The Sun. — London, England, 1844-08-01 00:00:00

`441 , 'Te w A- STEAM-BOAT PIERS 'ON THE - . THAMES. Yesterday a Court of Common Council was held Thr the dispatch of public business. The principal business of the day was, the consideration of the report of the Navigation Committee on the petition of the inhabitants in the vicinity 'of Blackfriars-bridge, for an improved pier for landing from and embarking on board steam-vessels. The Court was fully attended. THE PIERS'OP THE RTVER THAMES. • Mr. Melts (the Chairman of the Navigation Committee) brought up the report relative to steam-boat piers, and ex ' pressed his earnest hope that the Court would be as unani- Min as the Committee had been in its adoption. The fol ' liming are the principal paragraphs ;in the report :—" That We have duly proceeded in the examination of the allega tions in the petition, and upon inquiry it 'appears that the subject of the erection of a steam-boat landing or pier at Blach(riars-bridge has been for some time under considera tion. That in December, 1841, a conference was held by us With the Blackfriars-bridge Committee when the plan of Mr. Walker, the engineer, for a pier of two arches on the north west side of the bridge, was examined, and this Committee expressed an opinion favourable thereto, but urged a hope that any plan, before being finally agreed upon, should be rendered subservient to the proposed general embankment of the river. That when the Blackfriars-bridge Committee closed their labours, the matter was by this Honourable Court referred to the Bridge-house Estates Committee, who en the 30th of March, 184.3, presented a report for authority to obtain plans and models, which report was read, and the consideration thereof adjourned, since which it does not ap pear to have been resumed.—(Hear.) That your Committee are of opinion that some such erection as the one proposed by Mr. Walker, modified with a view to the eventual carry ing out of the general embankment of the river, would be a great accommodation and security to the public ; and that we should accordingly be empowered forthwith to take such steps as we may deem advisable, to enable us to lay before this Court a plan for a safe and suitable pier at Blackfriars bridge." 'The Chairman moved that the Court should agree with the Committee in the report. Mr. ANDERTON said he hoped the Navigation Committee would not sleep upon the subject, but would fellow the ex cellent example set by the Lord Mayor, in visiting all the piers under the conservancy of the City of London, and taking care that every construction of the kind should be liable to no objection of instability or incommodiousness.— (Hear, hear.) He particularly called the attention of the Court to the Southwark-bridge pier, the Cadogan pier, and the pier at present being formed at Vauxhall-bridge, all of which he considered to be models of utility, and the last of which would be a very great ornament to the neighbourhood. He concluded by repeating his hope that the Committee would not sleep in the business, and declaring that he had no wish to continue the excitement occasioned by the calamity which had occurred at Blaokfriars-bridge.—(Hear.) Mr. OBBARD said the former Committees against which such strong censure had been expressed at the last Court, ought to be released front the imputation of neglect, as the Court was, in its collective capacity, really reprehensible. Mr. HALL agreed with Mr. Obbard that the blame did not justly lie with the Navigation Committee. It was impossible not to see what embarrassments must have arisen from erecting a permanent pier pending the great question of a general embankment of the river contemplated by the Go vernment.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. GRESHAM could not see how any immediate remedy was applicable by the terms of the report proportionate to the immediate urgency which existed. Mr. Mots said that, if Mr.. Gresham would wait until the report should be agreed to, a paper would be submitted to their consideration, containing a comprehensive statement of the important plan upon which it was intended to act. Mr. GRF.SHAM observed that his apprehension was that *something might be proposed to which the Court would de mur for eighteen months more. • A MEMBER added that after the present excitement should be abated, the report might just drop into the oblivion which had been the fate of numerous other recommendations. Mr. Lorr said there was one thing to which it was neces sary to call the attention of the Committee. The owners of steam-piers, and the captains of steam-vessels, entertained great objection to the placing of planks as a protection to the public. He suggested that an attention to such a means of security ought to form an item in the list of safeguards. Deputy STEVENS said he thought that too much stir hid been-snade about the accident.—(Cries of "No, no.") Upon looking at the circumstances of the accident he found that although the erection had not been made to hold seventy persons, it had been sufficiently strong for the purposes for which it had been constructed. He did not see how the Court would be justified in incurring a large expense at a .time when the general embankment of the Thames was under consideration. He trusted that it would not for a moment be supposed that he did not feel as much as any other person in that Court on account of the accident which had occurred, but he could not see why there should be such alarm amongst the members, as if they were all chargeable with the consequences.—(Hear.) Mr. PEWTBESS was much surprised at the total insecurity of the piers on the river, and considered the Court to have been culpable in granting the power to individuals to erect piers for their own profit, without demanding that stability should be one of the principal conditions of the grant. Upon the motion of Mr. STACY, the important paper to which Mr. Hicks referred, as containing the elements of the remedy Sir the evils complained of was read. It was as fol lows : " FLOATE‘G Prem.—The Corporation of London, acting under the advice of eminent engineers, as well as their own officers, have been hitherto unwilling to 'grant licenses for the construction of temporary landing-places for steam-boat pas sengers, in the belief that some general plan for improving the banks and bed of the river would be adopted, in which the better accommodation of steam-passengers might be pro vided for, by the erection of strong and substantial perma nent piers. " The recent melancholy accident at the floating platform at Blackfriars, has, however, impressed upon the Committee the conviction that the public safety demands the immediate exercise of the authority of the Corporation, as conservators, to avert the dangers attending the insecure and unstable floating piers and platforms as th e y a t present ex i st on the river. When the Committee consider that several hundreds of thousands of persons weekly avail themselves of these landing places to make use of steam-boats for purposes of business, health, or recreation, it is manifest that, in the ab sence of some general plan of embankment (which it may require a series of years to accomplish), the continuance of some such temporary expedients in an amended form, is ab solutely necessary to afford present accommodation. The Corporation have, therefore, given directions to their officers to inspect and report upon the state and condition of every steam-boat pier within their jurisdiction, with a view to the application of the following rules and regulations as speedily as they can be brought to bear upon the numerous piers already existing, as well as upon those which may be here after erected. " The Corporation will have to regret, if in the , discharge of the duty they have undertaken, they should be obliged in juriously to interfere with private interests or private conve nience; but they rely upon the good feeling of the proprietors of existing piers, by a speedy and cheerful acquiescence in these reasonable rules, to spare them the necessity of resort ing to strong measures. The Corporation rely with equal tonfidence upon the force of public opinion to sustain them in their endeavours to give additional security and accommoda tion to steam-boat passengers, and to prevent the recurrence of accidents similar to that which has so recently taken place. " For the purpose of carrying the foregoing objects into execution, the Corporation have resolved— " That no pier or landing-place for steam-boat passengers be allowed on the River Thames within their jurisdiction as conservators of the river (viz., from Staines to Yantlet), 'without a license in writing from the Navigation Committee under the authority of the Right Hon. the Lord Mayor. " That no such license be granted except upon a certifi cate from the Clerk of the Works, or other officer of the navigation, appointed by 'the Committee, to the following effect : " Ist. That such pier or landing-place does not project from the bank beyond a line laid down as the limit for tem porary piers, and that such pier is so constructed as not to in terfere with the navigation of the river beyond what the necessity of the case absolutely requires. " 2dly. That such pier is constructed of good sound ma terials of a proper thickness, and in a suitable form to afford all reasonable convenience to passengers, and to secure the safety of the public. " 3dly. That the access to the pier from the land is pro tected by a suitable and sufficient gate or barrier. " 4thly. That two red lights are fixed—one at each end,of the extremity of the pier. " sthly. That a suitable drag and man line are provided and placed at a convenient spot on the pier. " 6thly. That a suitable chain painted white upon a dark ground, or black upon a light ground, has been _securely fixed a little above the water-mark all round the floating-barges and pier, as hold-fasts for persons falling over. " That such license do continue only during the pleasure of the Committee, and that such pier be removed in , either of the following cases : " Ist. If from any alteration of the current from the for mation of a permanent embankment, or from other causes, the pier shall, in the judgment of the Corporation, become an impediment er obstruction to the navigation of the river. " idly. If any part of the barges, piles, bridges, chains, platforms, or any other part of th e structure shall from ac cident, injury, or decay, become unsafe, and if it shall not be immediately repaired with good sound materials of a suffi cient thickness, s a nd rendered safe and secure to the satisfaction of the Clerk of the Works. "idly. If the gate or barrier at the entrance be not kept in a sufficient state of strength to prevent the access of more than a convenient number of persons, or if the person having charge of the pier do permit passengers to remain upon or over -crowd any part of the pier or platform ; or if he do per mit any other persons than passengers to use the pier. "4thly. If the red lights on the pier be not kept in a pro per state, or if they be not lighted and kept alight from dusk till morning light, so as by night to show the position of the 'pier and to define its extent. " sthly. If a suitable drag and man-line be not always kept on a convenient part of the pier to be ever ready in case of accident. 