The Sun. — London, England, 1836-06-18 00:00:00

-. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNE 17. Their Lordships met at Three o'Clock, and were occupied up to five o'clock with the examination of witnesses on the Stafford Disfranchisement Bill. The first witness called was Mr. Borlock, jun., who stated that he was a shoemaker, and resided in Stafford. He had received several papers of tickets, some having the arms and others the crest impressed on them. These papers he gave to two persons named Wat wood and Booth, who were attending at the polling-booths. There was a difference made in the distribution of the tickets; those with the arms on them being handed to the persons who gave plumpers, and those impressed with the crest being given to the persons who only gave split votes. The parties got the tickets as they were about to leave, after having voted. One set—those with the crest—represented 21., and the other, those with the arms, 61. In the course of the election the value rose. In 1832 the value of the tickets was, split voters' tickets 2/. 10s., and plumpers, 81. The amount was paid to the parties at the house of Mr. Frith. Mr. Sylvester was the next witness produced, and he proved that it was the common conversation against Captain Gronow's friends that the sum of 3/. was to be the price given for single tickets, and 61. for plumpers. He heard this stated at the time he was canvassing. The Counsel and witnesses having been ordered to with draw shortly after five o'clock, the Lord Chancellor took his seat on the Woolsack in order to proceed with the public business. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. :Mr. MACKINNON and others brought up a message from the Commons, requesting their Lordships to allow the Duke of Richmond to be examined as a witness before the Committee appointed to investigate the subject of Tolls and Turnpike Trusts in Great Britain and Ireland. Also, that the Commons had agreed to allow one of their Members (Mr. Williams) to be examined before their Lord ships upon the Stafford Disfranchisement Bill. The Tralee Harbour Bill, the Oyster Fisheries Bill, and the Administration of Justice in the Cinque Ports Bill, were also brought up from the Commons. POST-OFFICE. Lord MELBOURNE seeing his Noble Friend on the cross-bench (the Duke of Richmond), wished to know whether he would postpone his observations on the Report of the Post office Commissioners till some day next week. The Duke of RICHMOND had no objection to consent to this arrangement, but he should like to have an early day, and if the House had no objection be would take Monday next. FRENCH PAPERS. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY brought up the report of the Library Committee, in which it was stated that 1,872 vo lumes of papers and other proceedings connected with the French Legislative Chambers had been presented to their Lordships by the Members of the House of Peers of France. The Noble Earl added that he had given directions that these books should be placed in the library of their Lordships' House, and that the Committee recommended the appointment of an assistant librarian, at a salary of 100!. a year. The Duke of RICHMOND observed, that as the French Peers had been pleased to furnish their Lordships with 1,800 and odd volumes, not only of their Parliamentary papers but of other most valuable works, it was, under such circum stances, no more than right that their Lordships should re turn the compliment by acknowledging their thanks. The Noble Duke then proposed a resolution, expressive of their Lordships' satisfaction at the large and valuable collection of books which had been presented to them by the Peers of France. Ths Earl of DEVON said that their Lordships had a right to be very thankful for this valuable collection, which had been got up with great pains and trouble, and was well deserving of their Lordships' attention. Tire Marquis of L ANSDOWNE had great pleasure in se conding the motion of his Noble Friend, and could not nut express his satisfaction at the e:xellent spirit in which so va luable a collection of public documents connected with the French Legislature had been presented to their Lordships by the Peers of France.—Resolution agreed to. The Duke of RICHMOND then moved that the Library Committee of their Lordships' House should be instructed t, feud to the French Chamber of Peer; the public papers and documents of that House fimm the period the last papers were sent down to the present time.—Agreod to. '.llle Municipal Corporations (English) Amendment Act Bill was read a third time and passed. The Earl of ROSE BERY brought up (a; we underqood) the report of the Committee on the Scotch Entails Bills.-- Laid on the table. FISHERIES. The Marquis of BUTE presented :1 petition from the ship owne-f; and other inhabitants of Rothsay, complaining of the f.frelt disadvantage tinder which they laboured in consequece of the duty placed by Russia and 'Holland on the introduc tion of British herrings, and ' , raying the protection of Parlia ment. He hoped the subject would be taken into considera fon by the Government. Viscount MELBOURNE sad that it was, he believed, at present under the consideration of the Board of Trade. CONFERENCE WITH THE LORDS.—IIIISH MUNICIPAL BILL. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, attended by a largi; body of the Members of the llouse of Commons, appeared at the Bar, to request a conference with their Lnr&hips on the subject of the amendment to the Irish Municipal Bill. The Conference was agreed to, and consisted of the following Noble Lords :—The Lord President, the Lord Privy Seal, the Duke of Cleveland, the Earl of Minto, the Bishop of Bris tol, Lord Crewe, and Lord Ilatherton. It was ordered to be hold in Committee-room, No. 5. After an absence of about a quarter of au hour the Con fere.nce returned, when The Marquis of LANSDOWNE announced that the Con ference on the part of the Commons was conducted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. His Lordship then proceeded to read the reasons of the Commons for disagreeing to the amendments. Lord MELBOURNE then moved that the Bill as amended by the Commons be presented and taken into consideration on Friday next.—Agreed to. The Earl of li ADDINGTON said that the conference bad not been carried on in the usual manner, or according to the standing orders of the House. It appeared that the managers on the part of their Lordships had stood uncovered instead of sitting covered. The Marquis of L ANSDOWNE said that through some inadvertency the Noble Lords present at the conference had, during the greater part of the conference, stood with hats off; hut that was not until they had sat down covered on coming into the room. As this was not according to custom, he thought the Noble Earl was acting most properly in drawing the attention of the House to it ; but at the same time he hoped no advantage would be taken of it in future. Their Lordships then adjourned to Monday. ROUSE OF COMMONS, JUNE 17. The SPEAKER took the Chair at four o'clock. Sir H. PARNELL moved the further consideration of the Report on the Dundee Water Works. Sir G. was of great importance that the town of Dundee should have a good supply of water. The expense had originally been estimated at 5,600/., and subsequently, in consequence of that estimate not having been carefully prepared, it was increased to 7,0001. ; and subse quently it had been raised as high as 13,000/. ; upon which a clause had been introduced which altogether changed the cha. racter of the measure. Under these circumstances he should feel it his duty to move that the clause do not stand part of the Bill. Sir H. PARNELL said the town stood very much in need of a supply of water, but the alteration complained of would be highly advantageous to the rate-payers; for instead of having to pay 3,0001. or 4,000/. a year for pumping, as they would be obliged to do under the original plan, they would only have to pay the interest of forty thousand pounds for extending the line. Sir GEORGE CLERK explained. He hoped as the case was rather a novel one the Speaker would favour the House with his opinion. After a few words from Mr. CHALMERS, in suppert of the clause, The SPEAKER said the question was one of considerable importance, and proceeded to point out the difference between the clause as it stood in the present Bill and that originally introduced; and eventually, the clause was ordered to be struck out. BRIGHTON RAILWAY. Lord GEORGE LENNOX brought up the report of the Committee on Stephenson's Line for the above Railway. Mr. ALSTON brought up a Special Report from the Committee