The Sun. — London, England, 1839-09-16 00:00:00

EVEN LNG EDITION. ! ' DEPARTURE of EMIGRANTS : FOR NEW ZEALAND. - 41 0-- l ' On Saturday the Directors of the New Zealand Land Company, accompanied by several friends to ' the undertaking, proceeded on board the Mercury steam packet to Gravesend, for the purpose of visit ing the emigrant ships, prior to their departure. Among those present we observed H. Aglionby, E s q., M.P., Hon. F. Tollemache, M.P., Hon. Mr. Petre, Francis Molesworth, Esq., Mr. Alderman 1 Pirie, J. Soames, Esq., G. F. Young, Esq., Dr. / Evans, Major Baker, Thomas Alers Hankey, Esq., J. A. Smith, Esq., M.P., Dudley Sinclair, Esq., Rev. Mr. Hawtree, E. J. Wakefield, Esq., 1 J. Rintoul, Esq., Editor of the Spectator and ) Colonial Gazette, S. Revans, Esq., and several 1 other gentlemen. Several ladies also honoured the icompany with their presence, notwithstanding the unfavourable state of the weather. 1 The Mercury, which was elegantly fitted up for the occasion, left Fresh Wharf, London-bridge, shortly after twelve o'clock, and arrived at Gravesend, alongside the emigrant ship Adelaide shortly after three. This ship, which carries out one hundred and forty-nine emigrants, exclusive of cabin pas sengers, is fitted up with every attention to the comfort of those on board that thought and experience can suggest, ample space is allowed for the accommodation of each passenger, and ventila tion is most sedulously attended to. The Directors and their friends having gone over the ships, the emigrants were mustered on deck and addressed by Mr. G. F. YOUNG, who said that as they were about to proceed to New Zealand, the Directors felt it their duty to do that which the Government ought to have done, namely, make provision for the maintenance of good order in the country of their adoption. In order to do this they had prepared a voluntary agreement, to which each of the emigrants would affix their signatures ; and after having heard that agreement read, if there were any man among them who had been induced to leave this country, because he was desirous of setting himself loose from all restraint of law and order, such a man would doubt less refuse to sign this voluntary agreement, which was, in fact, a solemn league and covenant for the preservation of social order among themselves, and compelling of others to observe it also. Mr. G. F. Young then proceeded to read the agreement, and to explain its provisions as he went on. By this compact the settlers agree to be directed—agree to 1 the appointment of a Governor and Council—and of an umpire and assessors, for the administration of criminal justice, This umpire being in fact a Magistrate, and the assessors jurymen. G. S. Evans, Esq., barrister-at-law, is to be first umpire. In all civil proceedings an arbitrator is to be chosen by each party, and these two arbitrators, with . the umpire, are to decide the matter in dispute. The umpire's power in criminal matters is restricted to the infliction of a fine not exceeding ten pounds, or of an imprisonment for not a longer period than three months, and there is an appeal from his de cision to the Committee of Appeal, and from that to the Governor and Council. The emigrants gave three cheers at the conclusion of Mr. Young's ad dress, and immediately signed the agreement. This ceremony having been concluded, the steamer left the side of the Adelaide, the company on board cheering the emigrants, who cheered in return. She next proceeded alongside the Oriental, a very fine ship, fitted up in a similar manner to the Ade laide, and the agreement having been signed by the emigrants on board, the Directors proceeded to the third ship, the Aurora, similarly fitted up, and the emigrants on board which also signed the aeree -1 ment. The Oriental takes out 138 a n d the ' Aurora 142 emigrants, exclusive of cabin passengers. It is intended that these ships shall sail this morning. The Duke of Roxburgh, which will sail on Tuesday, takes out one hun dred and twenty emigrants, belonging to the labour ing classes. The emigrants on board these ships are partly from London, partly from Kent and Sus sex, and a few from Warwickshire. The Bengal Merchant, which sailed o» Saturday morning for the Clyde, takes out one hundred and fifty-five emi grares principally from Sutherlandshire. The num ber of cabin passengers on board the fiv e s hip s amounts to upwards of two hundred ; several of whom have made very large purchases of land ; the whole of the proceeds of which are by the Direc tors made applicable to the promotion of emigration, by furnishing mechanics and their families desirous I of settling in the colony with a free passage. The company on board the steamer then sat down to )an elegant cold collation, laid out on the deck, the arrangement of which did great credit to Mr. 1 Laws, the Steward of the Mercury. Mr. G. F. Young, on taking the Chair, apologized for the absence of Lord Petre, whose son was about to sail in the Aurora, and who consequently did not i feel in spirits to join the company. Mr. Soames also had been obliged to go on shore at Gravesend, I where his only 'daughter was lying very dangerously ill. The steamer then again went alongside each of the emigrant ships, for the purpose of enabling the i friends of the emigrants to take a final farewell of I them before their departure for the distant country of their adoption. The scene was a most affecting one, but on the whole the emigrants appeared to be in excellent spirits, and nothing like despondency was visible. They seemed to feel that on them had devolved the high responsible mission of being founders of a new country, and to be determined to do their duty. The weather being very unfavour able, the dessert was laid out in the' cabin. The first toast proposed was " The Queen," which was drunk with all the honours. " The Army and 1 Navy" was next proposed, which having been drunk, Mr. G. F. YOUNG rose to propose as a toast "The health of the Colonists about to proceed to New Zealand," and in doing so he took occasion to vindi cate the Directors from the imputations which had been cast on them, and entered into a detail of the endeavours which had been made to induce the Colonial Office to take up the colonization of New Zealand as a national undertaking, but as the Go vernment had refused so to do, the Company had determined to do that which he verily believed the Government ought to have done. The toast was then drank with three times three and one cheer more. Dr. EVANS, in rising to return thanks al luded in a very affecting manner to the feelings from which he and others must suffer in tearing asunder the near and dear ties which connected them with their native country. He thought they were about to establish a settlement in New Zealand which would be of the utmost importance to the mother Country. He knew nothing of this new-fangled philanthropy, which would attempt to taboo the most fertile regions of the earth against the pro gress of civilization. In this colony the interests of the natives were well taken care of, and the land set apart for them would, in consequence of the in troduction of civilization among them, become to them of infinitely greater value than the whole island was at present. The emigrants were princi pally of the labouring class, and would, by going out to the new colony, escape from the ruinous effects of that competition from which that class • was Ruffering so severely in this country, and would be enabled in the colony to attain that sta tion which those whom he was addressing occupied is this country. They left their native land like the pilgrim fathers of old, full of hope, and he ot doubted n t h at „hen the colony was established, the hangers- on of the Colonial-office—the lookers out for Coloni a l s ppo.ntments, would absolutely teaze the Government into acknowledging them, and in flicting on them a government badly administered, but intAnitely more exp ens i ve than the one which the Directors had provided for them.