6tlaly. If the chain above the water-mark o f the pier be alwayspot kept securely axed and in condition for use. isms. If any steam-boat be allowed to moor or to remain attached-to *ny part of th e a The Co pier during the night. reserve to themselves the right to make such other eel s , regulations for the safety and conveni for the protection of the navigation, may call for; and they will remove t ase h n e ctei p m i of e e r ta i h f necal u pe c ubx h Pell aeast e464cnan ie rules and regulations be violated, in the same manner u na th i rated in, and formed a ay would do if they were incorpo ef, the foregoing regulations.' The reading of the pa per evidently gave general satis fliction. Mr. COPE said there was a dicer e aceful and most annoying nuisance, to which the paper maa : I ? reference. He meant the touting for passengers, which Wire resided near the piers were constantly in the habit of coactually fought for not only took hold of passengers, witnessing - neasin g- The touters them, in order to secure them for the for which they exercised their rival zeal and activitr. had spoken to the City Commissioner upon th e Suaeble4, law to that o ffi cer did not seem to-think that there was sanction his interference. He (Mr. Cope) thought thyereamwustot be some error in that opinion. _ Mr. MArritEws concurred in the opinion expressed by Mr. Cope. Mr. WIRE condemned the course pursued in the Court when the accident was discussed. If he were a member of Parliament, and wanted to find arguments for depriving the citizens of London of their privileges, he could have found abundant reasons in the discussions which had taken place, during which the Court cast the blame upon the Committees, and the Committees cast the blame upon the Court. If, in stead of proceeding with useless and empty criminations and recriminations, the Court had copied the conduct of the Liverpool authorities, and taken the whole management of the river, over which they had complete control, into their own hands, there would be at the present moment no reason for cotnplaint.—(Hear.) The Court was no doubt reprehen sible, for when plans for the erection of piers were presented they were uniformly ordered to lie on the table. He did not think the report of the Committee went far enough in the power for which they sought, and he therefore should move, as an amendinent—" That the Committee be empowered forthwith to take such steps, by and with the sanction of the Lord Mayor, as they may deem advisable, to erect a safe and suitable pier at Blackfriars-bridge, and that the 23d and 26th standing orders be suspended upon the occasion."—(Hear.) 7 Mr. GittsnAm was understood to adhere to is statement t of the former day, and to add his opinion that the Committee had only half done the business they had been authorised by the Court to do. Mr. ASLICTIL,T supported the amendment, and ex ressed an ardent wish that the Court would do as well as talk some thing.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. STACY said there was uo necessity for the amendment. The report, if agreed to, would be an adequate security to the public, and the piers would no longer be dangerous. Mr. PRIOR strongly supported the amendment, and urged that a concurrence in the report would merely give rise to a vast diversity of plans and speculations, and occasion still greater delay. The plan of Mr. Walker had all the elements of a sound and good construction.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. HEPPELL trusted that the Court would negative the amendment, and agree to the report. Lying as they did under the charge of having neglected an important duty, they ought not to give up their whole power on so serious an occasion to a Committee.—(Hear, hear.) Alderman T. WOOD hoped the Court would adopt the amendment. Apart from the recent accident, it must be acknowledged that nothing could have been worse than the floating piers.—(Hear, hear.) They were incommodious, without order, or regularity, or plan, and there was about them a total absence of security. He was :satisfied that, as conservators of the River Thames, they were bound to do something for the security of the public, and at the present season. Erections of piers ought not to be made upon the principle of private property. All erections of the kind ought to be swept away, and permanent places of public accommo • dation ought to be formed by the Corporation.—(Hear, hear.) The Corporation would be adequately reimbursed by the pub lic, and they would obtain an economical superintendence through the agency of the Watermen's Company. They would also get rid of the dangerous competition between ' rival steam-vessels, and of the noisy and annoying nuisance of the touters.—(Hear, hear.) He was of opinion that the best plan to pursue in the construction of steam-boat piers was, to make them the adjuncts to the bridges, by which they would be completely protected; and he believed that if the Corporation would adopt the suggestion, they would find the Watermen's Company ready to pay for the whole outlay, and to take the whole management upon themselves.—(Hear, hear, and cries of " No.") Mr. HICKS, although he proposed the original motion that the Court should agree with the report, said he certainly pre ferred the amendment, upon the principle that " If 'twere done, it were well if 'twere done quickly." Mr. HARRISON was decidedly against suspending the stand ing orders, especially to give to the Committee a power which ought to be exercised by the Court itself. The LORD MAYOR, in answer to some observations made at the commencement of the discussion by Mr. Anderton, who warmly thanked his Lordship for the example he had set to the Court and its Committees, said, that from the in spection he had, with the aid of some of the officers of the Corporation, made of the piers on the river, he had ascer tained that, with the exception of one or two, they were all in a very bad condition, constructed of rotten barges, and affording no protection to the public ; and that the officers had been instructed to make a report to the Committee upon which they could act, which had been accordingly done. The amendment was then negatived, and the report wat agreed to, and referred back to the Committee to be carried into execution.—Adjourned. SOUTH SEA. HOUSE. A Quarterly General Meeting of the Proprietors of South .Sea Stock was held yesterday at the South Sea House, in Threadneedle-street. Charles Frank, Esq., took the chair at twelve o'clock. The CHAIRMAN said that the object of the present meeting was to take into consideration the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The correspondence which had taken place with the Chancellor of the Ex chequer was printed, and he was sure the proprietors were aware of the nature of that proposition. He would, however, read it to the meeting. The correspondence was then read, by which it ap peared that the Government proposed to complete the guarantee fund, and to transfer 610,0001. t o t h e Com pany for that purpose. After the reading of the correspondence the CHAIR MAN proposed a resolution approving of the completion of the guarantee fund and the transfer, on the basis of the correspondence. A short discussion took place on the resolution, some of the proprietors, Mr. Makatta, Mr. Manbert, Mr. Hammond, and others, advocating a dissolution of the Company, by which the Company would be saved the expense of management, amounting to about 6,000 L They contended that if the Company accepted the proposition of the Government the expenses of the management would fall upon the Company for an indefinite period. They did not think there was any necessity for keeping up so large an establishment, when the Bank of England, or any other incorporated body, might pay the dividends at scarcely any increased expense. The CHAIRMAN said that they were then met for the purpose of considering the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and it would be open to them to consider on a future occasion what they were to do with regard to the Society. If they were to negative the resolution, the effect of that would be that the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was unjust, and less than what they were entitled to. Sir J. L. GOLDSMID said that he would vote for the resolution on the understanding that a meeting was to be called on a future occasion with respect to the expe diency of keeping up so large an establishment. He thought, however, that the old clerks of the establish ment ought to be provided for. The resolution was then put and carried, after which the meeting separated. SPIRIT of the PUBLIC JOURNALS. mom THE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY. GLOBE.