 irty p - er i i il e i eTt s ' • .......... . . . . . . . _ Four per Cent • ... 77 Ditt o Thirty-seven Millions, ditto ...... Bank of Belgium •• • • . • 653 —Brussels Papers, April 6 . AUSTRIAN FUN. DS.—VIfiNNA, 31e_scn 29. 5 per Cent. Metalllcitles• • •,:. 4 pet: Cent. ditto • • • • ..... • • • • • • • • • ••• • • • 102% 3 per Cent. ditto • • • • I.oan, 1834 • • ...... •" • •• • • • • • • •••• •. • Ditto, 1839 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • - Bank Shares • • • • Esterhazy's Loan • • • • • • —Allgemeine Zeitung, Aprll2. DUTCH FUNDS.—AMSTERDAM, APRIL 1. Money. Bills. Actual Debt, 2% per Cent • Isitto, 3 per Cent • • • • Ditto, 4 per Cent. • • • • • • " ...... .• 99 (1 100 Ditto, 5 per Cent. ..... _ Ainort Syndic, 4% per Cent 99% 100 1 ,i DittO, 3 1_ per Cent •••••••• • • • • • • • • 93% 93% 150% 151 98% 100 Exchange on London , a t si g ht •....„. C E ° D. ' s li t m" India Loon, L(ot,P4au perr' 4 % per Cent .. Cent • • • • • • • ... 12 25 Two months. •• 12 20 On Hamburgh, at sight ..., 35 50 Two months. •••• • • • • ..... • 35 25 On Paris •••••••• • • " • • . • Two m0nth5........ • • • .. —Dutch Papers, April 2. ...... 1638 HORRIBLE CASE OF MATRICIDE. KENDAL, APRIL 7.—Yesterday afternoon the . inhabitants of th e town ship of Old Hatton were thrown into a state of the greatest excitement by the fact that Mrs. ,Simpson, their respected neighbour, had been murdered. Suspicion immediately fell upon Mr. Richard Simpson, the son of the murdered lady. Early in the evening the respected minister of the place, Mr. Whaley, accompanied by a friend, hastened to Kendal. They waited upon the Coroner, who issued his warrant for holding an inquest on the body, and a jury was summoned to meet at Middleshaw House, Old Hatton. From the st atement of one of the female servants of the deseased, it appeared, that Simpson (the son) had gone home on Saturday, the 30th ultimo, in a state of intoxication, and found his mother in bed, upon which be insisted on her getting up, which she refused to do, when he pulled her on to the floor, and abused her in a most brutal manner Last Saturday, being in a similar state, he re peated his inhuman attack, but in a more ferocious man ner, and seized upon the poker, and inflicted several blows with that weapon upon her. He left her lying upon the floor, whence she was removed by the servants to bed. On being informed yesterday moruing that his mother was in a very dangerous state, and that she was not expected to live long, he made an unfeeling answer. He afterwards gave the servant some rim, and ordered her to bathe her wounds, and said in the -roughest language, that she would soon come round again. The family is one of great respectability, but the supposed murderer has been a drunken and dissolute character for many years. After the evidence of the servant had been heard, the coroner aaid, he thought it his date to adj o u rn ed the inquest till to- morrow (Tuesday), that a poit mortem examination of the body might take place. The prisoner was then conveyed to the Kendal House of Correction. LIE OREGON D ECLARATION.—"These declarations," says the Liverpool Albion of yesterday, "reached Liverpool *hardy after three o'clock on S a turday, and their effect on the cotton market w as i mme di a t e ly perceptible, activity sud denly succeeding to stagnation, and a change of purposes be coming instantly evident on the part of both purchasers and sellers. Throughout the day business had been flat, all par ties appearing ~hv of operations. This apathy q uickl y dis appeared. and, notwithstanding the lateness o f the hour, full y 5,003 bales changed h an d s , an d an advance of from id. to *d. per pound was re a li se d. T o -d a y i s expected to be a sin gular day in the c o tt on mar k e t, the speculator s being gene rally on the qui vice; while others who are holders evince a disposition to continue so." PRINTERS' PENSION SOCIETY. The eighteenth anniversary of this Institution was cele brated yesterday evening, at the London Tavern, Bishops gate-street. Upwards of 100 gentlemen assembled on the occasion, and the chair was occupied by Mr. D'lsraeli, M.P., who was supported by Sheriffs Sidney and Hunter, and se veral other influential gentlemen. After justice had been done to a dinner served in Bathe and Breach's best style, The CHAIRMAN proposed the usual loyal toasts, which were duly responded to; as was also "Success and Prosperity to the Worshipful Company of Stationers." Mr. SHACKELL responded to the toast. Mr. D'lsHAEti then, in giving the toast of the evening, said he relied with confidence on the kind feeling of the company, although he might, in doing, so, well be daunted on looking over the list of royal, noble, and celebrated per sonages who had presided at former anniversaries of this Institution. He was, however, in some- degree sustained in attempting to discharge the duties which he was about to do, but which he knew he could but imperfectly perform—first, by their evinced kindness ; and, secondly, .by the fact that although be might be deficient in the attributes of a chair man upon so important and interesting an occasion, and be neither a royal, noble, or celebrated person, yet that he was at least one of themselves.