The Sun. — London, England, 1844-09-05 00:00:00

°Pin-lon upon the goodness of the counts before the k / livery of a verdi c t. N o i nconven i ence cou ld a r ise; I on the contrary, he thought great good would be pro duced from their adoption of the practice. In his opinion there could not be a greater grievance and oppression than these endless, unintelligible, unwieldly, voluminous indictments. An indictment extending over fifty-seven pages was itself a grievance ; many prisoners could not afford to pay the clerk of the peace for a copy, and, when they got it, the most learned persons could not find out with what the prisoners were charged. The words were so ambiguous, that it might be that the pleader who drew it up might mean one thing, the Jury another, the judge a third, and the court of error a fourth, if they did not overthrow the whole judgment. There was also a mistake as to the prac tice of the Court of Queen's Bench in this country. It was said that when an arrest of judgment was moved on one count, the court was in the habit of refusing if there was an other count which would support the verdict. Had that been so in the case of Feargus O'Connor ? He had been convicted on two counts. The Court had heard the argument on one count in arrest of judgment, and had granted it, and then had proceeded to hear arguments on another count, which was so full of verbosity and ambiguous expressions, that the At torney-General discovering the great doubt which the court entertained, had never pressed for judgment. No inconvenience could arise from adopting the cor rect practice. In a case of conspiracy which he had tried at Guildhall, objection had been made to a count. He said it was immaterial, as he was not going to pass judgment then, but had he been going to do so, he should have considered the goodness of the count, also where there were several counts on each, saying, " We apportion such and such a punishment to such a count, and such and such a punishment to others." And thus it would be reserved for the after-considera tion of the court how far the objections affected that judgment. Such was the practice of the Court of Queen's Bench, and the proper mode, as it seemed to him, of proceeding. But his Noble and Learned Friends said that the objections were merely technical, and that no injustice could arise from the course that had been followed by the Court below. Now he must say that he thought there would be the greatest injustice. The case was not the same as if some irre event stuff had been inserted which imputed offences. But it was impossible not to see that if there had been three or four indictments, some of them bad, and the court had passed judgment on all these, the case would be the same, and there would he the greatest injustice, for the court might pass its judgment on the strongest clauses, and then the bad ones. The first case, which was relied on by his Noble and Learned Friend was, that of the King v. Powell, where the defendant was indicted for two offences—assault with a certain intent, and with a common assault. The jury foun I a verdict generally, and a writ of error was brought on the ground that the defendant was found guilty on two indictments. Now, there was one remark which fell from Mr. Justice Taun - ton, to which he (Lord Denman) wished to direct atfee tion. That learned judge said that there were not two indictments, that there was but one act charged, and that the defendant was found guilty of only one offence. The words " misdemeanour" and " offence" comprised both the counts, and formed, in fact, a siomen conjunctium applying to one act. He thought that the decision of the judge separated that case frcen this appeal. The next case relied on was that of the " King v. Rhodes" for subornation of perjury. Some of Le counts were deemed bad, because there were no assignments of perjury in them. The view taken of that case by the Lord Chief Justice Holt was, that there was only one offence, that of perjury, and that it was no matter what were the assign ments. Now to him Lord Denman) that answer completely removed the case from the present argu ment. The next case was an indictment against a man and his wife for assault. There the objection was somewhat of a grammatical nature. In the first put of the indictment the singular number was used in the words " vulneravit et verberavit." But on the hitter part the error was corrected, " vulneravesunt et verberaverunt." In that case Mr. Justice Parker held that there was only one count, and that the verdict was rightly found. These were the only cases which were relied on, and these were all the authorities on which the state of the English law before Lord Mans• field was affirmed to be in support of his Noble and Learned Friend. But they relied further on cases which occurred since. Let them first, however, consider what was the weight of Lord Mansfield's general dictum. His Learned Brother, Baron Parke, with more doubt than his subsequent argument seemed to war rant, had shown their Lordships that it was not of great weight as applied to this case. He (Lord Denman) concurred in that view. He would come now to the causes which were afterwards cited. The first was the "King v. Hill," Ist Powell and Ryan; that