—The wrongs inflicted last year by the French on the Sovereign and people of Tahiti, have not merely remained unredressed—they have rapidly multi. plied in severity and extent. The accounts just arrived from the Society Islands, which were published in the Globe of yesterday, have excited surprise and indignation among men of all parties. These renewed instances of aggression must, we apprehend, be sufficient to rouse Lord Aberdeen from the indifference with which he has hitherto treated the subject. The occupation of Ta hiti by French troops ; the deposition of its Queen ; the confiscation of property ; the imprisonment of the chiefs whose presence and influence with the people might have been troublesome to th e invaders—have I been followed up by the seizure and imprisonment of the British Consul. These acts of unprovoked vio lence upon a defenceless State have been committed under the pretext of a "Protectorate," not merely un sought by the " protected" Queen Pomare; but earnestly, and with touching simplicity, protested against and de plored by her. An appeal by the insulted and deeply• injured Queen to the English Sovereign, for pro tection against the outrages which had been perpetrated on her person and government, made last year, was at first slighted. Tahiti and its dependencies are situated at a vast distance from England—nearly at the antipodes. They are also of slight importance in the scale of na tions—mere specks on the map ; and are manifestly too insignificant to merit the interference of England, whose sympathies are with great and powerful nations ; to whose tender mercies she magnanimously consigns the weak and the defenceless. Time was, when a more noble spirit actuated the councils of Britain. It is true that Britain was not bound by absolute and formal treaty to maintain the independence of Tahiti ; but there was an assurance, almost in the nature of a solemn promise and engagement, given to Tahiti by a former Forei g n Minister o f thi s coun t r y, th a t Eng land would watch over its safety and interests. That interesting spot had been civilised and Christianised by the labours of English missionaries, who had settled there, and had introduced a form of govern ment closely resembling in its institutions that which exists in this country. Under that constitution, Tahiti advanced to a considerable elevation of civil and social excellence. The arts were introduced and cultivated ; commerce was established, and regulated by recognised laws; and religion gave a tone to the morals, and stability to the institutions, of the country. The his tory of nations affords no instance of an improvement so rapid in everything which elevates and ennobles man as Tahiti exhibited. Such was the condition of Tahiti when the French Admiral Dupetit Thouars last year commit ted those aggressions by which he acquired inglorious fame. With an apathy of feeling and tardiness of act, which implied an indifference to the complaints of French aggression that were made to him as the Foreign Minister, Lord Aberdeen at length directed a represen tation of the case to be made to the French Government. M. Guizot disavowed the acts, and promised to inter fere. Lord Aberdeen was elated with success ; and puffed forth his own doings in Parliament, as though his diplomacy was unequalled in its policy and unprece dented in its influence. Somehow, or other, the French admiral was impracticable. The " Protectorate "—in the propriety of establishing which Lord Aberdeen had acquiesced —was followed by the occupation of the island. All knowledge of this extraordinary proceeding was also disavowed ; and a very courteous assurance was given to our Ambassador that the French Govern ment did not adopt the responsibility of the act. Still it has been followed by yet more flagrant proceedings in Tahiti 1)1 the French commanders. The Queen has been deposed ; and has sought refuge from per sonal indignities on board a British frigate. The British Consul (Mr. Pritchard) has been seized, by military authority, and placed under arrest, without any charge being alleged against him, or any explanation furnished as to the cause of this out rage upon his person, and this insult to his country's flag. Mr. Pritchard fortunately eluded the vigilance of his keepers, and escaped on board the English vessel, by which he has reached this country. He was to have an audience with Lord Aberdeen yesterday. Summonses were last evening issued for a Cabinet Council to be held this day—it is conjectured, for the purpose of deliberating upon the extraordinary conduct of the French Govern ment, not merely in tacitly encouraging, while it professes to disavow, the acts of its agents in the matter of Tahiti ; but for pursuing the same aggressive policy in Algiers and Morocco. The quiescence of England, with respect to the occupation of the former, has encouraged the alarming invasion of the latter territory; and, combined, assumes an aspect at once portentous to the preservation of peace, and derogato r y t o th e goo d f a ith su pp ose d t o exist between France and England; on which alone pacific relations can be preserved between the two countries. We are —we have ever been, the advocates of peace. But the maintenance of peace is not best promoted by a mean and truckling acquiescence in acts which com promise the h onour, an d d eter i orate the interests of dtuaeinto. The h ar country aeter a that a exhibits afety,i a o indifference the verge f w d h i what is honourable and disastrous war. We do not attribute . to the French Ministers a desire • in a war. But we do c to involve two countries war faction which exists ifieFranemce with to y a i n eld e i x n t g en t t o ge t I must result in war, if they do not pause in their aggres sive policy. They will otherwise find themselves com mitted beyond the power of retractation. Pacific as surances are but words. When the acts of a Govern ment are found in frequent antagonism to its professions, there requires no extraordinary powers of prescience to predict the result. STANDARD.—The proposed embankment of the Thames from Blackfriars to Westminster would be a TIE SUN,- LONDON, _THURSDAY ETENING, AUGUST • noble ornament to the metropolis of the British empire, but we are not quite sure that this consideration has not been rather injurious than beneficial to the project. The public is so fir utilitarian, as to think that " the game ought to be worth the candle," and that ornaments may be bought too dear. Accustomed, therefore, to look upon the proposed embankment. as an ornament, and as an ornament only, though to be bought at a high price, they turn coldly from it. This would be our own feeling too if we had not to " make the journey," as the French happily describe such laird work, of Fleet-street and the Strand, as often as we have to make it, and to run the risk which every one must run in crossing these perilous thoroughfares some half-dozen times a-day. This disagreeable expe rience has convinced us, as it must convince every one who will prove it, that some additional means of com munication between the centre of the City and West minster is a matter about which there can be no longer an option. The grand duct, which might have served very well for a population of a million, will not serve for a population of about two millions, with a traffic increased fivefold, to say nothing of the feli citous introduction of those most lumbering of all impediments, omnibuses. In short, a new thorough fare, continuing the line of Thames-street to West minster, it already indispensable to the safety, not to say comfort, of all the pedestrians of the metropolis, and every addition to the ex tent, population, and trade of this huge city makes the want of this additional thoroughfare more intolerable. The only question then that can be raised is, where this new thoroughfare is to be situated ? Within the river bank it cannot be placed without cut ting through, besides some thousands probably of other expensive houses, the Inner Temple, the Middle Tem ple, King's College, Somerset-house, the Savoy, the Adel phi, Hungerford-market, Whitehall-place, Whitehall gardens, Richmond-terrace, with the magnificent resi dences of the Duke of Buccleuch and others. The bare purchase of the ground for this line would probably cost as much as the erection of a terrace upon arches from Blackfriars to Westminster twice told. Yet be tween such an enormously expensive street as we have suggested and Lord Lincoln's proposition there is really no choice, for, we. repeat it, the second thorough. fare is perfectly indispensable. An objection has been raised, that the masonry to support the pro iiosed terrace would displace so much of the tide water as to render less rapid the current of the river. We should think that this would be scarcely an objection, if, as the report on Westminster-bridge states, the current has become so rapid since the removal of old London ' bridge, as to deepen the channel seven feet, between Westrnistzga Blackfriars, and to undermine the founda tions of all the older bridges and all the buildings whose foundations are on the river's banks. But suppose any mischief to arise from the displacement of the water, that may be very easily remedied by finding a new place for water on the Surrey side, or by deepening the frontage on the Middlesex bank ; but, in truth, we believe this fear to be perfectly groundless. Whatever, happens, we must have the thoroughfare, and the sooner the better. SUMMER ASSIZES. HOME CIRCUI T.—Lewes, July 30. CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Baron PA.RKE Georrge Marchant, a person respectably connected, and who carries on the business of a wine -merchant, at Brighton, surrendered in discharge of his rocognizances to answer an indictment, alleging that he had feloniously stolen a quantity of tame pheasants and partridges, the property of the Right Hon. Thomas, Earl of Chichester. Mr. Johnson conducted the prosecution, and Messrs. Clarkson and Creasy appeared for the defence. From the evidence adduced it seems that the noble prosecutor had a number of young pheasants and partridges that had been reared by a hen, under the charge of his gamekeeper, at Stanmer Park, and on the 9th July, twenty•eight pheasants and fourteen partridges were missed. Shortly afterwards, in conse quence of some information that was received, a Brighton constable, named White, went to Marchant's premises, and the servant showed him several young pheasants and partridges. A warrant was then obtained, and the birds were taken away, and on the prisoner being asked to account for the possession of them, he said he had bought some " small stuff" of a man who came to his house, and that he gave half-a-crown for th em . The prisoner, it appeared, had been originally colu mned by the Brighton magistrates for receiving the bird. feloniously, but that charge was abandoned, and he was indicted for stealing them. The evidence of identity was, however, very weak, and there was very little testimony to support either charge. At the close of the case for the prosecution Mr. Baron PARKE contended that there was no evidence to go to the jury, and a verdict of Not Guilty was accordingly recorded. CIVIL SlDE.