on Rennie's Line. Both were ordered to lie on the table. On the motion of Sir OSWALD MOSELE Y, Thring's Estate Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be com mitted. Mr. BALFOUR brought up the report of the Glasgow old Falkirk railway Bill. On the motion of Lord ARTHUR HILL, the Ban Re senvir Bill was read a third time an A d passed. CANAL NAVIGTION. Mr. MACKINNON presented a petition from certain owners of property in the parish of Marylebone, complaining of a great depreciation of property by reason of the increase of canal navigation. HENEAGE'S ESTATE BILL.' On the motion of Mr. A. SANDFORD this Bill was read a second time. WESTMINSTER SMALL DEBTS. On the motion of Mr. BYNG the Committee on this Bill of tained an extension of time till Friday next to make their report. MEDICAL ATTENDANCE AT CORONERS' INQUESTS. Mr. WIL KS presented a petition from seven physicians of Worcester, and other medical men of that City and County, swaying some provision might be made by which medical men might receive compensation for their attendance before Coro ner's Inquests. The Hon. Gentleman also presented a petition from a place in Barks, in favour of the Registration of Births, Marriages, and Deaths Bill. CHURCH RATE. Mr. WILK S stated that, in consequence of indisposition, he had been unable to bring forward a measure respecting Church Rates; but that he should endeavour not to let the im,R, Jc p ip34 : away without making some effort to relieve the ome way or other from those imposts. EAR E3' DIA MARITIME OFFICERS. F, litg. NG, in presenting thepetition of which e, begged to assure the Hon. Gentleman ts e ke e . Board of Controul) that he did not par • Ti n th r tations thrown out by certain parties against ff 0 . Gie n ; on the contrary he (Mr. Young) believed ail,' influenced by the very best intentions, al tbwame time he thought the course pursued by him had operated with great injustice towards the petitioners. At the term: . tiation of the East India Company's charter the trade was ~~ ~. • thrown open, anct - a great number o e commanders ore** vessels were in consequence thrown of employment. A bill had passed that House awarding c R ensation, but by regulations reulations adopted to carry the provisions of the Act into effect, great injustice was done to the petitioners.—( Hear.) The question had been brought by petition before the Pro prietors, who unanimously decided that the parties were en titled to the compensation claimed, and recommending the Court of Directors to admit the claim of these parties. Not withstanding both the Court of Directors and the Proprietors , have concurred in that recommendation, that the grant should be allowed, they have been refused by the Board of Controul, and they now saw no means of obtaining it, but by appealing to that House. Such were the facts of the case. They had been pre vented from following their profession by the discontinuance of the Company's trade, and in his opinion they had established a clear and incontestible right to demand, at the hands of the Court of Directors, the compensation that had been provided for the other officers of that service. He would not trouble the House further ; but as he was wholly unacquainted with the opposition which might be offered to the petition, he trusted the House would oblige him with a very short reply. These gentlemen had an undoubted right to compensation, ac cording to the rule as laid down by the Board of Control. An Hon. MEMBER, whose name was unknown, had been requested to support the prayer of the petition, which he did with very great pleasure, because the claim was one of justice, and every one of the best feelings of man must be enlisted in their favour. He was well acquainted with the service, to which England owed much. All the science which had been applied to naval matters for the last 40 years owed its origin to the East India service. Within that time not even a junior officer in that service but was competent to navigate the largest of his Majesty's ships to any part of the world. He would appeal to the person who was at the head of the scientific department of the Admiralty, from which source he received the information he possessed. The Officers of the East India Company were without exception the most gallant and the most devoted he had ever witnessed. The Hon. Mem ber concluded by giving his most cordial support to the petition. Sir JOHN C. HOBHOUSE could assure the Hon. Member who had just sat down, that, no man more than himself estimated the value of the services of the officers of the East India Company. He questioned not their merits, but he must confess after looking over again the papers with respect to the particular case in question, he had arrived at the same conclusion to which he had come before. It was with the greatest pain that he felt compelled from a sense of public duty to resist those claims, more especially when, as stated by the lion. Gentleman, (Mr. Young,) they were recommended by the Court of Directors and the Court of Proprietors. But the Hon. Gentleman made a slight mis take when he stated that the Court of Directors took in the first instance the same view as they did now. They had at first decided that these claims were not admissible, but they afterwards changed their opinion. He, however, had no reason to differ from the opinion of Lord Ellenborough, when that Noble Lord was at the head of the Board of Controul. A total misapprehension prevailed as to the meaning of the Act of Parliament. It was never contemplated that the power of that House was to govern individual cases. If it was to be occupied in that way, the whole time of the House would be taken up, to the exclusion of all other business. He had certainly given the most attentive consi deration to the case of the petitioners ; and after the most mi nute investigation, he must say that he fully concurred in the decision of Lord Ellenborough, that the petitioners had proved no prospective loss. On these grounds it appeared to him that the present was not a ease for Parliament.—( Hear.) Mr. ROBINSON thought the only question for the House. was, whether these parties had been injured by the discontinu ance of the East India Company's trade with China. In his opinion they bad, and their case was one of peculiar hardship. and he might add of injustice. The Right lion. Baronet had stated that the Court of Proprietors had nothing to do with it. liedoubtedlv the Court of Proprietors had no pecuniary interest in the matter, because their dividend was secured to to them ; but they had a right to interfere, because they were one of the three parties to the contract which had been made between the Company,the Proprietor,and the Maritime Officers. He was only anxious that justice should be done to ail parties. He was not aware of the intentions of his Hon. Friend, neither could he then say whether he would take any ulterior pro ceedings upon behalf of other officers ; but the case was one which the House ought—in fact it was incumbent upon the House to enquire into the subject, and take some steps for securing. iwitiee for the parties. Mr. PR :El), after detailing the state in which the ques tion was when he was Secretary to the Board of Control. said that he thought there was a strong claim on the part of more than one of the cfficers of the East India Com pany.—( Hear.) With respect to the statements of the Right Honourable Baronet, that Lord Ellenhorough had given a decided opinion on this subject, he begged to say that that Noble Lord had not given any decided opinion on the subject ; he had only given an opinion on the case before him, stating at the time, that if a case of a different complexion came before him upon the subject, he should give it his consi deration. Mr. V. SMITH did not think that the petitioners had made out a good claim for compensation. Mr. G. F. YOUNG would not occupy the house further with this discussion ; he merely rose to give notice that on the 7th of July he would move that the petition he had just pre sented he referred to a Select Committee. IRISH CORPORATION BILL—LORDS' AMEND MENTS. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER appeared at the Bar of the House, and being called upon, said, that as Chairman of the Committee appointed by the House to draw up reasons to offer to the House of Lords for disagreeing to certain amendments made by their Lordships in the Irish Municipal Corporations Bill, he was directed to state they had drawn up those reasons, and to report the same to the House. The Report having been presented, was read by the Clerk. It began by stating the necessity that a good correspondence should exist between the two Houses of Parliament for the enactment of good laws, and to promote the security, peace, and tranquillity of the United Kingdom—it stated that the Bill for the better regulation of Corporations in Ireland was framed on the principle of a reform of abuses, retaining a system of Municipal Government, but that the Bill which was returned from the House of Lords abolished Municipal Corpo rations in Ireland altogether, and placed the Corporate funds under a Board of Commissioners.