— Cheers.) Mr. G. F. YOUNG then proposed "Lord John Russell and the reform of the Colo n i a l -offic e," and in doing so said that he believed that it was n the men who were to bla me for the non-acknow ledgment of the new colony, but the system ; for he verily believed that if a person were to set about to devise a system by which the affairs of a great empire could be most effectually mismanaged, th e one pursued at the Colonial-office would be that system. He understood that Lord John Russell had taken that office to settle the affairs of Ca nada, so that he at least thought Canada worth preserving, and did not hold the new-fangled opinions that colonies were worthless to the Mother country. He anticipated the t happiest results from the appointment of Lord ) John Russell, whose energetic and manly mind, and honesty of purpose, admirably fitted him for destroying the red tape influence from which the Government of the Colonies had so long suffered. The toast was then drunk with three times three. " The Aborigines in New Zealand, and may 1 the establishment of a British Colony in their magnificent coun try, condu ce to t h e i r we lf are , soc i a l, moral, and relig ious," was the next toast. The Rev. Mr. HAwTREE said that the Abo rigines instead of being hunted down as in other Colonies, would be civilized, and every means would be used to induce them to amalgamate with the settlers. " The Ladies." This toast was acknowledged by Mr. G. HUN TER, who is going out to New Zealand with six daughters, and four sons. In returning thanks for his health being drunk, Mr. E. G. WAKEFIELD said that this colony, unlike any other at its first settlement, would possess all the advantages derivable from a perfect currency, as the Bank of Australia had sent out an Agent and Clerks to establish a branch in the colony. The venerable Society for the propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts had also lent their assistance for the establishment of regular religious observances. He could not let that opportunity pass without bearing his testimony to the kindness and assiduity of Mr. Soames, who had never been found wanting when assistance was required, whe ther pecuniary or otherwise. Various other toasts were then proposed, and drank, and on arriving at the Fresh Wharf, about eleven o'clock, the health of the Chairman was proposed and drank, and the company sepa rated. These are the first ships that have sailed with settlers, but an exploring expedition left this country in April. The ships are fully loaded, and 600 tons of goods belonging to the settlers are now in the docks waiting for a conveyance. Among these goods are several wooden houses, so that a city will be erected in the settlement in a very short space of time. LORD BROUGHAM. [Lord Brougham has just published his speeches on the Administration of Justice in Ireland, to which he has given the following Preface. In justice to him we re produce it entirely, remarking merely that his avowal of having been driven into a reluctant and long-deferred opposition, no longer leaves any doubt as to what the Noble Lord's future line of conduct will be as long as the Ministers remain in office.] The violent attacks and more than usual misrepre sentations made by slanderous, and probably venal, writers of the Government upon Lord Brougham's conduct in bringing forward the Irish Administration of Justice for the consideration of Parliament, have naturally given rise to the separate publication of the following speeches. Those who read them will judge whether they are filled with vio lence, bitterness, personal animosity, factious scur rility, and a number of other things ascribed to them by persons, who most probably never heard a word of them—very possibly never read any report of them. But a few particulars may be stated usefully enough for the purpose of affording an additional proof that the people of this country are very well advised in no longer taking their opinions from the anonymous writers of newspapers, gene rally engaged, sometimes hired, by one of the con tending parties to blacken the other, and who have long been in the practice of having their hand against every public man, and but few hands held up for them even among those who amuse themselves by reading their handiwork. That any kind of personal feelings or interested views should by possibility dictate Lord Brougham's conduct on this occasion, is quite as absurd as the same charge, or rather insinuation, - always flung out against him since the time when (November 1837) the declaration of the Government against Re form, followed immediately by their unconstitutional measures and refusal of common justice towards Ca nada, drove him into a reluctant and long deferred oppo sition. No one who holds this very silly, and still more false, language can answer the question so often put to them—why Lord Brougham supported the Mi nisters during the whole Session of 1835, acted in con ceit with them during the year 1836, and supported them on all but th• Canada question in 1837 ? In 1836 he even remained in the country at the express desire of Lord Melbourne, who said that if he came and opposed two or three of their measures, which he conscientiously disapproved, it would overthrow the Government. This he stated in 1838 before Lord Melbourne, to whom he appealed for the truth of his assertion in the face of Parliament and the country. Surely, if he had any personal grounds of opposition, these existed dur ing the three first years of the Government formed in April. 1835, and could never have been created since. That he had ample personal grounds, who doubts? Not certainly the Ministers, who never pre tend to have the shadow of a claim upon him, though they suffer their adherents to argue as if Lord Brougham had deserted them ; and was bound - to return thanks for their ingratitude. But he did, till late in 1837, return good for evil. What has produced the change? Say rather, what change has since taken place ? The Go vermnent has changed its policy. When the King and the Court were against the Ministers, they were fain to court the people by affecting a more reforming policy than they really approved. The moment the Queen and the Court were delivered over to them, bound hand and foot, they abandoned all pretences of the kind, and made their famous declara tion of Finality. But this proved very distasteful to the ' country, which had been taught to fancy that Lord Melbourne wanted much to grant further improvements, only the Court would not let him. The country now found that, the Court being for him, he was quite satin- ' fled ; and having no further occasion for the country, pulled down the Reform colours. and hoisted the Con servative under the Royal standard. Be it observed that Lord Brougham has never once blamed Lord Melbourne for this ? Why ? Because, independent of personal considerations, Lord Melbourne never pretended to be much of a Reformer ; nay, he had often passed as an enemy of Reform. There were others, over whose conduct he well might sorrow, though he should avoid to cast blame. But the Mi nisterial organs of both the press and the hustings—all their papers, all their spouters—took every occasion to deceive the people. One said that Lord John Russell's declaration was misunderstood—he repeated it with aggravations the next day. Another said, it is Lord John Russell, and not the Cabinet : the Cabinet avowed it was theirs to a man ; and indeed Lord John was and is, after all, the very stoutest Reformer among them. A third said, they don't mean what they say ; wait and see their measures.—No measures came ; men were weary of hoping, though the deceivers were never tired of their base trade ; and discon tent began to spread through the Ministerial ranks. The Bedchamber quarrel brought the Ministers back to office, after confessing that they bad not even the shadow of a constitutional right to hold it ; and the re gular Whigs now were content to be in place without the confidence of any but the Court, and that bestowed on the avowed ground of a mere back-stairs movement —in place, too, stript of all power, either in Parlia ment or in the country. Forthwith came a strain of adulation,—and the trumpet was once more sounded to rouse the hopes, the sinking hopes, of the Liberal party. It would show human nature it its very basest form to collect the falsehoods with which the newspapers in town and country now teemed, and the speeches of Government supporters abounded, as to the new and reforming policy intended to be pursued. Falsehoods they must have been ; for not one of the Ministers even so much as gave the shadow of an authority for such re ports ; and accordingly no change whatever was made in the pokey, the anti-reform policy, of the Government. The organs of misrepresentation, thus foiled in their at tempts to propagate delusion among the people, now turned their attacks upon those who still adhered to the Reform principles which their patrons, the Minis ters, had abandoned ; and Lord Brougham of course came in for his very full share of the assault, as he had been among the greatest of those most unpar donable of all offenders—the men who persisted in clinging to the principles which the Ministers had de serted. It was a new feature, however, and a most unexpected one in the aspect which the Ministry now presented, that the Whig, or Constitutional, or Popular party stood upon the worst ground ever occupied by the Tories, whom their Liberal adversaries never assailed more bitterly, than for their disposition to stand upon Court favour, and parade the wishes and feelings of the Sovereign as a protection for his servants against the wrath of Parliament and the people. There was no one article of their political creed to which Whi , s were, up to this period of time, more religiously attached, none in which their faith more widely differed from that of the Tories, than this, of the use to be made of the King's name, the King's favour, and the King's influence. " The good old King," was the Tory rallying cry fo: many long years of misrule. " Don't disturb the good old King's repose." " Respect his Majesty's scruples." " Don't force his Majesty's con science,"—was the comparatively decent appeal which that great and consistent party made to the coun try as often as a measure of toleration was