—(Before Mr. Baron GURNEY and a Common Jury.) • PARRY V. NICHOLSON. _ This was an action upon a bill of exchange for 2501., accepted by the defendant. The pleas set up on behalf of the defendant were that no consideration had been given for the bill, and there were other pleas to the effect that it was a forgery. Mr. Sergeant Channell and Mr. Peacock appeared for the plaintiff ; Mr. Platt and Mr. Clarkson were for the defendant. The case in itself possessed very little matter of in terest to the public, but there were a few disclosures re lative to discounting and bill transactions which deserve notice. It did not appear that any consideration had been given to the defendant for the acceptance in question, but it was endorsed by the party who received it to the plaintiff, who is an attorney in London. There had been other bill transactions in connection with the case, and one of the witnesses said that a bill for 60/., at two months, had been discounted, and 10/. more charged as interest. In cross •examination by Mr. Platt, he said that it was customary in discounting transactions to take from three per cent. upwards, and that the generality of the bills that were brought to be discounted were not worth the stamp they were written on. There was some appearance presented on the face of the bill that the date had been altered as well as the amount ; and Mr. Platt, in his address to the jury, contended that, under all the circumstances, the defendant was entitled to a verdict. The jury retired to consider the case, and upon their return gave a verdict for the defendant. Mr. PLATT subsequently applied to have the bill im pounded, as it was probable other proceedings might be taken. Sergeant CHANNELL expressed his opinion that there were no grounds to justify the proceeding. There was no evidence of any forgery having been committed. Mr. Baron GURNEY said he should give no opinion upon the facts. The only question was, whether there would be any objection to have the bill placed in the hands of the Court to insure its production in case it should be required. His Lordship added, that there did not appear to be any imputation upon the character of the plaintiff in the present action. Mr. PLATT said he did not intend to impute any mis conduct to the plaintiff. His only object was to secure the production of the document at a future period. The attorney for the plaintiff said be had no objec tion to the bill being impounded. Mr. Baron GURNEY said as that was the case there was no difficulty, and he directed that the bill should re main in the custody of the officers of the Court. MORTALITY in the METROPOLIS. The following are the results of "A Table of Mortality in the Metropolis, showing the Number of Deaths from all Causes registered in the Week ending Saturday, the 27th of July, 1844." The Table is issued from the Office of the Registrar-General:— Weekly CAUSES OF DEATH. Total. Average of e years. Epidemic, Endemic, and Cont ag i ous Di seases 289 Five 178 Diseases of variable or uncertain seat lOB 111 Diseases of the Brain, Nerves, and Senses 207 157 Diseases of the Lungs, and other Organs of Respiration Diseases of the Heart and Blood-vessels 3O 21 Diseases of the Stomach, Liver, and other Organs of Digestion ' 107 69 Diseases of the Kidneys, &c 8 5 Childbirth, Diseases of the Uterus, &c. lO 10 Diseases of the Joints, Bones, and Muscles 4 6 Diseases of the Skin, &c. Old Age, or Natural Decay 53 71 By Violence, Privation, or Intemperance Causes specified 1064 942 Deaths from all Causes ...... 1066 946 DEATHS FROIS THE PRINCIPAL DISEASES INCLUDED UNDER 1 openitig of—thc election,- urged upon all present to be active in pressing the distinctive claims of the new Charity upon the notice of the true friends of the orphan in the City of London and throughout the country, feeling persuaded, as he did, that the public required but to be aware of facts, To induce them to support so worthy and righteous a cause. Dr.: Reed announced the names of the five success ful candidates, one of whom had come in under peculiar circumstances, having been withdrawn from another charity, voluntarily throwing up 8,000 votes upon con scientious principlQs. Votes of thanks having been passed to the Lord Mayor, Lord Dudley Stuart, David Salomons, Esq., and others, the meeting was dissolved. derived from a Mr. Lukin, a gentleman holding some situation in the War-office. He happened to be in the country when Captain Warner was testing the powers of his invention. He inquired into it, and con sidered it of so much imp•alance that he reported it to Sir Herbert Taylar. .vh laid the eiraumstances before his late Majesty, King William IV. That re vered Monarch, who yielded to no man in his attachment to the maritime interests of this country, at once con ceived the idea of the vast importance of the invention. After a great deal of personal investigation he thought it right to consult an officer of great eminence, Sir Richard Keates--a mall whose distinguished ser vices were well-known to that House and the country. That officer was deputed by his Majesty to inquire more fully into the subject, and his investigation lasted nearly through a course of two years. He was given to understand that his reports had given the strongest possible opinion that this invention ought to be secured to the country; that it ought to be in the hands of the Prime Minister—(A laugh)—whenever the circumstances of the country might require it, and that all the world should know that the Government of this country was in possession of such a power. The opinion of Sir Thomas Hardy, whose name could not be mentioned by any one connected with the navy, but with extreme respect, was taken on the subject. He considered it was most unfortunate for the country that the reports of those two officers should be mislaid. What had become of them he could not say; but this he knew, that they existed at one time. He presumed that the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who was then First Lord of the Admiralty, would have no objection to state whether any report had been made to him on the subject. With respect to the magnitude of' the invention, he contended, that because it was extraordinary it was not to be supposed to be the result of the brain of a visionary. Thirty years ago, to talk of gas would be considered madness, and years before that the inventor of gunpowder had been looked upon as an impostor. Much reproach had been cast upon Captain Warner on the ground that he never car ried out what he proposed. The Noble Lord then pro ceeded to defend the course that had been pursued by Captain Warner during the administration of Lord Mel bourne, and observed that when the subject was re ferred to Lieutenant Webster, who made a report, it was treated with contempt at the Admiralty. lie considered this was a most unwarrantable breach of confidence ; at all events, it was a most improper way of treating a confidential communication. The report of Lieutenant Webster corroborated in every particular the reports which had been made by Sir Richard Keates and Sir Thomas Hardy. That report w at6d by some persons with derision, and by others ft was stated that Captain Warner and Lieutenant "Webster were in collusion. He denied that such was the case. Lieutenant Webster had made that report like an honest man, who was anxious to do his duty - to his country. Then an in sinuation was made that Lieutenant Webster was insane, and the same thing was; said of Sir Richard Keates. It was said that Sir Richard Keates was in his dotage, and that Sir Thomas Hardy had yielded up his opinion to that of Sir Richard Keates, on account of their long habits of personal intimacy, and from the personal re spct which he bore him. Now, who that knew the high and honourable character of Sir Thomas Hardy could for one moment imagine that he would make such a report if he did not believe it to be correct ?—(Hear, hear.) Lieutenant Webster's report had been presented to the Admiralty on the 16th of September, 1839. Lord Melbourne had frequently gone and sent to the Ad miralty for that report, but had never been able to ob tain it. In January, 1840, it was suggested that the Board of Ordnance should be consulted on the subject. Sir Hussey Vivian, who was at the time at the head of that Board, treated the whole matter with ridicule ; he said he was incompetent to decide on the subject, but that if he were called on to give his private opinion, he would do so. He (Lord Ingestre) bad called on Sir Hussey Vivian on the subject, and it was evident that Sir Hussey Vivian thought that Capt Warner was mad, and that he (Lord Ingestre) was very little different. Ile himself, however, had not as yet discovered such to he the case, although he must confess he enter tained strong impressions upon this subject. He would now read to the House a letter which Captain Warner had addressed to the Hon. Member for Hertford (Mr. Cowper) on this subject, the lion. Gentleman at that time holding the situation of private secretary to Lord Melbourne. (The Noble Lord here read the letter al luded to, which was dated Feb. 3, 1840, and in which Captain Warner, after describing the various reports which had been made on the subject of his invention by Sir Richard Keates, Sir Thomas Hardy, and Lieut. Webster, and stating that in his opinion the knowledge of the secret should be confined to the inventor, the Prime Minister, and the Sovereign, observed with re gard to the proposal, that the invention should be sub mitted to Sir Hussey Vivian—that if Sir Hussey Vivian's deciion was to be final, he would not object to commu nicate to him, in the presence of Lieutenant Webster, that portion of the invention which related to the land service.) Finding matters in that state, he (Lord In gestre), being convinced that the matter was worthy of investigation, had waited on Lord Melbourne on the subject, and had stated his willingness, although politi cally opposed to Lord Melbourne's Government, to afford the Government every assistance in investigating the matter, and he besought his Lordship not to suffer that which might be of great importance to be turned into ridicule. He was sure Lord Melbourne attached im portance to the matter, or he would not have allowed him (Lord Ingestre) to tease him so on the subject ; he would have found some means of getting rid of him, or have said that he would have nothing to do with the matter. He tried in vain to procure for Captain Warner an opportunity of testing his invention. He was re ferred from one to another until he became tired. He then suggested to Captain Warner that he should try an experiment on a small scale, and undertook to re quest the attendance of one or two officers of distinction to witness it. He requested the attendance of Lord Hardwicke, and of the Hon. and Gallant Admiral, the Member for Ripon, who was not at that time in Parlia ment. On the 28th of July, 1840. an experiment on a small scale was made at Wanst , ad, and no person who witnessed it could doubt its efficacy ; and Admiral Cock burn recommended Captain Warner to apply to the Go vernment, which he again did, but unsuccessfully. The invention possessed, as well as extraordinary power, great applicability. His