case was relied on, but he could not see what bearing it had on the present case. There were several counts; they all charged one offence and some of the counts were objected to. The judge said that he would reserve the objections, but in the meantime would pass sentence, and if all the counts were found bad judgment would be arrested; but if one was good the sentence would be carried into effect, but that it was the practice of the Court of King's Bench to take care that no verdict should be taken for Crown on a bad count. The next case was that of the " King v. Mason," an indictment for obtaining money under false pretences, for which the punishment was dis cretionary—either pillory with imprisonment, or transportation. Now it was admitted that in the indictment two of the counts were bad; but it was evident that there was great want of distinctness in the case as an authority, for the learned reporter himself said in his marginal note that judgment was arrested. That case, however, was very different from those in which the successive counts contained cumulative charges, which would lead to greater punishment in the discretion of the court. Now he thought that in those cases, where there were bad counts, the discretion might be ill exercised, and he thought the court was bound to arrest the judgment, lest it should appear to have been awarded on the bad counts. The " King v. Young" was no authority on the point, although it was relied on by his Noble and Learned Friends. But there the court only refused to arrest the judgment in the way stated, because there were good counts in the indictment, but it is relied on that because no writ of error was brought the decision of the court must be taken as conclusive. Yet, there was actually no means of trying in what way the judgment was entered upon the record, nor was there anything whatever to show whether a writ of error could or could not be brought. His Noble and Learned Friend said that the point had never been decided by a court of error, and, therefore, it was only difficult to make out any authorities upon this very doubtful, very loose, and (he would say) very censurable practice. His Noble and Learned Friend said this was purely technical in its nature, and that the effect of it would be, that if a party were found guilty, not generally upon such an indict ment, but upon the good counts only, he would not be able to defend himself in case of any other charges being brought against him, by pleading that he had been already punished ; for the answer would be "No," because he had not been punished on the imperfect counts. What was the answer given by one of the most acute and learned persons he had ever the good fortune to meet with in an argument ?—let him observe not stated with any doubt—it was stated by Mr. Justice Coltman, whcse plain and manly understanding brought the question before them in a way that could not be doubted. He said it was an injustice that a person should be punished who could not plead that punishment against being punished a second time on the same state of facts. What was the answer of Mr. Justice Patteson to that ? He said that the proceedings would be estopped. Why were they not estopped now, a conviction having taken place on this indictment ? Now, again, there would be a difficulty in calling on the judge to decide at the assizes whether a count was good or bad; and they were to assume that he did so decide, and they were to get rid of that question, whether the decision was good, because he did not so decide. They were to have it both ways. Th ey were to assume it was too difficult for him to give his mind to the subject at all, and they were to say that he had apportioned the judgment on those counts which were good in point of law. He thought when they got rid the in d ista ' ken su a p n p d osed f authorities, the dicta founded on a a un unfortunate observation of Lord Mansfield, that the principle would a earp altogether unsatisfactory, and he thought whenPtheg looked at the record itself, with ou t at all adverting to the other circumstances of the case, it would be found that judgment was pronounced on counts stating no offence, as well as on counts stating that there had been offences upon which there were erroneous findings entered up, and that therefore the judgment of the court below had been incorrectly passed. He stated again that this point overpowered him not only with its novelty, but with the clear and demonstrated force upon which, when he came to the examination of the arguments, it rested, and he took up, therefore, the principle on which he thought they could only set aside the Judgment of the court below, namely, that what had been done by the court below was not properly , done. He regarded the Court of Queen's Bench in Dublin with the greatest possible respect, and he had the highest opinion of the talents and endowments of the learned judges of that court. He had still a greater veneration for the opinions of his learned brethren here, with whom he acted, ._ and for whom he entertained the greatest pos sible respect. He acted there, however, as a judge for himself, and he felt bound in duty to ex ercise his judgment on the reasons brought before him. He thought that