to be op posed. " The Ministers are the King's choice." " Don't deprive your good old King of his favourite ser vants," was the constant set-off against all failures, all proofs of i ncapac i ty, a ll l oss o f public confidence. But never was there indignation more loud, never scorn more bitter, th an were ex hibit e d in the treat ment which suc h appeals constantly met w i t h f rom th e Whigs. It would be hard to say whether Mr. Fox, Lord Howick (now Lord Grey), Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Tierney, Lord H o ll an d , or Mr. Brougham (now Lord Brougham), poured forth the most fierce invectives against these topics and this policy of the Tories—in whom, nevertheless, they were tolerably consistent with their avowed principles —just as th e y stoo d i n w id e and impudent and disgustint, repugnance to every ar ticle of the Whic , faith. Leta sin; le speech of Lord Grey in 18 sample of 07 be given, a s a tothe sort o f retra with out power, and profit without credit, have dee me d things which Whigs are now called upon no w that this Whig party, for m ere l ove of place, ct— it be- THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 1839. coming their position in the country and worthy of 1 former recollections, to stand before that country—with out blushing at those recollections to stand—upon a Bedchamber difference, and hold their offices in the teeth of Parliament and the country, relying for all their support upon the favour of" the good young Queen ;" and fatiguing the weary country, rousing the flagging party, with cries of "Stand by your Sovereign.—" Don't let her Bedchamber women be changed." What portion of this speech, about to be cited, except perhaps the last member of the enumeration, is inapplicable to the pre sent moment? But what portion of it could her sup porter of the Whig Ministry read without shuddering at the present position of his party ? " While 1 possess the power of speech," said Lord Howick (Grey), 23d June, 1807, " I must ever protest against anything so fatal as introducing the Monarch's name into discussion. If such a practice is permitted, farewell to the freedom of deliberation ; but farewell also to the personal security of the Monarch himself. Arraying him as personally opposed to the Whig party, and calling on the country to decide between them, endangers the King's personal security. If I am an enemy of an Administration engendered in Court in trigue—if I am an enemy of an Administration composed of men differing from one another upon the most important questions—if lam an enemy of an Administra tion which does not possess the confidence of the coun try—if I am an enemy of an Administration, of the first man of whom I will say nothing—it is because I am convinced that such an Administration is pregnant with the greatest dangers to the King and to the Constitu tion." Lord Brougham, a few years latter, after enumerat ing the acts of misgovernment chargeable upon the To ries, above all, their mismanagement of the war, and their Walcheren, expedition says— " After all these confessions, their (Tories) only excuse, the only attempt they make to regain the confidence of the people, is to tell us ' that the King has reigned fifty years.' They have ruined our allies ; they have failed in every plan ; they have brought us through slaughter and danger, wedded with misery, and weighed down with almost intolerable burthens, to the very brink of destruction. But the King is very old,' and ' he has reigned above half a century.'" Such are the words which Lord Grey and Lord Brougham are impudently expected impudently to eat up for the sake of supporting a set of Whigs, the remnant of the party, who, having separated themselves from their fast and faithful friends, joined some of their bitterest enemies, and cast off their oftentimes avowed principles, are following the very worst of the bad practices of their adver saries, and erecting the standard of mere office upon the sole ground of Royal favour, in obsequious subserviency to the Court, and in open defiance of the country. It is a pitch of impudence, yet more extrava gant and astonishing, to charge men with a b an d on i ng their party, who have only refused to be guilty of the gross apostacy which has been exacted from all adherents to the Whig standard ! The same agents of the Government have, on the same ground, charged those who refused to sanc tion Lord Normanby's Irish Administration, espe cially his use of the judicial powers vested in the Executive Government, with factious and personal motives. If any thing of a personal kind had been felt or acted upon, the evidence afforded free scope to indulge in a strain of remark very different from that which will be found in the following speeches. Some topics are omitted, and some heads of charge are entirely passed from, which an enemy might have really dwelt upon with satisfaction. The employment, by the Crown, of counsel to defend murderers prose cuted by the Crown, is not once alluded to. The re ception of persons at the Caistle, after official represen tations made of speeches exc ting to acts of bloodshed— speeches themselves gross infractions of the law—is not even hinted at. The tone and temper of all the ob servations is as utterly free from all personal rancour, or disrespect, or even unkindness, as can well be ima gined—and the whole blame imputed is excess of ami able feelings—and a casual indiscretion. Whence then, it may be asked, all the fierceness of the very injudicious advocates, who have undertaken to repel attacks so measured and so abstinent ? Fron. this, that the Irish Administration had hitherto bee! the only ground whereon the Government conceived it had any thing like a firm footing—and the Irish suc cesses were held up as a perpetual set-off against the constant failures in England. When, therefore, this only and favourite spot of ground was invaded, and invaded by the force always most formidable it. English political warfare—the supporters of the law marching under the standard of Justice, and whoa rallying cry is the preservation of judicial purity— no wonder that great uneasiness was felt at the attack. and ill-concealed anxiety betrayed during the whole o, the operation, and a bitter mortification shown at its triumphant success. The defence was feeble beyond all former example ; but the spirit of acrimony whicl , had evaporated in the conflict without stimulating to ; blow, was concentrated afterwards, and exhausted it, petty efforts to harrass the Victorious party, instead. ol administering to the vanquished the consolation of re venge. It is necessary to note two things for the sakt of edification in matters political—and as being mall) curiosities of a rare description, and of some relish to lovers of new and strange sights. Lord Brougham was not at all answered, nor ever. attacked, in Parliament, except upon one ground ; and this wholly unprecedented. He had once, it seems, praised Lord Normanby ; and Lord Melbourne, wit" much sarcastic contempt for the praise so bestowed, i! not for its object, cited a passage from a work published under Lord Brougham's sanction, namely, his Speeches. He might have found much unretracted praise of Lord Nor manby's Jamaica administration ; nay, not a little even in the Irish debate of April last. One of these speeches was accompanied by a note, which, after giving much well-earned commendation to Lords Wellesley ant. Anglesey for their wise and liberal conduct towards the Catholics, eulogises Lord Normanby for follow ing in their footsteps, and bestows a panegyric in passing upon his private and literary character, a pane gyric which excited Lord Melbourne's great merriment. whether justly or not, could be no fault of its author. Perhaps of all ridiculous subjects of attack, this was the most ludicrous. The passage, although it speaks of holding even the balance between the two religions plainly means and indeed in terms says, that this trim ming process consisted in giving all the favours to the Catholics which the law allowed ; and that Lord Brougham, or any one else, has ever since cast blame or. Lord Normanby for not doing so, or could have cast such blame, is quite a new view of the case. But even it it were as true as it is false that he had ever stated an opi nion in favour of Lord Normanby's whole Irish adminis tration in May, 1838, how could he predict what came out in Committee, during forty-eight days' examination of witnesses, in May and June, 1839 ? Did he in 1838 know—could he believe—the things which only came out when the Lord Chief Justice was examined this year ? Was Gahan's case known ? Was Sly's ? Was the treatment of the Chief Justice ? Was the refer ence of cases to attornies ? Was the delegation of par doning to turnkeys? Were the details of wholesale gaol deliveries ever dreamt of before 1839 ? Assuredly public men out of office are placed in a somewhat strange posi tion when they are called upon to piss judgment upon public men in office, if the moment any praise is be stowed by the former upon one portion of the conduct pursued by the latter, a perpetual estoppel is created, and no change of conduct, no new facts