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The Bill, as amended, contained an entirely new principle, and a new title, and must, therefore, be considered as an original measure—that from an earnest desire of preser ving a good understanding and correspondence between the two Houses, and considering it essential to the well-being of thz.. Monarchy, that House had proceeded to take into conside ration the amendments made by the House of Lords, and they hoped that the measure founded thereon would meet with the concurrence of the other House of Parliament. The Clerk then proceeded to read in detail the various amendments made by the House of Commons, with the rea sons therefore. yV Sir ROBERT PEEL hoped that it would be distinctly understood that the reasons were given under protest, and that they were not the opinions of the entire House.— (Opposition cheers.) It was impossible to deny that arguments might not be urged for not agreeing to those amend ments, but that could not be done without opening the whole question and provoking a lengthened debate. By withhold ing or not provoking that discussion, he trusted that it would be understood that these reasons were given under protest, and with a distinct reservation on that side of the House. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the understanding on such occasions, and as had been the case last Session was, that these reasons were to be considered as the reasons of the majority.—( Hear, hear, hear.) As re spected the minority of that House, the matter was a mere ex parte proceeding. He would suggest that the same course be now pursued as was done on the former occasion. They were the opinions of that side of the House, and of course did not in any way preclude the gentlemen of the other side. Sir R. PEEL doubted whether it would be a good prece dent to set, that the report of a Committee should be taken and received as the opinion of the House. Mr. S. RICE said they were read as a mere matter of course. The Clerk then proceeded with the reading of the reasons, which having been agreed to by the House, The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. P. TnortmsoN, the ATTORNEY-GENERAL, and a great number of Members, proceeded to the House of Lords, to request a Conference. Petitions against tithes, and against the Lords' Amend ments, were presented by Mr. Smith, Mr. O'Brien, and Mr. Sheil, from places in Limerick and Tipperary. Mr. F. SHAW, presented a petition from a place, the name of which did not reach us, in favour of the Lords' Amend ments. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. In reply to a question from Mr. SANFORD, Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he had on a former oc casion announced that at the end of the month of June, he should move that Orders of the Day take precedence of mo tions on Tuesdays and Thursdays. They had not yet arrived at the end of June ; when they did, he should be happy, with a view to forwarding the Bills before the House, to submit such a proposition. It was unnecessary at the present moment : for the gentlemen who had notices on the paper for next week, had one and all consented to give way, and allow the prece dence to the orders of the day.---( Hear, hear.) Sir R. PEEL took that opportunity of suggesting that it would be very desirable to give public notice of the days on which particular measures were really to be brought forward ; so that when the House separated on a Friday night, Hon. Members might have an opportunity of preparing their minds for the discussion of important matters, with the certainty of their being brought forward on a particular day.--( Hear.) Lord J. RUSSELL could not refrain from saying that during the twenty years he had had the honour of sitting in Parliament, he had never known such ample notice given of the days on which particular subjects would be brought forward, as had been given in the course of the present session. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND) BILL. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER appeared at the Bar and said: I have to report, Sir, that having been to the Lords to desire a conference on the subject matter of the amendments made by them in the Bill entitled " An Act for the Regulation of Municipal Corporations in Ireland," the Lords do agree to the said conference, and appoint the same to be held presently, in Committee -loo m No. 5. The managers of the Conference, attended by a large number of Members from the Ministerial benches, then left On their return in about a quarter of an hour, the House. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER again ap peared at the Bar and said : I Conference r inn r a ep act or e t, a o M n ther.part Speaker, of that the managers of the havethe Lords v e b r y e thed theirLo r d Presidentreasons for of the disagreeing U nc o a n t d h e o t hers), Lords amendments, and have left the Bill and the amendments with that House. THE SUN, lAON CUT *C H OF IRELAND. t On'theortitistethe 4v for the further consideration of the report on the Tithe Commutation Bill being moved by Lord JOHN RUSSELL. Sir G. SINCLAIR rose for the purpose of asking the Noble Lord why the Church of Ireland Bill, which stood at the head of the list, was to be postponed? The conduct of his Majesty's Ministers on this question, when in power, was very different to that which they pursued when they sat on that (the Opposition) side of the House. The House beard of nothing then but the difficulty of settling the tithe question in Ireland. A vast deal was said about the appropriation clause, and they were told that it was impossible to pacify Ire land until a measure, of which it formed a part, became the law of the land. How stood the fact now? Week after week, and month after month, the question remained in abey ance, and was treated with as little ceremony as if it were a measure for lighting and paving the town of Belfast. He could not reconcile this course with his notions of what con stituted manly, straightforward, statesmanlike, and patriotic conduct. There was only one reason which he could assign for the conduct of his Majesty's Ministers in this respect. It was, that they found the appropriation clause a very conve nient millstone to hang round the neck of the Lords—a very serviceable catapulta with which to break down the barriers of the House they wished to get rid of.—( Cries of, " Oh, oh I") He hoped a day would be fixed for the full and fair discussion of the measure. At all events, he wished to know whether it was to be wholly extinguished or proceeded with ?—( Hear, hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not help observing that it certainly would seem that the Hon. Member who had just sat down had not paid the slightest attention to the events of the last few years.—( Hear, and a laugh.) The Hon. Mem ber charged him with having pretended a great anxiety for the settlement of the Church question in Ireland. Undoubtedly he had not pretended, but felt a great anxiety for the settle ment of that question. Acting upon this feeling, he had in the year 1834—being then one of the King's Ministers—taken a part in framing a measure for the settlement of the question, which was proposed in Parliament, and carried in the House of Commons; at the same time declaring the opinion with re spect to the appropriation clause which he had restated a few days since.—( Hear, hear, hear.) What became of this Bill ? It did not pass the other House, and was consequently lost. — In 1835 his Majesty's Ministers, so soon as they had had time to consider the question, proposed another Bill on the subject of the Tithes and Church in Ireland, and that Bi!1 was like wise thrown out by the House of Lords.—(Cheers.) These were the facts of the case ; facts of which the Hon. Gentle. man seemed to be wholly and completely ignorant. Another Bill had been brought in, and that Bill would be proceeded with, although he (Lord John Russell) might not entertain tbp hopes which he had cherished in the two preceding year', of its passing into a law.