—(Applause.) He wanted to call their attention for a moment, and, if possible, to interest their feelings on behalf of a charity that was founded for the children of labour—an institution which, although its origin was humble, its achievements had been considerable ; but not so ample as could be desired. Ile was anxious, not merely to induce them to support so valuable an institution, issued. Now he but to extend its benefits. They were aware, no doubt. of I Hee tae general uljeels winch the society aLtenipted Lo attain. At this moment he believed it granted 50 pensions to those whose energies were decreased by age or by infirmity. Those pensions were essentially of an auxiliary nature; it was not intended to support him whose energies had entirely failed, but to assist. That so much had been done by persons who were themselves struggling for existence, was in the highest degree laudable; but if they examined the statistics of the question, he thought there was no one present who would not be struck with the immense benefits which the energies of the printers' friends had produced. The number of jour neymen printers in the metropolis could, he thought, scarcely be calculated under 5,000, and if they took only one per cent. on thatnuraber, they-would find the exact number of pensions would be produced which at that moment they were paying. —( Hear.) Now in every charity and in every institution in this country, there never was an average contemplated less than two per cent.; three per cent. had been the basis upon which all charities had been calculated.—(Hear.) He hoped he might induce them, that evening, not only to increase the basis of the purpose for which they had assembled, but to increase that feeling which, duly cultivated and carefully nurtured, would accomplish an object such as lie had indi cated. He hoped that they would eventually afford assist ance to at least double the number to that which now it did. —(Applause.) He ventured to advocate not only the main tenance of the institution, but its expansion. When he remembered the-eminent personages who, for a series of years, had advocated the interests of the society, and called upon them to support it, he thought it would be useless to follow in their footsteps, and he would therefore go beyond his predecessors, and call upon the company, not only to sustain the institution, but to extend its advantages; and they would be surprised, if they carefully examined the subject, to find what immense benefits could be achieved from comparatively slight means.—(Applause.) Let them sup pose the number of pensions at present granted doubled — that the number of pensioners was 100. Let them take the same ratio of per tentage, and suppose 10 of those pensions not auxiliary, but absolute—that is, given to persons whose energies had altogether ceased. If, then, they were to fix the amount of pensions at 251. per year, and to the remaining 90 they gave, to the males 15/. a year, and to the females 10/. a year; if they were, in fact, to raise a munificent and ample charity, they would not require more than 500!. a year in addition to their present means.—(Hear.) He could not understand why there should be any difficulty in attaining this result.- Adding that sum to the income which they at present possessed, it would make about 1,400/. a year, which was not a greater amount than he had known to have been received by other societies at their annual festivals.—(bear.) There was no class of labour in themetropolis that was More entitled to metropolitan support than that of journeymen printers. London owed everything to its press; it owed as much to its press as it did to its being the seat cf govern ment and the seat of law. He regretted to say there always appeared to be a great lack of sympathy in this country in any charity connected with its literature. In every other trade there was more esprit du corps than in the realms of literature, if, indeed, they could call that a kingdom which was a perpetual scene of civil war.—(Hear, hear.) The fact was, that from alpha to omega there had been a perfect want of sympathy amongst all persons connected with lite rature. 'No matter what they were—from the most suc cessful authors to the humblest persons connected with the press—although the gradations were numerous, the hierarchy was entire. They originated in one principle—they existed by the same means—and, did they understand it, were con nected by indivisible interests.(Applause.) But, 'unfortu nately, it had ever been the case that authors, editors, re porters, and printers, had never exhibited among themselves that esprit du corps that was shown by the members of every other body of men. Jealousy and distrust had always inter vened, and the time had now arrived when they ought to make a great effort to put a stop to those unfortunate differ ences. To him there was nothing more surprising than that there should be an uncommon want of confidence amongst men who were in possession of the greatest power in the world.—(Hear.) Gottenburgh, the inventor of printing, though lie might have imagined the great influence which his discovery might acquire, could never have thought that its followers should, amongst all classes of the community have been the least respected and the most in want.—(Hear.) It was true the master printers had recently given their aid to the institution, and that they had done so with very great effect--(Applause)—but there were others immediately con nected with the craft who had not taken that prominent part they ought to have done. Where were the authors of England was a question which he dare not ask • if he did, echo would answer, " Where ?"—(Laughter.) Where were the authors whose books sold? Absent.