brought to light, are ever to justify a change of opinion or of tone. But happy above all things are men in office if such a canon of criticism is adopted ; for they have only to do some one thing deserving commendation, to be secure against censure for ever after. One matter, however, is quite clear. Whoever hereafter shall utter a word in appro bation of Lord Normanby, does it at his peril ; for once the irrevocable word flies forth, he must ever after hold his peace what conduct soever the Noble Marquis may pursue, upon pain of beimg assailed by himself and his friends as inconsistent, and malignant, and factious, and false. But another thing may also be safely predicted ; no such apprehension will ever deter Lord Brougham from warmly praising his former friend, as often as he shall honestly think that friend deservesit. But then it is said that Lord Brougham is ready enough to complain of the ill administration of justice in Ireland now—he who never, while the Tories were misgoverning that ill-fated country, opened his mouth against them on this score. Indeed! Then if he never opened his mouth, how came he to make a speech, three hours long, 23d June, 1823, so audibly that it is fully reported, with a long reply t o Si r Robert Peel, and is to be found in the debates--is contained in the publication cited by Lord Melbourne— nay, is the very identical speech, a note to which Lord Melbourne read in order to laugh at it ? Look at the Minute-books of the two Houses—that of the Commons for June, 1823, and of the Lords for July, 1839 ; and the identical notice stands in both, given by the same identical individual, for a motion on the same identical subject, " The Administration of Jus tice in Ireland !" The difference is that the Whigs all voted with Lord Brougham's motion in 1823, and all voted and all bellowed against this motion in 1839, when the case was ten thousand times stronger. Nor is this the only gross and most scandalous false hood circulated by the conductors of the Ministerial press. They have charged Lord Brougham with vo lunteering needlessly his motion. They have, in order to support this silly charge, suppressed all mention of the fact, twice over stated by him, that he never had thought of making any motion this Session, and was, on the contrary, against such a course being pursued, until the Ministerial defenders of Lord Normanby in the Committee took such a course as prevented the possi bility of a Report being made, containing such an ab stract of the mass of evidence as would enable the House and the country to read and understand it. Then it was that he said he should feel obliged to undertake the task of making that portion of it known to the House, which alone he had deemed worthy of general attention, and to obtain which portion had been his only ground of supporting the motion for a Committee. But other tricks to cover other falsehoods and to excite astonishment by their audacity, remain to be I mentioned. The whole proceedieg against Lord Nor manby was to be resented as merely factious. It was stated that not one person in the Lords had blamed his Lordship's conduct except enemies to the Govern ment, and personal or alitical advers Aries of them and Lord Normanby. Lord Hatherton and the Duke of Richmond belt ng not to this class. What then was to be done ? 80. , af these Noble Lords had joined in strong disapproval of the only part of Lord Norman by's conduct which Lord Brougham's motion seriously assailed. The one, Lord Hatherton, was the Noble Marquis's avowed and very able defender, both in the Committee and In the House. No mention therefore was made of his having, when he came to the important subject of the gaol deliveries, declared that for this there could be no defence, and that he could tiot " com pliment away his conscientious conviction," on this head, to gratify his noble friend. The Duke of Richmond even voted with Lord Brougham, he who is known almost always to support the Goverment, and never to leave them when he can help it. Nay, the very night after the debate, that truly noble and honourable person, in solemn and impressive terms, declared that, acting as a juryman upon the charges against his Noble Friend, Lord Normanby, he was compelled to condemn him for this important part of his adminis tration. And yet the Government writers say, none but the factious and the personal are found to blame the Marquis! Nay, some of the Government papers had actually the effrontery to cut out of their report of the Noble Duke's speech the above most remarkable part of it, for the manifest purpose of enabling them, in the other parts of the same publication, to propagate the falsehood that no friend of the Government had taken part against Lord Normanby ! This is truly and happily a thing unheard of in the history of party misrepresentation. But it re mains to add another singular feature of the contro versy. Can there be named any one person in any one station, connected with the Whig party, by any one tie, however close, filling any one office with or under them, or even filled with hope of being promoted by them, who has ever yet in private expressed any approval of the gaol deliveries, and the treatment of the Judges ? Nay, has not every person living , blamed Lord Normanby for these transactions, although some doubt less may have expressed their censure in far gentler terms than others ? Why, the Noble Marquis hardly defended this course himself—certainly his colleague and leader, Lord Melbourne, defended it not. A strange scene, no doubt, was witnessed when the Noble Viscount rose to speak. He had not read the evidence, therefore he knew nothing at all of the matter from the evidence, and could not tell whether his friend and colleague were guilty or not. Indeed ! Then why bad he not read the case ? It took two hours to read—no more. Was it chance, or was it de sign that kept him from the perusal? Had he picked up nothing of it from other quarters ? Was he really and truly so ignorant as to be unable to tell that the act of reading might be attended with a risk of con demning ? In a word, was not his ignorance voluntary —wilful ? This be left in no kind of doubt, for he never dreamt of asking time to read by moving an ad journment, which must as a matter of course have been granted, had he demanded it. On the contrary he moved the previous question,—the meaning of which is known to be," The motion cannot be negatived, for it contains nothing that is not true—but we object to its being put as needless or as inconvenient." Needless, no one ever pretended that it was,—inconvenient and excessively inconvenient every one felt it to be—for the Government. After this no person has any right to represent Lord Normanby as defended by Lord Melbourne. He was plainly and almost in terms given up by his leader. He was plainly and in direct terms given up by his defender, Lord Hatherton. He was openly condemned by his friend, the Duke of Richmond. But to what purpose make these remarks, or re cord such facts as these ? Not certainly in the vain hope of working impossibilities—stopping the false tongue of the professional slanderer—opening the hearts of party leaders to justice, or to truth the ears of their dupes—or making shameless men blush —making those blush at being detected, who never blushed to cheat. No such impossible aim is here in view. But it is not without its use to take every op. portunity of confirming the people of this country in their resolution wisely taken of late years, to think for themselves, and not let partisans and party prints dic tate their opinions of men any more than of measures. It is not unimportant to give new and striking p roo f s how unsafe a guide party prints are in form ing the public opinion on the conduct of public men. It is useful to show the worst kind of party dishonesty in its very worst colours, in order to deter men from becoming faction's slaves. It is good to add is new and striking illustration of Ilume's remark, as sagacious in substance as happily and simply ex pressed in words. "Itis no wonder that faction is pro ductive of vices of all kinds ; for besides that it influ ences all the passions, it tends much to remove thve great restraints, honour and shame ; when men find that no iniquity can lose them the applause of their own party, and no innocence secure them against the calumnies of the opposite."