demands on the Government were always postponed. In February, 1841, another ex periment was made at the instance of Sir Francis Bur dett, and before a large number of men of rank and station. Sir Henry Hardinge, Sir George Murray, and his Right Hon. Friend, were present ; it, too, was per fectly successful. In September, 1841, he waited on Sir Robert Peel, who gave him a very courteous answer, and promised not to let the matter drop. It was far from his wish to attack the Government, but he thought it an unfortunate thing thatquestions of this sort should be frittered away in their progress from one department to another. Sir Robert Peel referred the matter to Sir George Murray, who proposed certain terms, to which Captain Warner assented. The Gallant Officer then read the document containing the views of Sir G. Murray relative to Capt. Warner's invention. There were three points to be attended to—first, its power—secondly, the degree of safety and facility with which it, could be applied to useful purposes, naval and military—thirdly, the danger of Foreign Powers becoming possessed of the secret, in case the Government of Great Britain ne glected it. The document did full justice to the expen diture of time, money, and mental energy, on the experi ment of Captain Warner, and-set forth that the Govern ment were willing to make a certain pecuniary advance. Subsequently a Commission was appointed consisting of Sir Edward Owen, Sir Howard Douglas, and Sir Byam Martin ; the latter officer, however, could not attend on the Commission, and Capt. Warner requested that Lord Ingestre or Lord Hardwicke might be appointed in his stead. It had been said that Captain Warner had asked 400,0001. for his invention, but this was a mis take. A Gallant General (Sir Howard Douglas) said he could perform himself an experiment similar to that which Captain Warner performed at Brighton, but this he (Lord Ingestre) did not believe. The Gallant General had frequently thrown out sarcasms upon Capt. W arne r's experiment, such as that he did not want to see a punt in a fish-pond, and such like taunts.—(Laughter.) He did not think it was proper that any member of the Commission should, be fore the day of trial arrived, throw out any such taunts or inuendoes. Nothing could be fairer than the pro posals made by Captain Warner. He proposed to com municate his invention provided the Premier would un dertake to obtaidcompensation for him from the Parlia ment ; and he declared that he would not expect or receive a farthing if his experiment did not prove en tirely successful, and every way answer the purpose for which it was designed. It was said that the experiment at Brighton had not been effected by the means Captain Warner had proposed ; but he (Lord Ingestre) thought nothing could be more complete, and there was not the slightest appearance of the explosion having been produced by gunpowder.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The subject of Captain Warner's invention etas subse quently referred to a second Commission. That Com mission called on Captain Warner to make out an esti mate of the probable expense of a trial of his experi ments, and he did so, estimating it at 2,500/. This sum was to purchase the hulk of a vessel, and to provide the use of a steamer for a period of a month. A long cor respondence then ensued between Captain Warner and the Commissioners, and the result was that Captain Warner was offered 5001 to carry out his experiments. Tis, of course, Captain Warner refused, and then the negotiation dropped. He (Lord Ingestre) contended that Captain Warner had never shrunk from any oppor tunity of making his experiments. Although he had originally demanded 400,0001. for his two inventions, yet he afterwards consented to abide by any decision the Government might think proper to come to with respect to his remuneration. He had done all he could to have his invention fairly tested ; and he (Lord Ingestre) thought that great praise was due to Mr. Soames, the eminent ship-owner, for having afforded the means for the late trial at Brighton. That gentleman looked upon this matter as a subject of great importance to the country, and he said, " although the Government will not furnish the means of testing it, I will." He (Lord Ingestre) took that opportunity of expressing his approbation of the public spirit which had induced that gentleman to make such a sacri fice.—(Cheers.) The experiment at Brighton needed very little description from him (Lord Ingestre), as it had been sufficiently detailed in all the newspapers. No one could doubt the terrific explosive power that was there used. He was prepared to state that those expe riments could be repeated in every variety of form, and at all times of the tide. It had become a fashion to ridi cule the importance of the invisible shell. It was said, let us have nothing to do with the invisible shell—give us the long range. He had no doubt, if a vessel were to be placed outside of either of the harbours of Toulon or Spithead, that by means of the invisible shell it would be impossible for any ship to escape destruction coming out of either of_these harbours. Suppose we ware to be at war with France—which God forbid—the French might send a fleet to anchor ofißrighton, and that town might be laid in ashes in a few hours. Now, by this in.. vention of Captain Warner's, a hostile fleet could be prevented from coming within several miles of any shore. He (Lard Ingestre) had only now to beg pardon of the House for having occupied their time so long, but he had felt strongly on this sub ject. He had brought it forward from a sacred sense of duty, and he trusted the House would give him cre dit for having been actuated by no other motives.— (Cheers.) The Noble Lord concluded by moving for the correspondence which .had taken place between her Majesty's Government and Captain Warner, on the sub ject of Capt. Warner's invention. Sir R, PEEL—Sir, I rise for the purpose of seconding the motion of my Noble Friend, for I am determined at length that the public shall be in possession of the cor respondence respecting Captain Warner's invention, and they will then be enabled to judge what were the rea sons, after that correspondence, which I hold in my hand, had taken place, that Captain Warner was not in vited to exhibit his invention before professional men calculated to judge of its merits. My Noble Friend re presents Captain Warner as being placed under circum stances analogous to those in which the inventor of gunpowder was placed—namely, of being treated with ridicule, and that there was a wish on the part of her Majesty's Government to deprive him of the opportunity of bringing his alleged i nven ti on to a true test. Now I w i s h this use and the public to be enabled to judge whether that is a correct representa tion or nor, and whether her Majesty's Government have not given to Captain Warner every opportunity which Captain Warner could expect, consistent with that pre caution which I think every one will admit that her Ma jesty's Government should observe in a matter of this kind. I will make no reference whatever to what took place between Captain Warner and her Majesty's Go vernment, previously to my accession to office, and my personal knowledge of Captain Warner's proposal ; but I am bound to say, from what I have seen of the previous correspondence, and after my experience of the proposal of Captain Warner, I do not believe, that her Majesty's late Government did treat with Captain Warner in any other manner than the present Government has treated him. Ido not believe that they refused Captain Warner the opportunity of exhibiting the effect of his invention. Those connected with that Government, however, can speak upon that point with greater confidence and autho rity than myself. I may observe, in passing, that it is totally beside the question to instance any opinion that King William might have expressed. Those who are officially responsible must judge for themselves as to the merits of a subject respecting which they would have to submit to Parliament the consideration of voting public money. My Noble Friend stated accurately that in 1841, shortly after the accession of the Government to office, Captain Warner's proposal was renewed. Captain Warner stated that he was in possession of two instru ments of most destructive power ; one called the invisi ble shell, and the other called the long range. A speci men of the power of the invisible shell was given the other day at Brighton. I had an opportunity of wit nessing an experiment on a smaller scale in a pound at Wanstead, and I admit that the destructive power or the instrument applied to the vessel I saw destroyed was most formidable. I saw nothing whatever of the pre vious preparations. I saw a vessel blown up into the air as completely as if ten barrels of gunpowder had been placed in it. That I certainly saw. I was told that it was blown up by an invisible shell brought under the bow of the vessel. I had no op2ortunity of examining any part of the vessel. I had no doubt that the vessel was destroyed in the manner stated. The invisible shell however always appeared to me to be a matter of much less importance than the long range. I think Captain Warner professed to be in possession of a pro jectile which possessed great power, which would enable him to destroy fleets and towns at any distance varying from one mile to six. lam glad that my Noble Friend has relieved me from all reserve on this subject. My Noble Friend has appeared as the advocate of Captain Warner, and I have no objection whatever to the pro duction of these documents. He moved for the corre spondence, and I will give him as much of the corre spondence as will fully establish the relations between Captain Warner and the Government. My Noble Friend felt himself justified in referring to the correspondence of Captain Warner, and I will avail myself of the same ad vantage ; referring, however, to nothing which it is not my intention to produce. I mean to withhold nothing which will enable this House to judge of the course which her Majesty's Government has pursued. Captain Warner stated that he was in possession of this projectile called the long range. I will give his own account of it. He said, "It has a most destructive power, and its operation can be carried on with rapidity. I could bring it to bear on Gibraltar, and in a few hours not a man should be left alive. I could in the highest sea, with my long range, destroy a large fleet. I could demolish Algiers—instead of damaging it only, as Lord Exmouth did with his splendid fleet—with a single vessel ; and after having demolished Algiers, I could, with a com paratively trifling refit, undertake to destroy Toulon." Now a person in possession of such wonderful powers, ought not, on account of the apparent impossibility of the thing, to be set aside. I will treat Captain Warner on an assumption that all he says is true ; but this I will not do—l will not undertake to pledge myself to the pay ment of a large sum of money, on account of certain things having been done. I will do this—l will appoint the most efficient professional men the country can fur nish, two or three from each department. I will not require Capt. Warner to reveal his secret, but only to satisfy those gentlemen of its mode of operation ; they must be per fectly satisfied that all this can be done, and they must then make a report to the Government, or to me per sonally, if Captain Warner does not wish his plan to go further. This report must be on the following points: first as to the means of applying the inventions under adverse circumstances, both of wind and tide ; then as to possi bility of making use of it with safety and security by those who are possessed of it ; then, as to how long it is probable the Government would remain in possession of it after purchasing it. Having received a communica tion of this kind on these points, from these authorities, I shall reserve to myself the power of determining finally on the question. I do not want to know the secret, but I want to be assured as to how far it can be used with safety, and as to how long the Government could retain it, having purchased it, either for the pur pose of applyinz it, or suppressing it altogether. All this I want to know, but I will not enter into a blind engagement of the kind wished by my Noble Friend, that supposing a ship is blown up off the pier at Brighton, Captain Warner is to receive several thousand pounds for effecting it. I will do no such thing, and whatever debates may take place in this House on the subject I will not agree to it. On receiving this communication from my Noble Friend, I wrote to the Master-General of the Ordnance,) and desired him to communicate with the Admiralty Board as to the selection of two gentlemen from their respec tive departments for the purpose of forming a commis sion. Two officers of high professional character and personal honour were selected, Sir Thos. Hastings and Colonel Pasley. Captain Warner objected to both of them. I said, " Very good, I think - the objection an un reasonable one, but that shall not prevent a fair trial of the experiment." Two other gentlemen were then se lected, Sir Howard Douglas and Sir Edward Owen. Sir Edward Owen was shortly afterwards appointed to a command in the Mediterranean, and Sir Byam Martin was chosen to fill his place, and to act with Sir Howard Douglas. Now, I ask whether it would have been pos sible to commit the experiment to two authorities more competent to investigate and decide upon it ? I will read to the House the first communication these gentlemen made to Captain Warner, and I ask whether it was possible to enter into an inquiry with fairer justice or more liberal spirit. The Right Hon. Gentleman then read the letter, in which the Commissioners stated that they were required, in the first instance, to ascer tain the expense of making the experiment ; that they proposed to take first the exp er i men t o f th powers of the long range, and then of the practical effect of the invisible shell ; that, in both instances, the materials would be prepared on the scale th a t would be necessary for real service ; that they proposed to repeat the trial of the long range six times, and that of the invisible shell three times ; they requested to know what cannon or artillery he would require from the Board of Ord nance, and if he should want the assistance of any men. In order to ensure greater secresy, they offered to let him select his own locality, in the most unfrequented part of the country, that would present facilities for forwarding the experiment. The House will see that I departed from the rule generally observed in these cases—that those who have professed to have made discoveries of this kind shall try them in the first instance at their own expense. If that rule was not enforced, why, the establishment of the Board of Ord nance would not be sufficient to attend to the demands that would be made on it. This very day I have received no less than four proposals, invited probably by the dis cussion which has taken place on that of Capt. Warner's —four persons who have invented instruments each at least as destructive as Capt. Warner's.—(Hear, hear,'and laughter.) The inventors ask for no remuneration, but only that the experiment should be performed at the public expense. But after the speeches that had been made in this House on the subject, and an exhibi tion by Captain Warner, I must admit of considerable power, I thought I would deprive him of any opportu nity of saying I treated the invention with any disre spect or ridicule; I therefore offered to bear the ex penses of the experiment within reasonable limits. Captain Warner in his reply said, he did not want any artillery or cannon, as he effected his object by means distinct from any of the weapons of war. But with re gard to the reversal of the order of the experiments, by taking the long range first, he did not think it right to depart from the original plan. But he submitted to the Commissioners whether all expense in the matter might not be avoided, as he could refer for the success of his experiment to the high authority of the Secretary of the Admiralty, the First Lord of the Treasury, to the Master-General of the Ordnance, and to his Noble Friend Lord Ingestre. Why, I never saw any experiment with the long range. I only saw the one experiment at Wanstead, and what is the use of referring at all to first Lords of the Treasury ? I pro pose myself to be quite incapable of judging on the sub ject, and what I want is the opinion and judgment of professional men. In reply to this letter of Captain Warner's, the Commissioners returned a very proper communication, stating that they were not appointed to be referred to the opinions of others, but to judge for them selves. Then, as to the point of the expense of purchasing the invention, in case it succeeded. The Noble Lord says, I made a great mis-statement last year in asserting that Captain Warner asked 400,000 L for his secret. I hold in my hand a letter from Captain Warner to Lord Hard wicke, in which he demands for the purchase of his in visible shells, 200,0001., and 200,0004 for his long range also. That was the proposal made by Captain Warner on the 2d of November, 1841, immediately after the proposal for the appointment of a Commission, and his consent to the nomination of Sir Byam Martin. The Commissioners asked Capt. Warner to proceed with the experiments, and they received a reply on the 20th of April, 1842. In this letter Capt. Warner acknow ledges the communication of the Commissioners of the 16th, b,tt states that as they said they had no authority to fix th, amount of his remuneration in case he suc ceeded, and as this was the basis of his engagement, - he could not proceed further till they received authority to proini:-e him, on the part of the Government, a proper amount of remuneration. He said further, that he might save them any unnecessary trouble in entering on any other part of the subject till . this obstacle was re: . moved. Thus it i s ev id ent th at t h e sum o f 400,000/ was required, upon which the Commissioners informed him that there was an end of the Commission, since they had no authority to promise any such sum, or any other sum beforehand ; that this must be left entirely to her Majesty's Government, and they closed the Commission. After these gentlemen had thrown up the Commission, Captain Warner said he should he content with any re muneration the First Lord of the Treasury might offer him beforehand. He did also submit to some examina tion by these Commissioners, and he thought a refe rence to some of the questions put to Captain Warner, and the answers given to them would satisfy the House that caution on every point was not misplaced. The following questions were put to Captain Warner :-1 10 n; long is it since you satisfied yourself of the powers 0 ' your long range, and your invisible shells ? Captain Warner replies—Twelve years ago with respect to the long range, and twenty-seven years ago with regard to the invisible shells, as he sunk two French privateers at the end of the war, one off Folkestone, and the other in St. Vallery Bay. What was the name of the vessel you were on board of ? The Nautilus. Such an extraordi -• nary circumstance was, of course, reported to the Admi ralty ? No ;it was not reported ; we were not under the Admiralty. Then, who was the Nautilus hired by ? It was hired by the Secretary of State, and employed by Lord Castlereagh in landing spies on the coast of France. Was the destruction of these two vessels reported to the Secretary of State ? It might have been, but Ido not know. Was it recorded in the log-book of the Nautilus? We did not keep a log-book. Were any of the crew present when the destruction took place ? No one knew of it but myself and another. In answer to other ques tions, Captain Warner stated that no head-money was claimed for the crew destroyed, and that his father was the owner of the Nautilus. The Commissioners sent to the Admiralty to inquire if any record whatever existed, or cerrespondence, relating to the destruction of these two French privateers, and none could be found. The same inquiries were then made at the Foreign-office, but no record of any such fact existed. The Commissioners then asked where was the long range tried. ? The an swer was, upon some trees, at the distance of three miles, in Hainault forest, in the presence of Sir Edward Keats. Now, if this were the case, why should not Captain Warner satisfy the Commissioners as to the mode in which it was ac complished? The Commissioners also say, You have par ticularly spoken of the desolating power of your long range ; it so, how did you obtain a proof of it ? Car tain Warner in reply, stated that he had tried it in Hainault forest. and on the Biom islands, where there were no buildings, but where the power of the instru ment shivered several tons of rock. Now other persons could produce as ;neat effects as this. There were many chemical compounds that produced the most violent et feet.;, yet might be handled with perfect safety ; but the question was, whether it could be applied under difficult circumstances, and