—( Laughter.) Where were those whose books did not sell? Still further away.—(Re newed laughter.) Why, they would not be heard of even in the immortality of the pastry-cooks, if it were not for the printers of England.—(lncreased laughter.) They had many other clients to whom they could also appeal—the authoresses of England for instance. He knew of many ladies who had exhibited great ability in writing upon various subjects, not even omitting sermons, to be sold at bazaars, in aid of chari ties, and yet few of thein were found to come forward to sup port the decayed of that class which was mainly instrumental in placing their literary efforts before the public. — (Hear , and laughter.) After a few other observations with respect to the object of the charity, the Chairman proposed " Success and Prosperity to thtPrinters' Pension Society." The toast having been drunk with loud applause, Mr. Sheriff HUNTER. gave "The health of the Chairman," which was briefly responded to. The subscriptions were then announced, and amounted to upwards of 400/. " The Press," " The healths of the Sheriffs," and other toasts were subsequently proposed and responded to, and the company separated. self had issued? Sir J. GRAHAM—Not as to the form. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF COHMONS, April 8. THE POST-OFFICE. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE then rose, for the purpose of moving for leave to bring in a Bill to secure the inviola bility of letters passing through the Post-office. He felt that it was a reflection on the system of Govern ment under which we lived, as well as a reproach to our institutions of which we were so proud, that any Member of that House should be obliged to seek for the inviolability of his correspondence. In submitting this motion to the House, he would abstain as much as possible from everything of individual or of a personal nature. It was with the system he was going to war It was a system he felt it his duty to endeavour to de stroy. Committees of this House and of the other House had been appointed during the last session to re port what was the state of the law on this subject. Ali that the Committee of the House of Commons had told them was, that the law in 1844 was exactly the same as it was in the time of Queen Anne, but they did not tell them what that law was. The House of Lords had gone one step further, and had told them that the only way the intention of the law could be explained was, by the fact that that power was fully recognised by Act of Parliament, because it did not give the Secretary of State the power of detaining letters. They told them that the power appeared to have been exercised from the earliest period, and that it had been exercised ac cording to several Acts of Parliament. That was all that the House of Lords said in reference to the matter, admitting that there had been no law. He would grant that the practice had obtained, from old usage, and was recognised by those Acts of Parliament ; but if they referred to those cases in the Appendix of the Report of the Commons, they would find that there had been no such proof that letters had been stopped in the Post-office, opened, and then sent fore ard to the parties who ought to have received them ; there was no evidence that such a system of fraud and forgery had ever been exercised; they were used in Courts of law as evidence against certain parties. The law was so different on that point that they did not allow them to ask where was the warrant whereby those letters were taken ; it seemed that they came into the hands of the Government some way or other, but they would not allow it to be asked who detained those letters. The first of Vic toria increased the power of the former Act of Par liament. He had the authority of the highest men—the highest legal authorities, for saying that there was no law for the exercise of that power now 'made use of. All that was done by the Act was to re lieve the servant of the Post-office from a misdemeanor in detaining or opening any letters. It left the legality of the warrant totally and entirely untouched, just the same as a constable who produces his warrant is exonerated from all responsibility as to the legality of that warrant. The same thing might be said of the orders that were given for the admission of strangers into the gallery of that House. If a stranger in that gallery were to be apprehended, he would produce the order as his protec tion.• Yet it was clear that the power of admitting strangers did not exist in that House. But admitting that the Government possessed the power of opening letters, the question the House had to decide was, what advantage they had obtained by its exercise. They all knew the difficulties in which the present Government had been placed ; and they all knew the ill feeling which had been created by the exposures in that House. And if there was ever any benefit derived from this subject, he would ask any rational and sensible man whether, after the disclosures which had been made, a man engaged in a treasonable correspondence would not be an idiot or a fool to send that correspondence through the General Post-office. He said, therefore, after the exposures which had taken place, that the value or utility of this practice had been destroyed. If this system was to be of any value at all it must be practised in secret. There was no middle course. They must either stand by the present system, or abolish it altogether. Why should' they not expunge from the statute-book this