—(History of England, chap. lxix.) It is as well also to note the injury which party does to public morals by the encou ragement which it gives to a vile traffic in slander and falsehood ; for neither can the people nor those who assume to guide them be in a sound state, when the one are occupied in fabricating malicious fictions which the other are habituated to contemplate, though they may not be able to believe. There are not many serious evils in a popular Government, and none at all deserving to be compared with its advantages. But assuredly this is among the worst of those drawbacks to which we gladly submit for the blessin gs we en j oy , t h at one part of the community are trained to trick and deception, while another are drawn into unreflect ing dupery ; the feelings of publi c men are ren dered callous to public opinion, by see i ng i ts oracles so often devoid of all truth and justice ; and the dictates of right and wrong are confounded by observing how the best of party men, themselves in capable of such base proceedings, are yet willing enough to share in the benefits which their followers thus render to their cause. MARYLEBONE VESTRY. MUTILATION OF THE PAROCHIAL RECORDS. The Marylebone Vestry were specially summoned for Saturday, pursuant to notice, to receive the Report cf a Committee, and to comider the lateextraordimiry mutila tion of tombstones, and interpolations in the parish regis. ters, for the purpose of securing the title to an estate, called "Fendall's" situate in Bermondsey. The subject has created an extraordinary degree of interest, imd during the sitting of the Vestry the gallery of the Court-house was filled with rate-payers anxious to witness the pro ceedings. Mr. A DANIELL having been appointed to the chair, Mr. FLOOD, the Vestry Clerk, read the following Report : " Your Committee have been appointed by a resolu tioneDorme complaints n V oqt e uiA s i rtiereysi Messrs. 01l certain t.ch Christie, s t t h i ea 7 1 I f eEg August gn l a u, s lia t , , rr iot u ci so o rni andtt ee w, to n parish registers kept in the rectory church, the removal of certain stones from the grave of the Fendall family in Paddington-street burial-grounds, and the erection of a new head and foot stone thereon, report that they have prosecuted this inquiry with all possible despatch con sistent with a careful discharge of the duty deputed to them,, while they are at the same time compelled to ex press their regret that the result of this investigation is anything but satisfactory. " I it the statements of the several parties whi h your Coffin) ittee have had before them, considerable discre pancies are manifest ; but there is no evidence of a character sufficient to warrant them in designating the guilty parties, feeling aware that whatever may be the force of impression made by these varying statements upon their minds, they are not convictions arising from indubi table evidence, such as to justify them in fixing a branded mark upon the parties and instruments in this fraudulent transaction, concocted and carried out as it has bee n by some persons who are intimately acquainted with the whole details, and who have had easy access to the .registers. The erasures and alterations made in the mini,ater's fee-book, to make it correspond with those effected in the registers, fully substantiate this opinion ; that such alterations and erasures have been made within the last three years is also the impression of Mr. Pau, the sexton, from the circumstance of his having, at the re quest of Mr. G. Fendall, made diligent search to trace these entries within the period, without success ; but haw or by whom effected he himself has not the slightest knowledge. " Your Committee will state, first, the result of their inquiries regarding the registers ; secondly, as regards the graxestones ; and, thirdly, propose some remedial measure', as appears to them most suitable to meet the exigenci, as of so important an object. In the first place the attetition of the Committee was particularly drawn to the fo flowing entries, erasures, and alterations in the registers.. viz.—in a b oo k, mar ked on the back, No. of marriages, 6 Dec:, 1711, to '2.8 Nov., 1734 ; bap tisms, 16 Dee. 1711, to 31 Jan., 1734 ; burials, 2:2 Nov., 1.711, to 31 Aug. 1733. 1733. At folio , 134, dat e Nov. 29, 1734, the following . words have been inserted and attcttnpted to be eras e d f ro m the bottom of the page , " Richar d Fendall and Eli za beth Chappell, both of this parish, p er banns.' In a book marked on t he back , " No. of . Baptisms, 3 Feb., 1733, to 22 March, 1748 ; marriag.?a, 27 Dec. 1734, to 5 March, 1748, at the end of Coo month of Dec. 1734, in the register o f marriage are the words,' Richard Fendall and Elizabeth Chappell, of this parish, per bans.' These words are put in in lighter ink than the other parts of the book, and they have been partly touched over a second time in darker ink. At the bottom of the page, under the date of M .ty, 1735, there is an o bliteration of names, which your • Committee cannot perfectly define. In this said book, under the date of Septem ber 5, 1737, in the register or baptisms are the words of Richard and Elizabeth, born '25; William Fendall, 11 inst."Fhis is an insertion,. or an erasure. In a book, marked Burials, 3d July, 179, 6 , to 31st October, 1789,' under the data of April 11, 1786, are the nam , s of Richard Prendeil leau, Jane Mronella The book at this place is very much disfigured. There have been erasures, over which the name is written. The oil leaf is wrink:ed and shrivelled. In a small book, called The Mi nisters' Fee Book,' under the samiLdate of April 11, 1796, we the names of • Richard Vine, chd : Jane Petronella Launnens.' The only connexion this had with the present affair is, that the name of Vinn having been erased from the burials book, the name of Fend all appears to have been inserted, and then, for some reason, again erased, the name of Fendall converted into • Prendeill,' and eau' added thereto, making the name found in the book Prcndeilleau.' In this sami., burials book, under the date of July '27, 1796, in the words Richard Fendall,' the word Richard appears to be the original entry, and the word Fendall an insertion or an erasure. In the minister's fee-book, under the same date, are the words ' Richard Fendall f the word Richard appearing again to be the original entry, and the word Fendall an insertion or an erasure. In this same burials-book, under the date of July 31, 1726, the words R. Fendall' have been inserted, and again erased , the reason of this appears to your Committee that it was intended by the parties to insert the name of Richard Fendall in a blank space at the end of the month of July, but after having made the insertion in the burials book, they found no corresponding space in the minister's j fee-book. The name was, therefore, attempted to be erased from the burials-book ; and, under the date of July '27, 1796, is found the name of • Richard Prendeil leau.' The sirname was erased from both books, and the name of Fendall in both cases was written on the erasure. The erasure has been of some fine scratching, commencing with P. " In the statements of those persons who volunteered an explanation of the several parts they have sustained in the search for, the finding of, and the granting cer tificates of those entries the following particulars have been detailed : " Mr. Pau, the sexton, made search three years ago, but found none. The period of search was, he believed, from 1740 to 1770. His brother, David Pau, named the subject to him more than a year ago, when he told him (D. Pau) he might search the books if he liked. Mr. D. Pau did so, and claims to have found the entries required. Continuing the search he discovered the appearances ; he admits that at first they looked to him so very suspicious that he called his brother's attention to them, as also the Rev. Mr. Gilbert's, the curate on duty, remarking that it was his opinion that the registers had been tampered with. He, Mr. D. Pau, wrote out the certificates ; they were signed, on these suspicions, by the minister, and Mr. D. Pau took them to Mr. Fendall, and charged 3/. or 41. for the search and certificates, which Mr. Fendah paid. He, Mr. D. Pau, was induced to move in this business at the request of Mr. Fendall, who met him in the city, Mr. Fendall being then going to the parish clerk's office to offer a reward for those very certificates, and, having some previous knowledge of Mr. Fendal:, he, Mr. D. Pau, agreed to see his brother on the sub ject. That, at the time the entries were found, there were present in the Vestry-room of the Church, himself, his brother the sexton, the Rev. Mr. Gilbert, and John Stamp ; each inspected the registers, expressed surprise at their appearance, yet no communication was made of the circumstance to the other Curate, the Rev. Mr. Burgess, nor to the Rector, in whose custody the regis ters are legally placed. That at the last Summer Assizes for Surrey, held at Croydon in August last, actions of eject ment were brought by Mr. Fendall against certain per sons, purchasers of property settled under a deed of trust, dated June 1831, made by George Choumat, the in heritor by marriage of one, and by purchase of the other, moiety of the estate of Richard Fendall, of Bermondsey, who died in 1734, he, the present Mr. Fendall in question, claiming the property as descending from the said Richard. Mr. P au , th e sex t on , was su b pcenaed to attend at Croydon, and took with him the registers to produce in Court to sustain plaintiff's claims ; but on inspection of the registers, the evening preceding, by plaintiff's counsel, to whom Mr. Pau, the sexton declared, that if asked he should swear that he believed the entries to be forgeries, the plaintiff determined to withdraw the record. Had the trial proceeded, the complainants before the vestry, who are legally interested as purchasers of this pro. p