whether they could be applied with safety by the persons using them. We therefore do not see such advantage in blowing a vessel into the air, others can do that. So much for the in' visible shell. But, above all, they had a curiosity to see the effects of the long range—a projectile able W destroy fort and towns. If they attached a shell to the tail of a kite, or to a balloon, that would be of no impor tance—there was no ingenuity in that. If they proposed to convey it in this manner, and drop it into a fortress —that would be useless, for it would be impossible so to do. But could they project it to the same distance? Let them show that that was possible. However the experi ments came to an untimely end, and before he closed the Commission, his Gallant Friend (Sir Byam Martin), ex" pressed a wish that he might never be asked to try anY. more experiments, and th a t if h e were as k e d h e s h ou ld positively decline. A debate subsequently took place in that House, and Captain Warner published a letter 00 the subject, not very complimentary to the Government or to the Committee. But that was no reason why be should not have a fair opportunity of trying his experi ments. On hearing, therefore, that Captain Warner was dissatisfied with the course taken, I wrote again to Sir George Murray, stating that I understood Captain War ner was really desirous that the experiment should be fairly tried, and requesting him to confer with the First Lord of the Admiralty as to the selection of two other officers, not of equal rank with Sir Byam Martin and, Sir Howard Douglas, b u t o f un bl em i s h e d c h aracter, and having every qualification to enable them to judge. On this Commission Captain Warner wished to have a nominee of his own placed, but this the Government declined. The Commission, on the other hand, wrote to Captain Warner that the Government were willing to bear the expense, but proposed that one of the Commission should be on board the steam-boat employed by C a ptain Warner; but to this Captain Warner positively ob jected. They said they could not form a satisfactory Judgment unless they were on board the steamer; bu t still they would waive that objection, and they called on him for an estimate of the expense to be incurred. I said before I would not enter into a blind engagement to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds; all we wanted was, that the Com m i ss i oners s h ou ld watc h t h e mo de in which Captain Warner proceeded, and to report the re , stilt of their observations to the Government. But in the first instance, we wanted to have an estimate of the expense necessary for the experiment, and a letter was written to Captain Warner for an estimate of the ex pense. Captain Warner replied that he would want 2,6371. for the invisible shell, and 2,4701. for the long range, making a sum of 5,1071. altogether. Our wish was to see the experiment with the long range, and we said we did not mind the invisible shell, but we wished to have the long range tried, after what had been state d as having been done at St. Vallery Bay, Hainault forest, arid the Biom Island. We proposed to giv e him 6001. in the first instance, and then to watch the, progress of the e x p er i ment . C apta i n Warner o bj ec ted to this, saying that 500/. was not enough ; but still he would consent t o t r y th e exper i ment for that sum, a nd try to make up the remaining sum, which would be ii cessary, from amongst his friends. After a certain period, he intimated that it was impossible to make the experiment, a s h e cou ld not f i nd friends who wou l u, bear the remainin g ex p ense. T hus the matter close(' without any experiment, and the relations between the Government and Captain Warner ceased. We d e parted from the ordinary rule in this instance of advancing th e public money to try this experiment. We wanted have the long range tried first ; and I do not think it would be consistent with the duty imposed on us of guarding the public purse against all unneccessary ponse, if we were to enter into engagements for advane' ing a considerable sum—l will not say 400,0001., °. 1. , 200,00 a or 300,000 L—de p end ing u p on a cont i ng en° 7 , which could no t b e f oreseen. — (Hear, hear.) lam 0 ' opinion that the Treasury, and all the other depart' ments, have acted with the greatest fairness and libe . rality towards Captain Warner ; and I hope the House will be of the same opinion. I must say that nothing will induce me, from the experience which I have hea with regard to inventors, and in respect to Capt. Warner to consent to enter into an engagement to pay eitha 400,0001., or 100,0001., upon a certain vessel being de' stoyed.—(Hear, hear.) I will first know the mode 1 0 which it is destroyed. I will know the value of the dis' covery by which it is destroyed, and the power of PIT:, venting the use of it by others—all these effects I so') know before I consent, on the part of the public, that large sum of money be advanced ; and I hope that this House will not sanction a departure from that princird e ' seeing the importance which every inventor attaches ; ci his own invention, and that on every hand demands would would be made on th e p u bli c money on s i m i lar grouno * (Hear, hear.) B e f ore I s i t d own I must refer to so me additional evidence in this matter. In answer to a (Pe e tion which had been put to Capt. Warner as to whethe r ordinary ships would answer his purpose, or whether In would require a cer t a i n d escr i ption of vessels, he s aid that there should be vessels fitted for th e purpose in every fleet." They said, " The ° you propose to instruct persons in- the matt, k. rials you propos e t o employ ? This will ma " the secret kn own ; an d h ow many persons will it L a ' necessary to employ i n eac h fleet?" He said " t one man in the fleet should be in the secret." Thus the Government would lose the secret unless - they gn4 400,0001. to every p erson w h o b ecame acquainted 141'1 it, unless Capt a i n W arner cou ld suggest some mo d e ° keeping it secret which did not occur to the Commis' sioners. This had been signified to Captain Warners and he replied that no person need know it but th e Prime Minister and one manufacturer.—(Laughter ) Now I protest against being in the secret with anothe.r. —(Laughter.) I don't think the secret could be in t worse hands than i n th ose o f the Prime Minister. jf became necessary to prevent other Powers from w": coming aware of it, an d converting it to hostile It; poses, and that it was a sine qua non that the see'' ' should be en t ruste d to somebody, he thoug ht that that responsibility ought no t t o b e Waf t on the Prime Minister. To the objection ti another wo u ld di vu l ge the secret, Captain Waril said he did not think any Englishman would do such thing. They replied. " You are an Englishm7 f ; and you want to sell it." He said. " I want to s ic eli e the secret to my coun t ry ." I am sorry that my No to Friend has imposed on me the necessity of entering 10 , these details. I thi n k we h ave not treated Captain WI, nor's discovery w ith ou t d ue respect and regard. I W.l'o entered into all these details for the purpose of s howl_l that the House of Commons is not the proper tribt7, for trying this matter, and that it should not be co ll eo e, tuted into a court of appeal from the Gorern e2 ith Captain Warner or his offers have not been treated° or , disrespect, and I think the House will see, from the respondence which has passed, that Captain Warnerlii7g had the fullest opportunity given to him of exhih i t . his " invisible shell" and " long range," and if C f g t he Warner has fail e d t o d o so, i t i s not the f au lt of be Government or of the Co mm i ss i on — t h e f au lt must ascribed to C a pt. W arner, w h o fa i led to perform " he had undertaken.—(Hear, hear.) rah le Mr. COWPER sa id t h at the Right 1 1011 2% the Gentleman had c l ear l y s h own to t h e House that present Government had performed its dutY 111 .. 0 4 gard to thi s ma tt er . — ( H ear, h ear.) The Govern's-the had done a ll th a t l ay i n t h e i r power in or d er that to experiment m i g h t b e f a i r l y tr i ed. He only wlen, say that the l a t e G overnment were not gu il ty of %sae glect on their p ar t, f or t h at w h en C apta i n Warner Via, his proposition to Lord Melbourne, the Noble ht count said it was not a matter in which a s to be called to decide, and he referred Captain ._ g e r x ii s e : to Admiral Sir W. Parker, who was unwilling_tsilloti mine into the question himself, and he got pertn i % q uire have another Lord of the Admiralty with him tf,'„ /. be into the matter. Captain Warner required 16,u;" p er) fore he proceeded with his test, and he (Mr_. „`, reast irt the remarked, Capt. Warner preferred going to rather than to the Admiralty or Ordnance Boards,44o a that he always treated the subject more as a cluv . w ater. be money Oulu as a scientific or military THE ABOVE HEADS. Total. Weekly Average of Five Years. Consumption l3O 147 Scarlatina B2 34 Pneumonia 53 79 Dropsy ..... .. .. ... 23 35 Hooping Cough .. ......... .. 18 33 Typhus 37 31 Small Pox Disease of the Heart Measles 22 28 Apoplexy _ .......... - - 32 18 .• ••• ******** .. Diseases of the Brain ...... .... V 9 9 Diarrhoea.. Sudden Deaths DISTRICTS. West l6O 138 North Central lB9 East South. Total ....... .....1066 • THE NEW ASYLUiII FOR INFANT The first election took ORP HANS . The Monday last, at the Hall of Commerce, and the friends of Liberal principles, who have seceded from the "exclusive institution," rallied in large numbers, and with much spirit, round the New Asylum. The object of the two institutions might be thought the same, but there is this important difference :—The one receives children of all denominations to educate them accord ing to the strictest discipline of the Church of Eng land ; and the other, while giving religious instruction, imposes nothing which is not common to Chris tian faith and practice, reducing it in all its sim plicity to the capacity of the mind of a child. At eleven o'clock, John Wilks, Esq., was moved to the chair, in the temporary absence of the Lord Mayor. He said, that it was a source of great delight to him that the Chief Magistrate of the City of London had recognised the demands of the great principle of religious liberty as connected with the very existence of this second institu tion for the relief of the infant orphan; and that, with Christian feeling, he had desired to become associated with a charity thus based upon a noble and catholic foundation. He (Mr. Wilks) felt that he need say no thing to urge to vigorous effort and generous subscrip tions of money the numerous friends around him. The Rev. Dr. Reed declared the poll to be open. At two o'clock the Lord Mayor arrived ; and, expressing his regret that he had not been present at the IMPEK/AL PARL LAME NT HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 31. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition of yesterday.) The House re-assembled at Five o'clock. Sir. C. BURRELL presented a petition from Sussex in favour of protection to agriculture. Mr. HARDY presented petitions against certain clauses in the Insolvent Debtors Bill. Mr. T. DUNCOAIBE presented a petition from the inmates of Whitecross-street prison in favour of the Insolvent Debtors Bill. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL presented petitions from Ireland in favour of a repeal of the union. Mr. BOUVERIE presented a petition from Wilts against agricultural protection. Mr. SPOONER presented a petition from Uppingham against certain clauses in the Insolvent Debtors Bill. CHARITABLE BEQUESTS (IRELAND) BILL. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL gave notice that, on going into Committee on that Bill he would move several amendments. Mr. WYSE also gave notice that, on going into Com mittee on the same Bill, he should move a proviso re specting the visitors of the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth. FRENCH AGGRESSION AT OTAHEITE. Sir C. NAPIER said he wished to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet opposite, of great importance to the character and reputation of this country. He had not given notice of his intention to put the question, but it referred to a matter of such public notoriety, that he hoped the Right Honourable Ba ronet would be able to give him an answer. The ques tion he had to put was, whether it was true that the British Consul at Otaheite had been arrested under the English flag by the French authorities; whether the lights of the English residents were obliged to be put out at eight o'clock in the evening by the orders of the French; whether the French had established strong for tifications there . ; and whether, in consequence of these operations, Queen Pomare had been obliged to take refuge on board a British ship ? He also wished to ask whether, at the time these operations were going on, there was a British force at the island, and if so, to what extent ? Sir R. PEEL said, though the Hon. and Gallant Officer has not given me notice of the question, yet two other Hon. Members, the Noble Lord the Member for Dorsetshire, and the Hon. Member for Evesham, have notified to me that it is their intention to put a ques tion of a similar nature to that of the Gallant Officer ; they will perhaps excuse me if, as the Gallant Officer has the precedence of them, though he has not given notice of his question, I take the opportunity of answering my Noble Friend and the Hon. Member in the replyA give to the Gallant Officer. In doing so, I must limit myself to the statement of those facts which are of the most importance. Among these is the removal of the British Consul. We have received ac counts from Otaheite, and presuming on the accuracy of these accounts, which I have no reason to call in ques tion, I do not hesitate to say that a gross outrage, accompanied by a gross indignity, has been com mitted.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") Her Ma jesty's Government received information to this ef fect on Monday last, and we have taken the first opportunity of making those communications to the French Government which we considered the circum stances called for. The outrage was committed by a person in temporary authority at Otaheite, and f rom what we know of th e f ac t s it was not committed in consequence of any authority given him by the French Government. Presuming that the accounts are accurate, I apprehend that the French Government will at once make such a reparation as we think this country has a right to require. I trust I shall not be pressed for any further information on the subject.—(Hear.) Sir C. NAPIER said there was one part of his question which the Right Hon. Baronet had not an swered—whether a proper force was stationed at Ota heite at the time, and whether the French had esta blished fortifications on the island ? Sir R. PEEL said he had given the Hon. and Gallant Officer all the explanation necessary. DROPPED ORDERS. When the dropped orders of yesterday were called on, for the purpose of being disposed of, Mr. WYSE expressed a wish to bring in the Art- Unions Bill at once. Sir R. PEEL hoped the Hon. Gentleman would give precedence to the motion of his Noble Friend, on the subject of Captain Warner's invention, which stood for yesterday, and which had been put off at the re quest of the Government, as he understood that there was a general feeling throughout the House that it would be proper that his Noble Friend should be afforded an opportunity of bringing forward his motion. POOR-LAWS (SCOTLAND)—LUNATICS IN THE ISLE OF ARRAN. Mr. BOUVERIE asked whether it was the intention of the Government to introduce any measure during the next session of Parliament founded on the report of the Commissioners of Poor• laws for Scotland ? Sir JAMES GRAHAM had not had time to read the voluminous evidence attached to that report, and there fore could not pledge himself as to the course of conduct which he might think it right to pursue until he had had an opportunity of giving that evidence mature consideration. He would avail himself of that opportunity to offer to the House an explanation on a subject which had been adverted to during the discussion on the mo tion of his Noble Friend, the Member for Dorsetshire, on the subject of pauper lunatics. The Hon. Member for Lambeth had, during that debate, quoted a passage from the report which had been alluded to by the Hon. Mem ber for Kilmarnock, describing, in most feeling terms, the state of the pauper lunatics in the Isle of Arran. He had immediately called the attention of the Lord Advocate to the subject, and he had great pleasure in stating to the House that nine months ago active measures had been taken to redress some of these evils. The pauper lunatics had been re moved from Arran to the Glasgow asylum. Steps had been taken to bring to justice the offending parties ; in progress against fact, and criminal prec au P t r i oc on e s ed h in ad gs be w en er ta e k i e n n to prevent a re currence of the evil. _ SLAUGHTERING HORSES BILL. On the order of the day for the third reading of this Bill being read, Mr. DUNCOMBE said the Bill had undergone considerable alterations in Committee. He had made various inquiries of several parties connected with the business of slaughtering horses, and the House would be glad to hear that the statements of the cruelties-which they had heard on the last discussion were unfounded. Those statements had been quoted from a pamphlet published by the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals ; but there was a rival society in existence, called the " National Animals' Friend Society," and it was owing to the rivalry of these societies that these exaggerated statements had gone forth to the public. He objected to the 4th clause, because it gave power to the police to call upon the inspector to accompany them to these knackers' yards whenever they pleased ; and he equally objected to the 6th clause, which imposed a penalty on the inspector of 101. if he refused to do so. He thought it was uncalled for and unjust that the inspector should be at the beck and call of the pollee without any fee or reward. He should move the striking out of the objectionable words of the clause. Mr. COWPER defended the clauses as they at pre sent stood. The House then divided, when there appeared-- For the amendment .. Against it Majority for the amendment —27 The clause was then agreed to. On the motion that the Bill do pass, Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that those who had the management of this Bill did not know anything about it. Where cruelty took place was not in the licensed yards in the City, but in those places outside the town. where the horses were kept before they were slaughtered. The Bill then passed. CAPT. WARNER'S INVENTION. Lord INGESTRE said he could assure the House that he rose with the utmost reluctance to bring forward the question of which he had given notice. He felt very considerable reluctance on two grounds. The first was, his own inability to do justice to the question ; and the next was, that he had always held the opinion that that House was the last place in which questions of that nature ought to be discussed. The question of these in ventions had been more or less before the country for a period of ten years. It was about five years ago that he first became acquainted with the nature of Captain Warner's invention. At that period he brought it under the consideration of the late Government, and he had also on a subsequent occasion brought it under the considera tion of her Majesty's present Government, in order that the invention might be investigated, and if approved of secured to the country. These inventions were, in his opinion, of paramo un t a d vantage to t h o cou ntry. He bad always thought so, and in consequence he had been as sailed with every species of ridicule. Notwithstanding that ridicule, notwithstanding the talentwhich might be brought against him in debate, the obstacles which might be thrown in his way, he felt it his duty to bring forward this subject for the consideration of the House. He trusted the House would give him credit for the motives by which he was actuated. Perhaps it would be convenient to the House if he shortly traced the history of this matter. His attention had first been called to the subject by a paragraph which appeared in a newspaper in the year 1839. In consequence of this information he was ultimately introduced to Captain Warner, the inventor of these projectiles. He then inquired a little into the history of the invention, and endeavoured to trace it to the best of his ability. He was bound to say, having taken the utmost pains in the investigation, that there was great reason for further inquiry. For that reason he had determined never to lose a single opportunity of ad vocating the cause, till it was proved to be either of the greatest possible importance to them as a maritime and commercial country, or a gross imposition ; one of these it must be, and he was himself convinced that it was the former of these appellations to which it was en titled. The first information on the subject was ,