odious power, if such power existed? Such a power existed in no other country. One of the articles of the Belgian Constitution protected the correspondence of the Belgian people. The power of opening letters did not exist in the United States, nor in Canada. It did not exist in France. Monsieur Guizot had de clared, in his place in the French Chamber, that in law and in fact the correspondence of the French people was inviolable. Honourable Gentlemen opposite smiled, but that had been the declaration of the Minister of Foreign Affairs in France. If correspondence in this country were violated, there was no redress because nobody was responsible for it. Sir Robert Walpole had declared that this power ought only to be exercised in times of great internal danger. From that time down to the present day the power had been increasing. It had been used, not only for criminal warrants, hut also for political purposes, If they confined the system to cri minal warrants, he should not have so great an objection 1 to it: but that was clearly impassible. On a former oc casion it had been stated that Lord Sidmouth had issued a great number of warrants for opening letters. Now he (Mr. Dunconsbe) had had lately a communication with a banker in the city of London, and he had told him that a clerk in his service had been guilty of for gery, and had absconded. Application was made to Lord Sidmouth to intercept the letters of the clerk. Lord Sidmouth declined doing so, saying that he never issued warrants for opening letters except in cases of high treason. An application was then made to Lord Sidmouth for the parties to be allowed to see the address of the letters, and Lord Sidmouth said he would send an answer in the evening. Ile did so, and it was to this effect—" That he considered the Post-office so sacred that he would not be a party to allowing the superscrip tions of any letters to be seen." Two-thirds of thewar rants issued within the last forty years had been criminal warrants; and, in point of fact, the question resolved itself into this—should the Crown have the power of issuing those warrants ? He thought that when the House looked to the extension of the police and other instru ments of the Executive, it would see that there was no necessity for this additional power of opening letters. He had asked for capita of the warrants that had been , Alnetherjhe iortut r Laa ;Sir J. Graham) as the models of thosa which he him- Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said, it would be very inter esting, to him and others,tohave before them copies of hose new forms which had been used in their own cases.---(Hear, and a laugh.) Ile believed it would he found that the practice had been of a most demoralising effect. To prove this, he would read the order of the postmaster general, dismissing servants of the post-offic.c for openigg the letters of certain noblemen and tren tlemen connected with sporting affairs.—(The Hon. Gentleman read the order.) Now the opening of letters by a postman was a transportable offence. But the postmaster dared not prosecute those men, because they might plead the example of their superiors as an au thority. If a jury found them guilty, it would be with a recommendation to mercy on account of the example set them.—(Hear, hear.) The dismissal of those men was occasioned by the unwillingness of the Post-office and the Home Secretary to go into a Court of Cri minal law, with an avowal of their own acts.—(Hear, _ hetlr.) There were Members of the Committee of In quiry now in the House, and he w4,.hed to Lice the op. portunity of reminding them of their own re port ; in which they expressed some regret that they could not go into an explanation of all the - circumstances — connected with those transactions. Now what did the Committee man by that ? Did they picture to themselves a Secretary of State for the Home Department sitting in his office in a state of alarm (having read, perhaps, the Morning Herald, the Minis terial organ), with respect to some treasonable conspi racy, or some sedition, which he learned from a letter brought from some person in the Post-office, but which, after all, might turn out to be a conspiracy got up by some Conservative Operative Society, or a mere Chartist meeting-. The Right Hon. Gentleman having found out the extent of the conspiracy might put his letter and the Morning Herald in the fire. Another reason given for maintainin this power was this—that if yeu abolish it, the Post-office, this great Government establishment, would be made the vehicle of treasonable or seditious practices. That was the only argument for retaining this power which had any plausibility ; hut upon exa• minatien he thought it would be found to possess more sentiment than common sense. Ii this argument were good as regarded the Post-office, it would be equally ap plicable to every railway, omnibus - driver, or even cab-driver in • the kir, gdom.