rty, would, perhaps, have had no occasion to call for inquiry as a means of protection on their part. Mr. D. Pau, at the time, could not be found by the defen dants to serve him with a subpoena. Stamp stated to the Committee that he was detailed in the country, having met with an accident. " Your Comtnitttee cannot refrain from expressing their surprise that Mr. Pau, the parish clerk and sexton, who received the appointment of deputy in charge of the registers from the rector, the Rev. Dr. Spry (he having also been deputy of the late rector, Dr. Heslop). should not have seen it his duty to communicate with the Rector on such an important affair as this, involving. as it does, the safe custody and integrity of the parish registers. The reasons he assigns are quite insufficient to justify his silence, in their view of his oblig:ttions his principal. The Committee are equally at a loss to account for the silence of the Rev. Mr. Gilbert, a gen tleman who, from his professional knowledge and minis terial character, must have known that the dis covery of a series of very doubtful entries in the registers of the parish required in vestga don. A doubt upon an entry made 100 years ago might be treated as an error not calling for any par ticular notice, but here a marriage, the birth of a son, and a burial, each relating to the same parties, eaci; exhibiting the same evidence of falsification, each cer tificate of which was required by or for the same per sons, and, at the same time (as it is so stated by Mr. Pau and Mr. D. Pau, while Mr. Gilbert has no distinct recollection as to the time, yet he stated a circumstance calculated to fix the memory—that the first set of cvr tilicates which he signed were brought again to the. vestry of the church so damaged by fire that they wert useless as evidence, yet retained enough for him to identify them when he was required to sign a fresh set of certificates), are all circumstances of so unusual a character as to have required from him a distinct ml(4 marked notice in the conscientious discharge of th( duties of his office. " In the explanations given by the sexton to th. Committee, he stated that since the Vestry had refused, in 1834, to pay for copying the registers as required b; the 52d Geo. 111. c. 46 , they hive not been fur nished. They have been regularly supplied by th. Vestry up to the present time. The Act makes it unr rative in the church authorities, and the non-cyie pliance with the provisions of the above-named Act, is marked dereliction of duty. It was, by correspondener with the Bishop's registrar, found that no copy of the St. Marylebone registers had been sent in since 1833. " The removal of the old grave stone, and the erec tion of a new stone, was effected upon the application of Stamp to Mr. D. Pau, on the part of Mr. Fendall he being desirous, it was said, that the inscription on the family grave•stone should correspond with the re cently discovered entries in the registers. This application was made in May 1838 ; Stamp required au order for this purpose from the sexton as usual. Mr. D. Pau wrote one in his brother's name. Stamp considered this sufficient, and gave an order to Mr. Daw son, the mason, for a head and foot stone. The next day Mr. D. Pau gave him, as from Mr. Fendall, a copy of the inscription to be cut on the new stone, which was done by Mr. Bunell, sen., (since dead). He re ceived his instructions from Stamp, and the work was finished by his son, Win. Bunell, who produced to the Committee the copy of the inscription, in the hand writing of Stamp. The old stones were removedlh‘ Stamp when the men brought the new ones. The} were told by Stamp where to fix them. The old heat stone was rubbed down by the grave-digger, Josiah Small, as directed by Stamp, who paid him 4s. for his labour, and thus the whole of the writing has been ef faced. The foot stone was left untouched, and sup posing the initials and dates on the stone to represent accurately the names and dates on the head stone, the following additional names have been inserted :—' Eli zabeth Fendall, died Dec. 24, 1774 ; Richard Fended, died July 20, 1796, aged 83 years ; Elizabeth Fendall, died May 3, 1811. The date of the decease of Wm. Fendall is altered to 1809, the date of the old foot stone being Win. Fendall, 1803. Two of these three names bear close affinity with certain entries in the registers. Stamp stated to the Committee that Mr. Fendall was un known to him. He was first pointed out to him at Croydon Assizes, and now he s ho uld know him ; yet he admitted subsequently that he took the bill for the new stones to Mr. Fendall, and that, after calling several times, he receved the amount, 71. 14s. 6d., from Mr Fendall himself, by cheque upon his bankers. Bunell, un., stated to the Committee that Stamp told him very abruptly one day as he was leaving the ground, that should he be asked any question about the waiting on the Fendall stone, to say he knew nothing about it, as he told them the man who did it was dead. The Com mittee have no evidence that Mr. Pau, the seeiton, had any knowledge of this part of th e t ransact i on : h e hi m self positively denies any acqu a i n t ance w ith it ; y e t th e position of the stone is a very public one, being close to the gate leading from Paradise-street, and may be seen without entering the ground. " Your Committee are aware, that by the 56th Geo. 111., c. 151, sec. 54, a penalty, not exceeding 1001., is incurred by wilfully or maliciously breaking down or de stroying any foot or headstone in any of the cemeteries or burial grounds of this parish, or to obliterate and de face any inscription thereon ; but the obliteration and defacing above detailed will not come within the mean ing of the statute, or they would recommend a pro secution to recover the penalty. With reference to the remedies your Committee have to propose the most effectual one to guard against the recurrence of such frauds as have been referr e d t o , wo uld be a complete copy in duplicate of the several registers from their commencement to 1813, when, by the 52d Geo. 111. C. 146, duplicate copies were re quired to be deposited in the Bishop's Court, with the registrar of the diocese ; but this would entail a con siderable expense, which it is apprehended the Vestry will be unwilling to incur . Such proceedings may be rendered unnecessary, and the registration com mittee appointed two years since. recommend the consolidation of all the registers belunguig to the Esta- EVEN 1 G EDIT ON. hvie been exported to England. The prospects of the harvest, especia!ly of wheat, are extremely favourable. From Jan. 1 to June 20, 468 ships have cleared in ward, and 418 outward. Very little bui:ness has been done in Ditch Stock, and the prices have remained entirely as yesterday. Tile latest quotation of Spanish Stock at the Ex change at Antwerp was 27-t. THE LATE LADY FLORA HAST- INGS. (From the Morning Post.) We have been honoured by the Marquis of Ha3t ligs with the ;'ollotsing interesting and inaptant corn- muuication : TO THE EDITOR OF THE MORNING ranPlo BURLINGTON HOTEL, SEPT. 13, 1839. Sir,—l will feel obliged by the publication, in your journal, of the following statement and correspond- ence : If I am asked why I have placed these flcts before the public, my answer is, because it is my duty , —because I have felt that it was the only way in which I could defeat the many prejudiced statements, gross misrepresentations, and unblushing falsehoods of interested persons—because I have felt that every part of this lamentable history ought to be published, that by so doing every falsehood might be met, and a true and indisputable statement of facts be handed down to posterity. I have been told, on high authority, that if I bring this subject before the House of Lords it will be immediately silenced as an attack upon the Throne. Insurmountable technical difficulties prevent my exposing in a Court of Justice the vile conduct of those who have slandered my sister ; and but one course, therefore, remains open to me, and that is, to publish the accompanying correspondence. It has been asked, why such delay has taken place ? A. few words will answer this. The repeated solicitations of my sister, personally to myself, and by letter to my mother, urged me, during the time it was deemed necessary she should con tinue at the Palace, to remain silent, as, to use her own expressions, every new act of ours was visited upon her dear mistress's and lier own unfortunate head. I shall not attempt to heighten the picture of this frightful tragedy. But it cannot be supposed that any regard for the feelings of those (be their rank and station what they may) who have sacrificed every feeling of my family—who have trodden under foot every Christian principle—who have outraged all delicacy, justice, and honour—can weigh with me. That the power of the Court may for a time protect the guilty— that it may prevent that measure of justice which the common law of the land holds out to the lowest subject —that it may foster and permit to bask in its sunshine the basest of slanderers—has alas ! been but too fully proved. But I have yet to learn that in this free country it can