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to the Bill which he now proposed should be taken into considera tion, namely, the English Tithe Bill—it was brought into the House early in February; it had since been the subject of frequent discussion ; it was a question of very great import ance ; it was one with which the interests of a large number of persons were materially connected, and on which he hoped Parliament might be brought to agree, inasmuch as it involved uo such question of party difference as arose in the case of the Church of Ireland.—( Hear, hear ) Under these circum stances, he really did not see why a question brought forward early in the month of April, should Le postponed for one in troduced a few months later. The one question might suit the lion. Gentleman better than the other. He might have pre pared an oration on the subject of the Irish Church which he was impatient to deliver, but if he would have the goodness to make it on the English Tithe Bill, he had no doubt it would be equally well received by the House, and equally appropriate to the subject.—(Cheers and laughter.) IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT BILL. In reply to a question from Mr. MACLEAN, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL expressed his very great regret that the Imprisonment for Debt Bill had not yet been introduced in the other House of Parliament. The measure was in the hands of his Right Hon. and Learned Friend the Lord Chancellor, however, and he had every reason to believe that in a few days it would be submitted by him to the House of Lords.—( [lear, hear.) Mc. MACLEAN wished to know whether, supposing the Lord Chancellor's other avocations prevented hint from intro ducing the Bill into the House of Lords, it would be brought forward in that House (the House of Commons) without fur ther delay ? Lord JOHN RUSS t:LL said that the Lord Chancellor had consitkred the subject with the utmost attention. It was one of very great importance, and required the fullest cortsi de;•ation ; but he ( Lord John Russell) knew that the Learned Lord would, at a vury early period, be prepared to submit it to the other House of Parliament.—( Hear. ) UNIVERSITY OF DURHAM. In reply to a question from Mr. ARTHUR TREVOR, Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that it ,sas not his inten tion to propose any further measure with reference to the Uni versity of Durham], than that contemplated in the Report of the Church Commission. TITHE COMMUTATION BILL. The original question having been put and carried, and the Order of the Day for the further consideration of the Report having been read, Lord JOHN RUSSELL reminded the House that when the subject was last under consideration, he had stated that although they had been some time in Committee upon it, yet the attendance had not been so numerous, nor had the sense of the house been so fairly takem on the 34th clause, as to justify him in proposing that the Bill should pass, with. out affording them an opportunity of pronouncing some more decided judgment upon that particular provision. The effect of that clause was, that if it should be found in certain cases that the amount of tithe paid, or the amount of the compo sition for tithe, was above 75 per cent. on the gross value, it should be reduced to 75 ; that, in cases where it fell below GO, it should be raised to 60 ; and that in special and pecu liar cases it might be fixed at between 60 and 70. He had since considered the subject, with a view to meet, if possible, the objections of those who had spoken and voted against this clause as one which, in their opinion, would commit a very great injustice against the landowners. the result of that consideration was, tit:. t he gave notice of a motion for the re-committal of the Bill, for the purpose of effecting a very considerable change in this enactment. That change would be a modification of this clause, as the former clause was a mo dification of the 33d clause originally proposed. It was es sentially necessary that that clause should undergo some modi fication, because it was evident that in many cases the sum of money taken as composition fell very much below what ought to be taken as its fair amount ; and it was represented—with great justice, as he thought—that it would be very unfair if persorrs who from their own leniency, or other creditable mo tives, had taken a small amount of composition for a certain period, were to be fixed for ever to that precise amount ; while others, who had got as high a rate of composition as they possibly could, were benefitted in proportion to the tena city with which they had insisted on exacting the utmost far thing. However, so much alarm having been created by the principle he originally proposed to adopt in the 34th clause, he now proposed to modify it in a different manner, and to fix a limit beyond which the tithe should not be varied by the Commissioners. He now proposed that the Commissioners, upon a consideration of the circumstances of the case, should ascertain the gross value of the tithe and should have the power of raising or diminishing the sum to be paid in future, with this limitation—that they should not raise or diminish it more than one-fifth beyond the amount paid for the last seven years. He proposed, likewise, that the Commissioners should, by the Ist of May next, make a Report to his Majesty, which should be laid before Parliament, stating what rules and regu lations they thought fit to adopt, according to which this amount—never exceeding the one-fifth—should be estimated. This would the better enable Parliament to decide upon the rule they would lay down, which would naturally be founded partly on the state of the different districts, and partly on the proportion which they should be told the sum taken bore to the actual tithe. He had thought it necessary to give notice that he should propose this clause in lieu of the 35th : at the same time he must express his opinion, that the clause he originally proposed was founded on the principles of justice, and his regret that it had met with so little support when first brought forward. Mr. GOULBURN said, that if he understood the state ment of the Noble Lord, it referred to an entire alteration in the principle of the Bill as originally proposed. If this were the case, be submitted that the clause ought to be printed to enable the House to consider it with that attention which its importance demanded. Sir R. INGLIS wished to urge upon the Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) the expediency of giving more time for the consideration of this clause. The House then resolved itself into committee. The clause (35) proposed by Lord John Russell was then brought up and read. Mr. HODGES - suggested that as the clause involved mat ters of a complicated nature it would be mueh better to post pone the consideration of it until it had been printed. He re commended that the debate on it should be postponed until it came regularly before the House. Mr. GOULBURN was quite incapable of discussing the clause with anything like satisfation to himself till be had seen it in print, and had had time to consider the probable effect of it. Mr. SHAW LE FEVRE thought that the adoption of this clause would be a decided improvement of the Bill, and would materially assist the working of it. He felt obliged to the Noble Lord for adopting it. He did not see the necessity for postponing the discussion of it, but still he thought that there could be no objection to doing so. Mr. E. A. SANFORD approved of the principle of the clause, because it gave a greater discretionary power to the Commissioners. - Mr. G 0 ULBUR N observed that it was probable that the Hon. Member for Hampshire (Mr. Shaw Lefevre) had seen the clause, as he had expressed so strong an opinion in favor of it ; but this was not the case with the rest of the committee. He once more suggested the necessity of putting the com mittee in possession of the clause with which they had to deal. He could not conceive that his proposition would be regarded as unreasonable. Mr. BL AMIRE said that he did not perceive that there was any difficulty in understanding the clause, although he had not seen it. He thought that it was highly advantageous that it had been brought forward. By means of it they would be enabled to guard against many cases of injust ice, which other wise would have been met with. Viscount EBRINGTON said he hoped the clause would be agreed to. Hon. Members could state any objection to it, on bringing up the Report. Mr. ESTCOURT obie-cted to the clause being inserted in the Bill, without the fullest discussion. Mr. BENNETT had no objection to give large powers to the Commissioners. Indeed, he thought the clause did not go far enough in this respect, for there were many cases in which the Commissioners ought to have the power of lowering the N, SATURDAY, JUNE 18, 1836. commutation beyond the twenty per cent. Although most anxious for the disposal of this Bill, which he considered as calculated to do much good to the country, he certainly thought this clause ought to be maturely considered before it was adopted. Mr. CAYLEY looked upon the clause as a great im provement. After some further discussion, the clause was agreed to. The House then resumed, .and the Chairman reported progress. Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the Report should be taken into consideration on Monday next. He also moved that the clauses should be printed separately, and that the Bill as amended be printed. REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND MARRIAGES BILLS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed that several amend ments had been made in these Bills. The Right Hon. Gen tleman opposite (Mr. Goulburn) objected to the provisions of the Bill. Perhaps the Right Hon. Gentleman would con sent to take the sense of the House upon those objections on the third reading. Mr. GOULBURN was understood to say that, if consi dered more convenient, he should discuss the provisions to which he objected on the third reading. Lord STANLEY thought the House was bound to take Tito its consideration the situation in which a class of persons, the parish clerks, would be placed by this Bill. Some of those persons received in fees from 1001. to 1501. Now, al hough he could easily imagine it might not be desirable that those persons should fill the office of registrars, yet it might be proper, when it could be conveniently done, that those persons should fill those offices. He wished to know whe ther meang could not be taken to afford compensation to those persons? Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought there would be very great difficulty in providing a remedy for the grievances re ferred to by the Noble Lord. Until the Bill was in operation they could not say what loss those persons would sustain. He did not well know how clauses for compensation could be in troduced into the Bill. REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS BILL. The report of this Bill was received, and the Bill was or dered to be read a third time on Monday se'nnight. CHURCH OF ENGLAND BILL. Lord J. RUSSELL moved the second reading of this Bill. Sir R. INGLIS said his objection to the Bill was, that it made the bishops of the Church of England, instead of being great proprietors, stipendiaries of the State. The apportion ment of the salaries he considered of minor importance. As he believed that any opposition which he could offer to the present motion would not be in the slightest degree success ful, he should content himself with entering his protest against the principle of the Bill. After a few words from Lord J. RUSSELL, which were quite inaudible, Mr. POULTER said that this was a question which ought to be completely discussed and receive the fullest considera tion. The object to be obtained was one of no less import ance than the real efficiency of the Established Church. He should not oppose the motion, but he must express his hope that the Noble Lord would fix some day on which the ques tion might be discussed fully. Mr. PE ASE considered it his duty to state that it was in tended when this Bill came into the Committee to propose a provision for the see of Durham, previous to any portion of the funds being set apart for Manchester and other places, which were in a situation to provide for their own wants with out abstracting any thing from the poor see of Durham. After a short conversation the motion was agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be committed on Thursday. REGISTRATION OF VOTERS BILL. On the motion of the ATTORNEY-GENERAL this Bill was committed. On the 49th clause, Mr. W. M. PRIED proposed an amendment for the pur pose of allowing counsel to appear in suppert of votes before the revising barristers. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the amendment. The Committee divided— For the amendment Against it Majority ... 68 The original clause was then agreed to. On clause 50, which gives the right of voting to charitable trustees, being proposed, Mr. G. F. YOUNG proposed as an amendment that no trustee should be allowed to vote who was not a trustee for property of the amount . of 301. a year, and who was not in ac tual possession of the rents and profits. Mr. C. ROSS also objected to the clause, on the ground that it gave the power of voting to charitable trustees. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL contended that it was but just that all property should he represented. Mr. G. F. YOUNG said, that according to the principle laid down by the Right Hon. Gentleman (the Attorney-Gene ral), the property owned by females should he represented. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed, that the pro perty possessed by females was deprived of representation, precisely for the reason that property belonging to minors and lunatics could not be represented—namely, that from its very mture it was unfit to have the privilege of representation granted to it. The property under the superintendence of trustees, however, was capable of being represented, and there fore it was the object of the present clause that it should be represented. Lord STANLEY thanked the Right Hon. Gentleman for his illustration respecting minors and lunatics, as it appeared to him to bear precisely on the present clause ; for he was per suaded that on the very same ground on which the guardians of the property of minors and lunatics could not be repre sented, trustees, to whom it was intended by the present clause to give the right of representation, should be excluded,— namely, because they have no beneficial interest whatever to entitle them to vote. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said, that if the Noble Lord would look at the words of the clause, he would see that those trustees only who exercised a controlling power over the property of which they were appointed guardians were cm. powered to vote. Mr. C. ROSS said that the effect of this clause would be that nominal charities would be created in every part of the country, in order to give a fictitious right of voting. Mr. FOSTER was in favour of some amendment of the Reform Act, as it stood at present, with reference to trustees, for he knew instances in which men having a trusteeship, without any beneficial interest whatever, were allowed to vote, though he, who was similarly circumstanced, had his claim disallowed. The Committee then divided, when the numbers were Against Mr. Young's amendment For it Majority against the amendment —2l On our re-admission to the gallery we found Lord STANLEY objecting to this clause as being opposed to the provisions of the Reform Bill. By the statute of Wil liam, trustees in actual possession were allowed to vote ; but by the statute of Anne which followed, no trustees were allowed to vote unless they were in actual possession of the rents and profits for their use and benefit. In the Reform Bill there was one clause with regard to the trustees which de clared negatively that no person who was not in possession of the rents and profits should be allowed to vote. This clause did not certainly say that they should be in possession of the rents and profits for their own use and benefit; but by a sub sequent clause it was distinctly declared, in conformity with the statute of Anne, that no trustee should be allowed to vote unless he were in possession for his own use and benefit. It was rather extraordinary that the latter restrictive clause was that relied on by the Attorney-General as a justification for the change now proposed, which must have the effect of mate rially enlarging this class of voters. He asked the Committee whether they would, in the face of the statute of Anne, in the face of the abuses which his Hon. Friend (Mr. C. Ross) had alluded to, as the inevitable result of their sanctioning this proposal : he asked them whether they would, in the face of common sense and the plain meaning of the Reform Act, consent to the creation of a number of faggot votes grounded on no beneficial interest whatever, ?—( Hear, hear, from the Opposition.) If this clause passed a man having 601. a year out of a school would have nothing to do but to make two or three trustees, and they would thereby be entitled to rote for Members of counties, they having no direct beneficial interest in the property. He called upon the Committee to reject the clause.