—( ear, hear.) Was it not better to use the power which the law at present gave of using a search warrant for the opening of letters in the Post-office, if they were supposed to contain treasonable matter, than to open them privately ? That would be a less dishonourable proceeding and less offensive to the individual. lie did not see how the power which was lately exercised could be of any value after the exposures that were made. He did not think that there was much fear of treason in w that they had p o li ce men in every corner. They and their county rural police, their borough police. What could they want more. But they had more, if they knew how to use it properly—a loyal and affectionate people, who, if they a ere well treated, would .be the best safeguard of the Crown, and the tranquillity of the country. He would ask the House to allow him to bring in a Bill, and let there be no mistake on the subect. He asked for leave to bring in a Bill for the unconditional repeal of this power. fie was satisfied that reo middle course could be adopted. This system of opening letters—this system of fraud and of forgery must either continue or cease. lie would be no party to any other course—be would not be made a fool of by bringing in a Bill, supposing leave were granted him to do so, and then having that Bill frittered away or strangled in some of the subsequent stages. He would have a clear and decided vote of the House, whether the power was to continue or cease. He was not aware what was the in• tention of the Government on the subject, but he hoped he would hear the Right lion. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department rise in his place and de clare that this was a power not only odious for a Minis ter to exercise, but repugnant to the feelings of the people of this country—that he would take the matter out of his (Mr. Duncombe's) hands, and endeavour to expunge it from the statute-book, on the clear understanding that any ill-feeling which this discussion had given rise to, and any suspicion which had been engendered, should he now and for ever buried in oblivion.—(Hear, heqr.) And this was not the only benefit that would arise from the abolition of this odious power. If any foreign Minister, or the spy of any foreign despot, came sneaking to their doors, a British Minister might tell them that this power no longer existed—that he was ready to give them any redre-s and protection which tne Bri ish law enabled him to do ; but with respect to this species of treachery it was no longer in his power (and he might at the same time point to the Act) to open letters for the gratifitta tion of any foreign power. With these views, he would ask for leave to bring in a Bill to secure the inviolability of letters passing through the Post-office.—(Cheers.) Dr. BOWRING, in seconding the motion, said that he wished the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department to state whether or not he in tended to make the reparation he promised to Mr. Muzzini's character, in case he found he had unjustly aspersed it. He wishei to know if the Bigiit lion. Gen tleman was able to produce anything in support of the criminatory charges he had alleged aLainst Mr. Mazzini. He would also ask the Right Hon. Baronet if he were in possession of any ether documents relating to this matter other than those which he had laid before the House. It appeared that there had been a communica tion from Sir Augustus Foster, eating that the Austrian Minister had got hold of certain letters of Mazzini, who had been expelled from Genoa, showing that Mazzini was the head of the secret tribunal which had authorised the atrocious murder which had been committed at Rodez. Now, Sir Augustus Foster only stated thet the Austrian Minister profesled to have got hold of certain documents impli cating Mr. Mazzini, and he wished to as k t h e Ri ght Hon. Baronet if he had taken any steps to get at the truth in relation to those documents; and he would also ask if there was anything against Mr. Mazzini be yond the insinuations which had been made on a former occasion, and if there was any further evidence to be brought forward in support of the accusation against this ill-treated, caltunniated, and, as the Right Hon. Gentleman himself had characterised him, unprotected foreigner? Sir JAMES GRAHAM, in commencing the obser vations which he should feel it to be his duty to address to the House on the present occasion, would commence by alludinu to the questions which 1)0.6 been put to him by the Hun. Gentleman who had just sat down. In the first place, he would repeat what' he had .stated to the House on a former 6ccasion, that until he had been in formed of the circumstance in that House on Tuesday last, he believed he was not aware of the fact that in the Westminster Review there had appeared a de fence of the conduct of Mr. Mazzini. He had subsequently stated that it would be his duty to make inquiries into the facts of the case, and that if the result should leave any doubt upon his mind as to the accu- racy of the statements he had made respecting the transaction to which he had alluded, he should be happy to take the first opportunity to state that fact to the House. He had certainly before stated to the House on the first occasion that he had endeavoured to inform himself from the best authority, if any prosecution had been instituted by Mr. Mazzini against the paper (the Moniteur) which had first brought forward the accusa tion, and he had been informed that no prosecution bad been instituted against that paper. But the same party from whom he had obtained that information, had taken no notice whatever to him of the prosecution which, it was said, had bees instituted against another party--- namely, Monsieur Gisquet, for a republication of the same statement. Under these circumstances, he had thought it his duty to institute further inquiries. He had done so, but he had only heard of these circumstan ces on Tuesday last for the first time, and he had as yet received no further information on the subjee,t. As soon as he should have received further information, it would be his duty to state the same to the House— (Hear, hear)—and, at the same time, to state the impression left upon his mind as the result of that inquiry.