stifle the voice of truth. I have, there fore, determined to make the public masters of the whole business, by publishing the entire correspondence which has taken place on this melancholy occasion ; and 1 now cast for ever from me a subject which has been productive of such pain and anxiety, fully confident of finding alive in the breasts of the British nation that justice and sympathy which has been denied me in a higher quarter. On the morning of the 20th of February I received, at Donington Park, a letter from my sister, the late Lady Flora Hastings, dated the 19th of February, in forming me that her honour had been most basely as sailed, but entering into no particulars. On the receipt of this I hastened instantly to Lon don, and, on repairing to my sister, was horror-struck by learning from her own lips, for the first time, a partial outline of the disgusting truths which are now, alas ! but too well-known to the public to need any further repetition from me. She said at once, that she felt it a duty she owed to herself, her mistress, and her family, to submit to the inhuman trials she underwent, in the presence of (to use her own words) her accuser, Lady Portman, Sir James Clark, and her own maid (whose deposition is now certified upon oath.) Sir Charles Mansfield Clarke, long known to her family, was also chosen by my poor sister to attend her. I may here very properly place the statement of my sister, Lady Flora Hastings, merely remarking that I heard from her own lips that the examination to which she was subjected was conducted with more than ordi nary disregard to delicacy and to her feelings STATEMENT IN THE HANDWRITING OF THE LADY FLORA HASTINGS, MARCH, 1839. SUBMITTED IN THE FORM OF A CASE TO SIR WM. FOLLETT AND MR. TALBOT. " I came into waiting on the 10th of January. The Ladies then in waiting were Lady Charlemont, Mrs. Campbell, Miss Spring Rice, and Miss Paget. Baron ess Lehzen and Miss Davys are in constant waiting . The same day, having been suffering from bilious illness since the beginning of December, I consulted Sq . James Clark, her Royal Highness's physician , a nd placed myself under his treatment. " At the expiration of that fortnight Lady Harriet Clive took Mrs. Campbell's place, and Lady Barham Lady Charlemora's- And, a few days before the meet ing of Parliament, Lady Tavistock came to the Palace to attend her Majesty on that occasion, and to the theatres. She remained about a week or ten days. Before she quitted, Lady Portman, Lady Caroline Bar rington, and Miss Murray came into waiting. " On the 16th of February Sir James Clark came to me, and asked me whether I were privately married, giving, as his reason, that my figure had excited the re marks of the Ladies of the Palace.' On my empha tic denial he became excited, urged me to confess,' as the only thing to save me,' stated his own Convictio n to agree with that of the Ladieq,' that it had occurred to him at first, that no one could look at me and doubt it,' and remarks even yet more coarse. " I observed to him, that the swelling from which I had been suffering was very much reduced, and offered him the proof of my dresses. He replied, Well, I don't think so. You seem to me to grow larger every day, and so the ladies think.' He proceeded to say it was the only supposition which could explain my ap pearance and state of health, or else you must have some very bad illness.' I said that was possible, I had thought badly of my state of health, but that his sup position was untrue and perfectly groundle.s. He ended by assuring me that nothing but a medical exa mination could satisfy the ladies of the Palace, so deeply were their suspicions rooted,' and that he must inform Lady Portman, who had been his confidante,' of my denial. He returned with a reiteration of what he had already said, and, I think, but I will not be po sitive, added that it was the more imperative as the rumour had reached her Majesty. I said, feeling per fectly innocent, I should net shrink from any examina tion, however rigoroas, but that I considered it a most indelicate and disagreeable procedure, and that I would not be hurried into it. I said also that before any thing was determined, it would be requisite for me to know the Duchess of Kent's pleasure ; and inquired if her Royal Highness had authorised these communica tions to me ? To my surprise I learned that her Royal Highness was still uninformed that the slightest suspicion rested on me. " It having been notified to me that it was her Ma jesty's pleasure that I should not appear until my cha racter was cleared by the means suggested, and having obtained the permission of her Royal Highness to submit to it, as the most instantaneous mode of refuting the ca lumny, I sent on Sunday, the 17th, for Sir Charles Mansfield Clarke and Sir James Clark, and the exami nation took place in the presence of my accuser, Lady Portman, and my own maid. "In the evening Lady Portman came to me, to ex press her regret for having been the most violent against me. She acknowledged that she had spoken a great deal to the Queen on the subject, especially when she found it was her Majesty's own idea.' She said she was very sorry, but she would have done the same respecting any one of whom she had the same suspicion. I said my surprise is, that, knowing my family as she did, she could have entertained those suspiciond." COUNSEL'S OPINION. (The opinion of Sir Wm. Follett atidli'Mr. Talbot was given to the effect that the facts of the case did not afford any ground for legal proceedings on the part of Lady Flora Hastings or her family). Feeling that with me alone rested the responsibility of protecting my sister's character, and restoring her to that place in society from which the artful villany of her enemies bad driven her, I immediately hastened to Lord Winchilsea, a man whose high sense of honour fully entitles him to the confidence I felt it necessary to repose in him. He agreed with me that the most proper course to take would be to demand from Lord Melbourne himself an explanation of the business. On seeing his Lordship be declared his ignorance of the subject beyond his having been made acquainted with reports by Lady Tavis tock, and his having desired the Ladies of the Court to be quiet, he himself not placing any belief in it. I also received from him an assurance, on his word of honour, that no one was connected with the business BUT the Ladies of the Court. I then declared my determina tion to seek an audience of her Majesty, to express iny . horror and disgust at th e w h o l e o f th e t rans action, and to ask who were the originators of the plot. He urged the business being kept as quiet as possible, for the sake of all parties, the youth of the Queen, and the delicacy_ of the affair. He further urged my seeing the Duke of Wellington ; and I then proceeded to Apsley House, but was not fortunate enough to find his Grace. I then wrote a letter to Lord Melbourne, which, wit the correspondence that ensued, I here insert : COQVISESPOOFNDHEANSTCIENGSSETAWNEDENLOTREIDE itMIEARL: BOURNE. THE MARQUIS OP HASTINGS TO VISCOUNT MELBOURNE. 6. Burlington Hotel, Feb. 26, 1839. " My Lord—=Having in vain waited for two days, in the i c l g g ht hope of having the audi ence of. her Majesty w hich I re quested (if not l as a au P s e te e d r : at an d lea b s e t as in 7 as m ya patiencematter of fbe r one of feeling), anxious to return to the bosom of my afflicted and insulted family, I am forced to resort to the only means now left in my power of recording my abhorrence an d d etestat i on of the treatme nt which my sister has lately sustained, by address ing,- mys,-If to you as the organ through whom all things are n w .i• Oli C •Lt 4 I. I %VII, b, g i n b y sta ti n g That I retrac t nothing of what I said in your presence, and that blished Church, and of those kept by the different bodies of Dissenters, uniting one general registry for the whole kingdom, a recommendation greatly to be de sired. The Committee feel it incumbent on them, however ? to recommend that the Vestry shall, by con sultation with the Church authorities, endeavour to de vise same plan by which those regista rs shall be placed in a fit and proper custo d y . B y the St. Marylebone Local Act, 51 George 111., cap. 151, sec. 32, com monly called the Church Act, copies of registers of births, marriages, and deaths, are required to be made, and deposited in the Court-house. It appears that the provisions of this Act were complied with until the 52d George 111., cap. 146, carae into operation, when the duplicate copies of the Court House were sent to the registrar of the diocese, and . the latter Act being a general statute, superseded the necessity of depositing those copies in the Court house. The important point with the complainants is, the safe custody of the old head and foot stone now in the Paddington-street burial-grounds, but how to effect this without the concurrence of the Rector is a difficulty which the Committee are unable to surmount, though they have no doubt of obtaining his consent to any pro per means proposed. If a faculty is required to remove the stones to any place of safe custody, the