—( Cheers. ) The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the Noble Lord happened to differ in his opinion of the right of a trustee to vote under the Reform Bill from the Chief Justice of the King's Bench.—(Hear, hear.) He had himself heard the Chief Justice declare, in the case of the parish of Mary-la bone, in which a question as to the right of trustees to vote arose, that under the Reform Bill a trustee had the right of voting. And any judge in England might, he thought, have expressed the same opinion. Before the Reform Bill passed, trustees in possession had, under the Act of William, a right of voting. Lord STANLEY (across the table)—But what do you say to the statute of Anne ? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL did not mean to pass over the statute of Anne. But under the statute of William, trus tees in possession were considered to be entitled to vote. Then came the statute of Anne, which declared nobody entitled to vote unless he were in possession of the rents and profits for his own use and benefit. A doubt existed whether the statute of William was repealed by that of Anne ; and then came the Reform Bill, in which was inserted the statute of Wil liam in totidem verbis. When, therefore, that statute was ex pressly re-enacted by law, how could the Noble Lord argue that it was repealed by the Reform Act ?—(Hear, hear.) By a subsequent clause of the Reform Act, however, it was de clared that trustees were not entitled to vote unless they held for their own use and benefit. Taking this clause by it self, trustees certainly appeared to be excluded from the right of voting ; but considering the two clauses together, it did appear to be a reasonable construction that when the trus tee was in possession as a mere receiver he should not have the power of voting ; but that where hd was intrusted with a discre tionary power over the rents and profits, his claim should be admitted, because sub modo he had a beneficial interest in the property. —( Hear, hear.) That interpretation of the Act ap pearing to receive the most general approval he had embodied it in the present clause, which he trusted would be approved of by the Committee.—( Cheers. ) Mr. PR AE D contended that unless, as argued by the At torney-General, the words " for his own use" included trus tees having a regulation or control over the trust funds, the objection taken by the Noble Lord was not removed. He should certainly take the opinion of the Committe upon the point. Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed, that the object of the 26th clause of the Reform Bill was to place the law in regard to trustees in the same state as it was placed by the Act of William 111. • I ........... ____ Mr. W. MILES was of opinion that the bona fide adminis trator of a charitable bequest had a valid claim to vote. After a few words from Mr. PR YME, The Committee divided on the question, that the clause stand part of the Bill-- Ayes Noes Majority The clause was accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. On the Chairman proposing clause 52, Mr. PRAED moved that it be omitted. He objected to it on two grounds ; first, as an infringement of the provisions of the Reform Bill ; and, secondly, as being a disfranchising clause introduced into a Bill, of which the title and preamble were of an enfranchising nature. The clause of the Reform Bill which the clause before the Committee went to repeal was one introduced by the House of Lords, and on its being sent down from that House, the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member for Kilkenny both expressed their approval of it. Unless, therefore, it could be shown that it had operated pre judicially, the House would be stultifying its proceedings by repealing it. The only ground of objection which, he be lieved, could be found to the class of voters now proposed to be disfranchised was, that they were unfavourable to the pre sent Government. That, however, was not a valid ground, or one which the Legislature could entertain. His objection, however, extended as well to the manner in which the clause was introduced, as to the matter it contained. If it was found necessary to meddle with the Reform Bill, it ought to be done openly, and the necessity ought to be stated in the preamble. The measure before the House was entitled " A Bill for the more effectual registration of persons entitled to vote in the election of Members to serve in Parliament ," and its preamble was of a similar enfranchising character. How, then, was a voter to know that, by a disfranchising clause smuggled into the centre of it, his right of voting was taken away ?—( Hear, hear.) He should certainly take the sense of the committee upon the question. Sir H. VE RNE Y expressed his conviction that the clause of the Reform Bill proposed to be repealed was introduced into it by mistake, and it was therefore glaring that Ministers had availed themselves of the present opportunity to destroy its operation. Mr. C URTE I S and Mr. BAINE S expressed themselves favourable to the preservation of the clause as it stood. Mr. EWA RT considered that the clause proposed to be omitted, so far from being an infringement, was in strict con formity with the principles of the Reform Bill. . . . The Committee then divided on the question that the clause stand part of the Bill— For the motion Against it __ . . 86 .... 44 Majority _ 42 Clauses 64, 65, and 66 were also agreed to. On the motion for agreeing to the 67th clause, Mr. PRAED moved that the chairman do report progress and ask leave to sit again. The motion being agreed to, the chairman accordingly re ported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Monday. CHARITABLE TRUSTEES BILL. Mr. VERNON SMITH moved the second reading of th© Charitable Trustees Bill. Mr. C. ROSS moved the adjournment of the House, as several Members who were interested in the Bill were absent ; not having expected that it would come on at that late hour. Mr. SMITH was not aware of any serious objection that could be entertained to the Bill. The principle of it was sanctioned in the Alunicipal Corporation Bill of last year. Mr. C. ROSS observed that there were some very impor tant clauses in the Bill, and he hoped his Hon. Colleague would not press it. Mr. V. SMITH said that his Honourable Colleague had not stated one reason why the Bill should not be read a second time. Mr. A. TREVOR declared that although it was a rare thing for him to vote with his Majesty's Ministers, he would vote for the second reading of the Bill; as any objections to it (and he entertained several) might be most advantageously urged in the Committee. Mr. V. SMITH stated that the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford had that morning told him that he would not oppose the recond reading of the Bill. Mr. PRA ED opposed the Bill. Mr. C. ROSS said, that, after what had taken place, he would not press his motion for adjournment. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Wednesday. GRAND .JURIES (IRELAND) BILL. Lord MORPETEI moved the second reading of the Grand Juries (Ireland) Bill. After a short conversation, in which Lord Clements, Col. Perceval, Mr. French, Sir Robert Ferguson, and Lord Mor peth participated, the Bill was read a second time, and ordered to he committed on Wednesday. The remaining Orders of the Day were than disposed of, and at Ten minutes before One o'clock this morning, the !louse adjourned. STATUE OF GEORGE 111. This statue was to have been placed on the pedestal pre pared for it on the 4th of this month, that day having been the anniversary of the birth of the monarch whom it is in tended to commemorate. Its erection on that day did not take place in consequence of an injunction from the Court of Chancery, obtained at the suit of Mr. Williams, a partner in the House of Ransom and Co., who considers that his premises will be injured by the site chosen for the statue, which is in Pall-mall -east, and nearly opposite the banking establishment of the firm. The statue itself reflects the highest cred't on the genius, taste, and mechanical skill of Mr. M. Cotes Wyatt, the artist. It represents the monarch on horseback ; the horse is not in an attitude of progressive motion, which would have been incorrect, because the action of advancing in a statue on a pedestal always conveys the idea of the figure being about to leave the station, and topple from the position in which it is placed. The horse in this group is reined back by the curb-rein, and thrown upon his hanches. This attitude has enabled the artist to deli neate