—(Cheers.) Painful as that discussion had befm to him on former occasions, he was bound to say that the Hon. Member for Finsbury, in introducing a great question of that importance, had done it in a manner the most dispassionate that it was possible for any Hon. Member to do. So far from contending against the po sition the lion. Member had taken, he aheuld say that he was ready to agree with it. He agreed with him in sav ing that he did not believe it useful to continue this power unless secrecy be observed. That was the leading proposition in the speech of the lion. Gentleman, and to that proposition ho was willing to give his entire assent. lie should state to the House that the Hon. Gentleman had, in the way he represented it, almost seduced him from hie duty, and he should admit that this power had been viewed with jealousy by the people of this country; but at the same time he did not think it consistent with his duty that he should assent to his motion. If he did not think so, nothing could give him more delight ; but he was first' to consider this question with reference to the public interest, and to the public interest alone, and would vtry shortly venture to deal with what was the law of the case, aid to differ with the view of the lion. Gentleman. He must say that the power was not first given by the Statute of Anne. Opening a letter was a great moral offence on the part of. him who was entrusted with it, but until this statute passed it was part of the royal prero gative to convey letters, and it was universally known that the Government, from time to time, whenever grave suspicion arose, did, without hesitation. open letters con fided to its trust, and so far from its being a legal offence, it was not only not a misdemeanour, but was not even a ground for a civil action. The statute created the mis demeanour, and also created an exception to the Crown. He perceived that the law was clear on this point. The effect of the repeal of this statute would be, that the opening of letters in the Yost-office would no longer be a misdemeanour or an offence prosecuted by law. The effect of the restriction of the law in this way, giving an exception only in favour of the Crown, was, that the se curity of correspondence was inviolable. The lion. Gentleman had stated, and stated very fairly, what was the general purport of th , , report of the Secret Com mittee on this subject. The Hon. Member also stated that the people ee this country bad an immense interest in the safety of correspondence sent by post ; he con curred in that, and so did the Comaiitti e. who, for that reason, had stated in their rt port, that with the exception of such an I:ct being committed by the Secre tary of State under warrant, the security of that cor respondence should be inviolable. The Committee fur ther stated in their report, the facts relative to the issuing of such warrants on former occasions, and the circumstances under which they had been issued. They stated the number of warrants that had been issued during the last twenty-two years, and that that number did not exceed an average of eight in the year. In fact the substance of the report was that this pri• vilege had never been abused in reference to political warrants, and that not more than one warrant in a year during the same period had been issued for criminal wished at that moment to ask the Right i pnrposes. But was that all ? .ko ; the report Furth > ti rll.tit! L.t bhe I.:wf !LIS IC,IJUCL sie ve the time of s or Spencer, in ISOG, and that all such warrants issued since then had been carefully preserved. Well, was there no other change ? Ile would show that there ens, and it was to this cffect, that now no Secretary of State could issue a warraet without the presence of three witnesses — a confidential clerk and two others, and a copy of each such ' arrant to be left at the Post-office. In this respect he b. geed to assure the Howe that every warrant issued by him had been copied, and a copy sent to the Post effice ; and rot only that, but he produced before the Committee every warrant he had issued, and gave an account see iatine of each. In all that he had done in this reseect he felt that he would be obliged to follow precedent, and he did so. In respect to political warrants, the Act required that the Secretary of State should give his reasons in writing for issuing them, and leave a copy of them at the Post-office, so that in fact, so far as regulations could go, he did not see how regula tions could be carried further.