complainants would willingly bear the expense. The Committee have had a communication with the Rector on the subject, he having'met with an accident which confines him to his house, or they believe he would have come to town to assist in this inquiry. His correspondence with the Committee is to that effect. His Curates, the Rev. Messrs. Burgess and Coghlan, have attended the meeting of the Committee at his request to render any assistance in their power. It is recom mended that the Rector be consulted on the subject. In the course of this inquiry the Committee have seen abundant reasons to congratulate the Vestry and the country at large on the existence of a recent Act of Parliament for the registration of births, deaths, and marriages, which will for ever put an effectual stop to the future occurrence of transactions of so fraudulent a character as the present. By the operation of this beneficial measure, now in its infancy, it will be impos sible to effect any alteration in local or general registers without immediate detection. No subject can assuredly be so important to all classes of the commusiity as the effectual security of such documents as those in question. It is satisfactory to your Committee, in closing their report, that they do it with the persuasion that the course adopted by them in pursuing this inquiry has been approved of by the complainants, who have attended the several meetings of the Committee, and have expressed their obligations to its members for assisting them in their endeavours ; and the Committee have only again to express their unqualified regret that in the case of the disgraceful alterations in the parish registers—whatever may be said of the grave-stones—they are not in a condition to point out the guilty parties, but they earnestly express their hope that the complainants who have originated this inquiry will feel it to be still their duty to follow it on to conviction, knowing that the Vestry, together with the clergy and churchwardens, will cheerfully continue their assistance whenever called upon." The following report of the sitting of the Sub-Com inittee of Thursday last was incorporated in the above report of the General Committee : " The Sub-Committee beg to state to the General Committee that, in preparing the Report, it appeared to them desirable that the registers should be further inspected, and the Sub-Committee having met this day at the parish church for such purpose, found that in a book marked—' Burials, Ist Nov. 1799, to 17th Aug. 1811,' No. 10, under the date of Oct. 14, 1803, the name of William Fendall' has been changed to Willis Fuedaillei,' and in the small minister's fee book, marked Burials, Ist May 1800, to 26th May 1805,' there is precisely the same alteration. Under the same day, the tee entered as received for the same is 6s. Bd. ; this is a fee that is not taken for an adult in these grounds. Again, in the first named book, under the date of Oot. 19, 1809, the name of William Fendall' has been inserted on the erasure of some other name, for merly standing as ' William T—; the name of Wil iam' is original, and the letter T' of the old sirname is remaining, imperfectly converted into' F,' the letters' en dall' are apparently entirely new. In the small minister's lee book of this date, marked 'Burials, 27th May 1806, to 31st of May, 1810,' the leaf is missing, as also the corresponding leaf in the binding at the late date ; they nave evidently been torn out, as fragments of the backs of them now remaining in the book will clearly prove. In the small minister's fee book, under the date of Oct. 15, 1808, appears the name of William Murray ad.' —this is the true and original entry. In the large burial book before named at this date appears now the fol .owing ;—' William H--11,' and at the end of the came, where the letters ' chd' were placed, the leaf itself is cut away ; the Christian name is the original entry, the name of Murray' has been erased, and the name of Fendall' inserted, and again erased ; the first letter F' has been converted into H,' and the two last letters left remaining, and the intermediate letters Left obscure and uncertain. In reference to, or explana tion of, the foregoing alterations, your committee beg to observe, that the death of William Fendall on the old foot stone is marked 1803 ; on the new head-stone it is marked 1809. This agrees with the alterations in the cooks at these two dates ; the alteration in the register in 1808 was probably a blunder." After some discussion the Report. was received and adopted with only two dissentient voices. Mr. RATHBONE then made a motion for the ap pointment of an extended Committee, to consider the best course to be pursued towards the parties suspected .1 being concerned in the above disgraceful affair ; and Lisp, further, to investigate the conduct of other persons high in parochial office. - Mr. JOSEPH seconded it. The resolution was carried unanimously without any ,liscussion, and the vestry separated. DUTCH AND .FLANDERS MAIL BRUSSELS, SEPT. 12.—The meetings of the mixed Commission at Utrecht continue. The Avondbode .ays, " that the complex subjects of the discussions pro mise to be brought to a speedy and satisfactory con- Ausion." General Gerard, who lately quitted the service of Belgium, has already taken the command of the de nartment of the Lower Seine, the head-quarters of ,yhich are at Rouen. We are assured that the Fort du Nord, and the bat teries without the gate of Slick, will not be dismantled till after the complete disarming of the forts of Lillo and Liefkenshcek. BRUSSELS, SEPT. 13.—1 n consequence of the re luction of the army to the peace establishment, we - laity see militiamen returning to their homes. We hear, on the other hand, that the necessary preparations ,ire making in the offices of the War Department to call out the militiamen of the class of 1838. This measure, which restores to agriculture and the manufactories disciplined troops, whose place willbe sup plied by young men to be instructed in their military duties, appears to conciliate the interest of the public with what is required by the necessity of providing for the safety of the State. The Augsburg Gazelle contains the following passage respecting the marriage of the Queen of England : " The speech of Queen Victoria on proroguing the Par liament makes no mention of her marriage. As some journals have inferred that the matrimonial alliance with the Coburg family was still doubtful, we can affirm on good authority that the meeting of several members of the house of Saxe Coburg at London is for the purpose of set tling the necessary preliminaries which must precede the marriage; that is to say, everything relative to the pre rogatives and the revenue of the intended husband As for the question of the marriage itself and the mu tual affection of the parties, all this has been some time decided. The Duchess of Kent and the King of the Belgians have been the most zealous promoters of this alliance." VIENNA, SEPT. 4.—We hear from Hungary that a proposal will soon be made in the Diet for the founda tion of a Society for Hungary and its dependencies, for the purpose of opening in England a market for the produce of the kingdom, especially wool. With this view it will be proposed to send a Hungarian Plenipotentiary to England, and to invite the English Government to send on its part a commercial agent to Hungary. On the whole the Diet appears, since the mixed sitting of the 21st of August, to have devoted more attention to practical objects ; the misunderstanding seems to be partly removed, and it is hoped that the Deputies will act with more calmness, which will be highly beneficial to the country. FLORENCE,AUG. 31.—Cardinal Lambrusehini has issued a circular letter to the councillors of the Roman Universi ties, by which the Professors are forbidden not only to visit Pisa during the meeting of the naturalists in that city, but even to have any correspondence with the learned men assembled there. AMSTERDAM, SEPT. 11.--Messrs. Paul Van Vlissin gen, and P. Van Eik, have issued a prospectus with pro posals for establishing a new Steam Navigation Com pany for the communication between Amsterdam and London. These gentlemen expect the most favourable results from this undertaking, as connected with the commercial treaty between the Netherlands and England, and the intended railway to Arnheim. DANTZIC, Ace. 24.—During the last few months there have been considerable sales of timber, and still more of corn, though the scarcity of money and the high discount in England have had an unfavourable effect. The stock of corn, particularly wheat, which was trifling in January, has been greatly augmented by numero us arrivals from P russ i a, Poland, and elsewhere. The dealers were partly disappointed in their expecta tations, as England received large supplies of corn from the Mediterranean, which caused a depression in the prices. It would be difficult to • state the quantities of corn that have been latterly expected from this place, but it may be ent , rtaining to annex the !)riees f-o m t! , O Ist of J nmary 0 !:,,1 from Euglaud. In the six months 8,268 cwt. of salt meat I