the muscles and form of the animal with great effect, and he has availed himself of it to display a correct know ledge of the anatomy of the horse, and to pourtray it with a spirit that gives the figure the appearance of life and ani mation. There is nothing outre or theatrical in this horse; he is a close study from nature, and represents a splendid specimen of a charger. The figure of the King has all the peculiarities of outline and general appearance by which George 111. was distinguished. There is nothing foppish or absurd in the co3tume ; it is precisely such as was worn by the good old king, and bespeaks most plainly the sim plicity of his manner. The countenance and the whole person of the monarch are expressed in a very felici tous manner, and render the statue an exact representation of the original, even to the very minutia) of identity. Another excellence of the group is, that it is not supported by the adventitious but clumsy contrivance of a piece of rock, or an ancillary serpent to uphold the legs of the horse ; neither does that animal rest, like. an opos sum, upon his tail, in order to secure the back sinews of his legs from being strained and broken. The whole is elabo rately finished, and comes as near to Nature as the sub stance of which it is composed can come. It is at present of a beautiful gold colour, and it has been proposed to cover it with a varnish or cold enamel, which will preserve its present appearance for many years. It is in height between ten and eleven feet, being of what is called the heroic size, but not colossal ; the pedestal is about eight feet in height, so that the whole will be rather under twenty feet. When erected it will form an additional ornament to the part of the town in which it may be placed. On Thursday last (Nov. 5) the Ambassador of the Sultan of the Maldine Islands paid the annual visit to our Governor. He was received on shore from his boat by a guard of honour of the Ceylon Rifle Regiment. He carried on his head a letter rolled in a handkerchief, from his mas ter, and was 'preceded by persons bearing the usual tribute of cowries, sweatmeats, salts, and dried fish and mats. He was introduced at the King's house to his Excellency the Go vernor, to whom he presented the letter, and who conversed with him through the medium of an interpreter, for some time. —Colombo Observer. When Hogg visited London, a literary friend took him to the Opera, where the Shepherd soon gave unequivo cal symptoms of drowsiness; yet, to any inquiry implying a doubt of his feeling entertained, he replied—" Eh, I like it gae weel, Sir." When he did give his attention to any por tion of the performance, his eyes were observed to be fixed on Mr. Costa, the conductor. At length he could restrain his curiosity no longer, but exclaimed, " Wha and what the deil's that fallow that keeps aye fugle.ing yonder ?"—New Monthly. MURDER OF A WIFE BY HER HUSBAND.— A most savage act was perpetrated at Passage West, on Fri day night last, the particulars of which it is our painful duty to lay before our readers this post. It appeared that the de ceased, Anastacia Twomy, and her husband, quarrelled while on the road from Cork to their own house the evening of this dreadful occurrence, and that he, becoming exasperated, commenced striking her with a stick, blows from which he continued to inflict until he got her into his own stable, where he leaped upon her body in such a manner as shortly to de prive her of existence. Her cries in this place drew her children to the spot, and, as they witnessed the cruelties of the father, their testimony on his trial, corroborated as it will be by others who witnessed them on the road, will, it is believed, convict him upon the most indubitable evidence. An inquest was held before Richard Foott, Esq., Coroner, on Saturday, and continued by adjournment until this morning, when the Jury found as follows :—" That the deceased, Anastacia Twomy, came by her death by violence committed upon her head, body, and limbs, by her husband, Jeremiah Tvvomy." Twomy has been committed to the County Gaol to abide his trial at the coming Assizes.— Cork Evening Herald. A SEA DEVIL.—On Tuesday last, a fine speci men of this rare and remarkable fish, popularly known by the expressive name of the " Sea Devil," w as caught in the Se vern, near Newnham, i n a ne t w ith se veral other fish. The creature, whose enormous and formidable mouth could have engulfed a shoal of small fry, weighed 122 pounds, and was on the following day ex hibit e d i n the market Gloucester, a t of _ at 2d. per head. We are not aware whether a fish_this de scription has ever been ca pt ur ed in the Severn before. KEYNSHAM ABBEY. The workmen, in excavating for the railroad at Keynsham, had to break u t p u someof the bu rying ground of the old Abbey, where they found the remains of persons interred there much perfectmoreen than could have Keynsham was abolished been expected. The monastery of by Henry VIII., with the rest. The estates of the monastery were then worth 4191. per annum. They are now in the pos session of the Chandos family, and worth 4,0001. a year, FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE. KENSINGTON PALACE, JUNE 16, 1836. His Royal Highness the Duke of Susse7; submitted to the opera tion of extraction of the cataract from each eye, on Friday the 10th of June. The progress of his Royal Highness has subsequently been as satisfactory as possible. HENRY HOLLAND, M.D. THOS. COPELAND. HEITRY ALEXANDER. ST. JAMES'-PALACE, JUNE 15. This day his Serene Highness the Prince of Oldenberg, attended by Count Pozzo di Box go, the Russian Ambassador, had an audience of his Majesty, to which he was inttuduced by Lord Viscount Palmerston, his Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and conducted by Sir R. Chester, Knt., Master of the Ceremonies. His Serene Highness had afterwards an audience of her Majesty. WHITEHALL, JUNE 15, 1836. The King has been pleased to order a conge d'elire to pass the Great Seal, empowering the Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral Church of Ely to elect a Bishop of that See, the same being void by the death of Doctor Bowyer Edward Sparke, late Bishop thereof ; and his Majesty has also been pleased to recommend to the said Dean and Chapter, the Right Rev. Father in God Doctor Joseph Allen, now Bishop of Bristol, to be by them elected Bishop of the said See of Ely. The King has also been pleased to order a cone d'elire to pass the Great Seal, empowering the Dear , and Chapter of the Cathedral Church of Lichfield to elect a Bishop of the See of Lichfield and Coventry, the same be ing void by the death of the Honourable Doctor Henry Ryder, late Bishop thereof ; and his Majesty has also been pleased to recommend to the ,aid Dean and Chapter, Samuel Butler, Doctor in Divinity, to be by them elected Bishop of the said See. WHITEHALL, JUNE 15. The King has been pleased to present the Rev. Michael Stewart Johnstone, preacher of the Gospel, to the church and parish of Monnigoff, in the presbytery of Wigtown and stewartry of Kircud bright, vacant by the death of the Rev. John Garlies Maitland. WHITEHALL, JUNE 15. The King has been pleased to present the Rev. Duncan camp bell to the church and parish of Glenlyon, in the presbytery of Dun keld and shire of Perth, vacant by the transportation of the Rev- David Campbell to the East Church of the parish of Inverness. WAR OFFICE, JUNE 17. sth Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Cornet J. I. Blackburne to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Stronge, who retires ; J. Conolly, Gent., to be Cornet, vice Blackburne, June 17. 7th Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Captain J. Crossley, from the 13th Regiment of Light Dragoons, to be Captain, vice Atkin son, who exchanges, June 17. 13th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Capt. T. Atkinson, from the 7th Regiment of Dragoon Guards, to be Captain, vice Crossley,. who exchanges, June 17. Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards—Captain the Hon. R. E. Boyle, from the 65th Regiment of Foot, to be Lieutenant aria Captain, vice Matthew, who exchariges,"June 17. Ist Regiment of Foot—Staff-Assistant Surgeon A. Knox, M.D. to be Assistant-Surgeon, June 17. 6th Foot—Ensign M. Hall to be Lieutenant, without purchase , vice Latham, deceased, 7th Jan. ; Ensign A. Barry to be Lieu tenant, without purchase, vice Hall, whose promotion, on the 184 1 March, has not taken place, March 20; H. Wheatstone, Gent.,t) be Ensign, vice Barry, 17th June. 15th Foot—Lieut. T. Rose, to be Captain, by purchase, vice Magan, who retires ; Ensign F. Walker, to be Lieutenant, by pur chase, vice Rose ; J. Carey, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase , vice Walker, June 17. 