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the question as to the expediency of this power, he would say that if it never had existed, psr haps he would question the expediency of now giving it; but it having existed, and that, too, from a very early perioo, and having undeigene many and various modifi cations and a siendments, from the time tef the R volution down to the present time, and by the highest authority in the country, he did not see why it should not be availed of when circumstances required. The House was now caled upon to declare that the Government sheeld not have the power of interfering with the cor respondence of any parties, either foreign domestic, no matter how dangerous or treasonable. The Hon- Gentleman thought it was too much to leave to the responsible servants of the Crown tti , talte measures to discover the designs of parties believed to be engaged in plots and intrigues dangerous to this country itself or menacing tn the peace and security of others --(Hear.) - Every country in Europe, except England+ gave its government the power of preventing the settles meat of foreigners within its territory, or of effecting their expulsion. He (Sir James Graham) did not ask for the restoration of such favours to the English Go- • yernment. He had always been opposed to those powers whilst they existed. But he thought it was not too much to ask, in the absence of such powers, that there sheuld be continued the means of checking correspon dence from this country, which was calculated to dis turb the peace and endanger the safety of other State°, and to peevent this country being made the focus ef conspiracies against its allies.—(Hear, hear.) He wished he could arrive at the conclusion at which the Hon. Gentleman had arrived, that the power so limited and restricted as it was, could be altogether abandone d with safety. He did not think so, and especially with reference to • foreign correspondence, there being n° power in the Government to check the arrival of fo reigners in this country or to effect their rejection. Il e believed that the Hon. Gentleman was correct in stating that any attempt to modify- further the power of the Crown would prove nugatory, and he, therefore, Pre ferred the course which the Hon. Gentleman had take ° ,of bringing in a Bill to take away that power altogether' To that Bill on the part of her Mejesty's Ministers b e would give a decided opposition.—(Hear, hear.) Lord J. RUS 'ELL said he quite agreed with tb • Right Hon. Gentleman that nothing could have beeu more fairly stated than the case of his Hon. Friend - His Hon. Friend had brotight forward the question ash constitutional one and he had placed his argurnee ttr fairly before the House. Now he (L or d J. li"se , ' found himself in the situation of being neither able t ° agree with his Hon. Friend nor with the Right 01 Gentleman. He thought there was great fo r ce in one . the observations made by his Hon. Friend, namely, th e this power having been much questioned, much discus' sion having taken place amongst the public as well. in that House, the power was no longer of the sane utility that it had been at a f orm er titn and that there was a sort of warning given to all persons inclined to u se the P °st as a means of correspondence, not to attempt to certify , W I an illegal correspondence by such an ag enc y. Let ' however, say that, with regard to the law of the qu estiol i e l his investigations, as far as they h a d p rocee d e d, had I him to the same conclusion as that which the Right 1 1 ° ° * f Gentleman had come to. It appear e d th a t the Act ° Anne was framed entirely with the view of inflicting, punishment and penalties on clerks and p erson s engs,,, in the Post- office, and not eithe r t o g i ve a p owe r or tin' s , away a power from the Crown which it Formerly iLit , b sessed. He had asked s e vera l gent l emen connec ted .7', the legal profession what sort of criminal proceedi n " • could be taken against a person who had agreed to CO c letters and had b e t ra y e d hi s trust, an d h e cou ld n ot fil i t o any authority upon whi c h a eriminal indictment could ; preferred. It seemed t o hi m , t h en, that it was ohei°_he that the purpose of the A c t o f A nne was to give wee public security against their letters being oP en the by going through th e P ost - o ffi ce ; an d at " same time. while it gav e th a t secur ity, i t reserved this power, which was then considered an established and r e ,. cognised power. Of course in that case it was not n e n cessary to confer the power by Act of Parliament was or neces-ary to refer to it. It had been tirg7 t i e that this power should be . u se d with more f o rmality a." precaution for the liberty of the su bje c t than hither' o, His Noble Friend (Lord Radror) was prepared to Pro pose a measure providing that, in all c ases o f openl,,r • letters, information upon oath should be a necesee': preliminary for the issuing of the warrant. He ander stood that such was the opinion of a very rity, Lord Denman. that there should be this sort. Considerable discussion had taken O a r ,(3 0 the subject, and he was of opinion that some restrictioa of this sort should be imposed. But his Hon. Fr ien e a; the Member for Finsbury went beyond this, and seem' s _ to consider that letters in the Post-office were e ta ' titled to a peculiar inviolability, so that Or': persons carrying on treason would have sort of security, by the Bill he would 1 '; troduce. He could not, therefore, eons with the 11 4 Member for the introduction of his Bill. But " hi* came from the other House, or was proposed in f " b i o egohnst ;o f t " 07 0 having tie restrictions mentioned, he would give it l a support. One effect which this Bill would have ei ot . l ll , be that of preventing the opening of letters at the l be stance of any foreign Minister. A letter would not opened, in case such a Bill passed, f or th e a lleged P , pose of preventing or detecting an insurrection or CO O spiracy in a foreign count:7. The Bill would rele ° , lo any such danger. He thought that was an unjustifisv use of this power.--(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. G e , ll. tleman had, of course, acted from a sane of public &li He did not believe he was swayed by party or colt,. motives. He did so because lie considered it to be Y.