20th Foot—Ensign G. W. Rice, to be Lieutenant, by purchases vice Briscoe, appointed to the 2d Dragoon Guards ; B. F. Vernon, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Rice, 17th June. 35th Foot—Major E. K. S. Butler to be Lieutenant-Colonel, by purchase, vice Keightly, who retires ; Captain B. F. D. Wil son to be Major, by purchase, vice Butler ; Lieutenant J. Fraser, to be Captain by purchase, vice Wilson ; Ensign F. English to be Lieutenant by purchase, vice Fraser, June 17. 80th Foot—P. Gammie, Gent. to be Assistant Surgeon, June 17- 115th Foot—Captain G. B. Mathew, from the Coldstream Regi ment of Foot Guards, to be Captain, vice Boyle, who exchanger June 17. 86th Foot—Hon. E. S. Plunkett to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Blewett, who retires, June 17. HOSPITAL STAFF. R. B. Gahan, Gent., to be Assistant-Surgeon to the Tomes, vice Knox, appointed to the Ist Regiment of Foot, June 17. MEMORANDUM. The date of Major Townshend's commission, in the 24th Regi ment of Foot, is 10th October, 1835, and not the 25th •af that month. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County Palatine of Chester. King's Regiment of Cheshire Yeomanry Cavalry--W. R. Court, Gent., to be Lieutenant, vice Marshall, resigned, June 3. DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY. JOSEPH MITCHELL, boarding-house keeper, Brighton. BANKRUPTCIES SUPERSEDED. ISAAC LEVI, merchant, Old Broad-street. ROBERT FARR, dealer, Doncaster. BANKRUPTS. DEEN MAHOMED, bath proprietor, St. James's-place, St. James's-street, to surrender June 27, at twelve, and July 29, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Scard and Fry, - Bedfor street, Bedford-square ; Lackington, official assignee, F, as ingl ,3ll " street. JOSIAH TAYLOR, dealer in pictures, Pall-Mall, June,!, 24 ' and July 29, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. R o bi nso n, ( "I' chard-street, Portman-square ; Cannan, official assignee, Sambroott' court, Basinghall-street. JOHN PIPER, coal-merchant, Prince's-wharf, Lambeth, June 24, at one, and July 29, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Green, official assignee, Aldermanbury ; Dover, South-square, Grey's-Inn. FRANCIS SIIAW, master mariner, Eltham, Kent, June '2B, at one, and July 29, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Gib son, official assignee, Basinghall-street; Freeman and Bothamley, Coleman-street. MATHEW MILLINGTON, joiner, Nottingham, June 27, aza July 29, at one, at the Flying Horse Inn, Nottingham. Austen and Hobson, Raymond-buildings, Gray's-Inn, London ; Percy, Smith, and Percy, Nottingham. JOHN HAWORTH, cotton manufacturer, Haslingden, Lan cashire, July 13, and 29, at ten, at the Commercial Inn, P,olton, Lancashire. Milne, Parry, Milne, and Morris, Temple, Lo adon ; Mitchell, Haslingden. JOSEPH BURKE, shopkeeper, Standish with Langtre , i, Lan cashire, July 13, at one, and 29, at twelve, at the Commercial Ina, Bolton-le-Moors. Adlington, Gregory, Faulkner, and Follett, Bedford-row, London ; Gaskell, Wigan. JOHN HOGG, victualler, Mathon, Worcestershire, June 2 7 e and July 29, at eleven, at the office of Mr. Hill, Worcester — Smith, Chancery-lane, London ; Hill, Worcester. JOHN WILLIAMSON WEBSTER, currier, Salford, July 2, ar 29. at three, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Manchester. CuveLJ. and Enfield, Southampton-buildings, L on d on ; B arron , M an ohest , tr. WILLIAM ROBINSON and JAMES ROBINSON, ma' .r'', - facturers of fancy goods, Sheep r id ge , H u dd ers fi e ld , Y or k s hi re , J m y 1, at four, and 29, at eleven, at the George Inn, Huddersfield . Lever, Kings-road, Bedford-row, London ; Barker, Huddersfieb 1. JOHN LEGGE LUCAS, druggist, Birmingham, June '9 7 ' and July 29, at twelve, at Radenhuret's Royal Hotel, Birminght 03 " Shinger, Northampton; Rickards and Walker, Lincoln's-I 011 " fields, London. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. R. Evered, boulting cloth weaver, Upper Thames-street, 8, at 27, at one—T. Griffiths, bookseller, Wellington-street, July ,t. twelve—P. Phillips, oyster merchant, Hungerford Mark at, Martin-in-the-Field, Suly 8, at half-past twelve—J. Lound, licensed victualler, Old Farm-horse, H ooper - street , W estm i nster - re a d, J , "'Y 8, at half-past one—A. Westley, livery stable keeper, Hon' s Cop; mission Stables, Assembly-place, Kennington, July 11, at half-P as it eleven—J. Jarmain bill broker, Air-street, Piccadilly, Jtity half-past twelve—E. Mumford, jun., victualler, French Ware, Herts., July 8, at t wo —J . M or l an d , corn deg. ler, - Br ° street, Ratcliffe-cross, July 8, at twelve—G. Jones, wlaaufing e " Shad-Thames, Horselydown, July 8, at half-past twelve. In the Country. F. Potter, merchant, Manchester, July 12, at ten, at the. Conarnis sioners'-rooms, Manchester—T. Upton, hatter, Birmingl mom, Jul/ 15, at twelve, at the New Royal Hotel, Birmingham_E Garner' factor, Birmingham, July 15, at one, at the Swan Hotel , Birrnin ham—R. Barber, wine merchant, W a l sa ll, St a flO r d s hi f • e , July 1 6 ' 0 at twelve, at Radenhurst's Hotel, Birmi ng h am —W. A. 010 09 2. and J. C. Kemp, merchants, Liverpool, July 18, at two, at tuv Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool. CERTIFICATES.—JuLy 8. W. Halton, tailor, Charles -street, 'sVestminster—J. K eY se 2. plumber, Yours-place, Old Kent-road—_J. Watson, baker, Mi l tou terrace, Southwark Bridge-road. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. J. Butler and T. Wise, silversmiths, Coppice-row, Clerken Rell W. Wheeler and G. D. Myers, Cheapside—H. W. Hylan AI his A. Fenton, Fenchuzvh-street Jenny Magnin and SnIV Descartes, milliners, Davies-street, Berkeley-square—J. and r , Brown, common brewers, Liverpool—R. Ledger and 'AL millers, Chesterfield, Derbyshire—J. H. and S. Maw, susgical J u n" strument-makers, Aldersgate-street--J. Sugden and 'ff. Bn °t ",'" cabinet makers, Bradford, Yorkshire—W. T. Cooper r„nd G. D eu: ' glaziers, Middlesbrough, North Riding o f Yorkshire—C. Grah an ; and R. Crabtree, curriers, Burnley, Lancashire—T. 'Williams an,t . J. Pritchard, linen drapers, Ancrats, Manchester—T. Bro adbe" and J. Cardwell, millers, Prestb,ory, near Macclesfield, Chesh ire-- F. Sleddon, jun., and R. Tb:relfal"l co tt o n spinners, Preston, L an " cashire—A. Lamb, W. Su.ctill, B. 'Dobson, and H. Askworth tutors of the late 1. Dobson), flax spinners, Bolton and Wifla n ,' ,.. Lancashire—F. Hopkins and J. Nicholson, drapers, Ashton:, Southwark—J. Braddock and A. Chapman, druggists, under-Lyne--T. Horne, E. T. Richards, and J. nOttoll, brat. founders (so far as reards E. T. Richards)—B. C. Tyzack, Dobinson, and T. Hedley , anchor smiths, Low Lights, Nord Shields (so far as regards T. Hedley)—J. Hewson, R. "Brovvn. aw"" J. Gray, skinners, Manchester (so far as regards Hewson). High-stret We understand that the Rev. Thomas Worsley, 04 Downing College, Cambridge, and formerly a Fellow of Tri-- nity College, has been elected successor to the late W illiasri Frere, D. C.L., as Master of Downing College. LA M.ANCIIA.-This province, celebrated. for the , scene of Don Quixotte's exploits, is so flat that a traveller on starting in the morning may see, it is said, the sr,ot where is to rest at night. It still abounds in windmills ; a recent: tourist counted no less than 21 at a single glance. Not only the fashionable world, which the ha s so skilfully portrayed, but that class of gentry, which fo rtns the staple of English society, will hear, we are sure, with r such interest that a new novel from the pen of the authoress of " Mothers and Dauhters" will be pu bli s hed in a few 'der . It is called " F enta ) e Domination." The title alone. Ix ill at once attest the piquancy of the subject—one of the pros ninent foibles of the fair sex—and which, set forth in strong colors by the satirical powers of the writer, will no doubt prove a most apposite and amusing lesson to many a haughty f air one. REPRESENTATION OP SOUTH WAR'NUCK.---- When we consider the immense majority Sir G ray Skip with polled above Mr. Shirley, in the election shere they were both candidates, we have little doubt of tl le ultimate_ success of the Liberal Member. The Conservat ive__gold of the Carlton Club—the c orru p tion we witnessed at Warvvick in the Borough election—i n timidation —everything , in fact, which can by either fair or foul means be brought into ac tion, to cajole and sway the electors disposed to va te in fa vour of civil and religious liberty. will be put in Liractice. —Leamington Chronicle.