%) ful to the public service ; but in his (Lord J. Russen h ' s (pinion, the use of this power in order to further t esa " views et a foreign Minister was unjust, :Por the reasons he did not wish to see that power exercised. , had expressed what his views were, and he could 0 4 give hi s vote i n f avour of his Hon. Friend, b u t be , be ready t o i mpose such restrict i ons as he had stateere- „ Mr. WARBURTON said, that he thought his 1 -10 1; • Friend the Member for Finsbury had taken the ' 9 %, course which it was expedient to take on this questLa° It appeared to him that there was no middle ect; Abrogate the practice, and do not attempt by new r e ei; lations to set it upon its legs again. He must say a t considered it hi g hly cre dit a bl e to t h e B r i t i s h G ove rnta e w in the ab s tra c t th a t t h e i r power or established prainetir of opening l e tt ers was exerc i se d w i t h so muc h ford as ante. Ile did not mean to say that in certain Par t f lar cases there might no t h ave b een a want o f discrete° e . On the contrary, his opinion was that there had bee° i ea lt want of discretion, b u t s till it was great l y to the 0 .- - t o of the British Government that for twenty-two Ye 6 he they had only issued e i g ht w arrants a yea r on t o / average, and he thought that must be the opinito foreigners themselves. A s t o th e aut h or i ty o n wt . "... this practice rested, it m us t e ith er d epen d on Pi i t rogative or common-law, or on the statute go Anne. With regard to prerogative, only o °,o persons versed in antiquaria n l ore g ave evidence tu ai such a power was exercised in the time of the Edell! and Henries, and that the power therefore r es t e d on P! e 0 ; rogative. But from a certain return moved f o r by bi t , (Mr. Warburton) it would appear th a t t h e warrl e ea ,, issued in those times were not the result o f prerogat'ee but of requests made by the_ rep resenta ti ves of , people, requesting the Crown to i n t er f ere to prerr"nt of • the extortions of the representatives of the Court Rome in this country. Th ere were , i n d ee d, two or thrz . exceptions in the cour se of a centur y, w h ere the w a ne rant., were of a political nature. Of' this character tv- o f . the wa. rents which immediately preceded the death e Edward 11., and the death of Richard 11., but with th ° o , 9 • exceptions no warrants de sc r u ti n i s f ac i en d o o f a P a 'ideal nature were issued. It was the o t h tsate( times h,sne,reona.theewrtspgetoaefwfrd,rtoeeeo. power noffhlhifeerojenesroPetgbpoeraeer! Charlesildeyeiai opening t C lngto lotvulrhteitndi evidence craetecierntl crimp ctssi t m o i iter t iheh o es wxat r itt t iw u rtaahot r srch e u v r e r i filrirsld peo c co o iuhrn t twf i n i t e s e ntt e t e iht: ; the : nee n c x:y, o ine f I n l ocse l ; e same footing as the power of torturing prisoners, e t e p - e bp la ti: e ).ews th b.e : aer o tl i. ju t e l ask it d vene.tdo Ithpt that them c e ,iat m risc tewh especially they ie did re s e n n o t t put day the e a e t power l existed)n t h c Bishop Weodl .Nationulktellig tbe noticed a i tn expressly t all h e it w exist osr pkes a ey, in some of his communications to encer, and it was on the occasion of e a g; . ; ' ference to the proceedings of the Administration or ,`; ne A lL tte l r V b a u i r7 l . e' n an t d ha t t o c, j )m us to ti u fy nic t a h t e io p n rosecution of Biee k se of those proceedings having been taken under the race" Acs—the Act of Anne. Be expressly said t h a t I t power was exercised under the Act recently passed- gri d was therefore c l ear l y no prerogative of the Crown, `-- „f he beli e v e d th a t if t h e House were to take the returns e„, the Committ ees t h ey would find that there was no WO; whatever for the retention of this power. Whether the/ . looked up on t h e matter as related to the criminal or P r' litical bearing, they would find that no really valuable information had been obtained, or at least none coal: usensursete with the soc i a l ev il en d i mmorality w hich r a suited from the u se o f t h e power. Whether t h e y at •, on the inform a ti on f urn i s h ed by the returns of the C °- mittee on the politi ca l or on the criminal warrents, t h ey.. wound find that the exerc i se o f t hi s power was a like Us e less and unnecessary, ii 3 t g Lord HOWICK said that he wi s h e d, b e fore ve t for th e mo ti on o f hi s H on. Fr i end, to assign his redo for doing so. He was not at all prepared to allo w practice of o p en i ng l etters to remain in it s present s taie w He believ e d th a t t h e present system of secresy w as °j be e ' gsther unne ces s ar y.—(ll ear , h ear. ) He was aw are t there wa s som e p ower requ i s i te f or the Secretary o f State' • but this practice of Opening and resealing letters,bet one calculated to creat e a f ee li ng i n t h e cou ntry . ' r. nothing would be safe from the scrutiny of a lVitil lite it s Did the Right Hon. Baronet su pp ose that, after the %I mercus discussions in th a t H ouse , the Post-office tv°" rn , ever be male a rn, ilium for traitorous or seditious e ° o6 • munications? H e m i g h t b e assure d t h at it, w ould ne t, and if . a power w as requ i re d, as h e belie l l that to some ext en t it was , t h ey n e g i n o ta k e the _A of'. his Honour a bl e F r i en d, an d, .11' they ple as ; introduce a clause into Committe e w hi c h would bit a 'l4 t} r• •