the reasoning in support of the judg ment was not good in point of law, and it was his duty to vote again t the motion of his Noble and Learned Friend. E SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, SEPTEMBER 5, 1844. Lord Coretattaai then proceeded to deliver his judgment. He agreed with his Noble and Learned Friend who preceded him, as to the difficulty in which any Member of the House was placed who felt him self called on to come to a conclusion adverse to the great majority of the judges, and the effect of an opinion expressed by a great majority of the judees ought, of course, to make any one extremely cautious of coming to a conclusion con trary to what was expressed by their opinion, and it ought to make one watch every step one took, and to weigh every conclusion which the mind was supposed to come to, in order that if a person came to an opinion adverse to that of the majority; and he should exercise all the powers with which he was invested if he was to come to a different conclusion. He adopted that course, he carefully attended to all that had been urged at their Lordships' bar, and all the reasons that had been urged by the Lord Chief Justice in delivering the opinions of the judges. He hesitated at every step of the reasoning, as he followed him, and he still came to the conclusion that the opinion expressed by the majority was wrong, and the opinion expressed by the minority was right. He apprehended it was his bounden duty to state the reasons upon which he came to that conclusion. They asked for the assistance of the learned judges, in order to inform the House, to assist them in con - ling to a right conclusion in matters of law, and their opinions were entitled to great weight, but they were not to bind the House, they were merely to assist the House; and no doubt when a majority of them came to one conclusion, the great est caution and care should be taken at every reason ing upon which one felt bound to come to a different opinion. On a question which lately came before their Lordships, there was a unanimous concurrence of the judges, and two of their Lordships concurred in their opinions, and two others dissented, so that the decision come to was against the opinion of all the judges. Upon one part of the case, to which his Noble and Learned Friend had last adverted, namely, the point of the challenge of the array, he would merely advert to, for the purpose of guarding him self against the supposition of forming an opinion adverse to the case of the plaintiffs in error. lie would only say that, if the judgment in that case was right, it would establish this strange proposition, that there was no remedy for an acknowledged wrong of great magnitude. The only part of the case on which he would address any observations to the House was, as to the effect to be given to the opinion of the learned judges, who thought that the first, second, third, and seventh counts of the indictment were to be rejected; the two last because they were bad in them selves, the others because the findings and the enter ing upon the findings were erroneous, and that a judgment and sentence of the court, which was " for his offences aforesaid" could not be impugned. A court of law could not be affected by a consideration of the nature of the counts which it was called on to reject. The question they had to consider was, whe ther there was error in the record, and if they read the record as any other document, and only gave to the words found there the construction they would receive if used in any other instrument, could it be for a moment doubted that, on the inten I ments stated in the indictments in the several counts, the jury ha I found a verdict of guilty upon all, and that the defendants, for the offences aforesaid, were subject to punishment ? Had not the court below passed sentence for the offences in the sixth and seventh count, as well as for the offences charged in the others ? It was so found in the record, and were they to say that the court had not passed sentence upon all the counts ? He considered that the only answer given, namely, that the court only passed sen tence upon the good counts, was unsatisfactory. They could not look to the record to ascertain cer tain proceedings not mentioned in it. Some of the arguments that had been used, supposed the court below to be right in all particulars. In his opinion the reverse was the fact ; there was manifest error on the record, and it was not competent for a court of error to inquire into the causes of that error. Supposing there was a charge in a count of a malignant libel, and that count was proved to be bad, was it to be said that the party was to be punished equally as if the count was good ? Now, the judg ment of the House was to be governed by the cases that had taken place ; and with respect to them seve ral had been referred to. Two classes of cases had been cited, the second of which he considered only to be applicable to the present case ; • the first were utterly inapplicable. The Noble and Learned Lord then adverted to the cases of the " Queen v. Rhodes" and the " Queen v. Ingram," for the pur• pose of showing that the court in those cases had arrested the judgment on the ground that, some of the counts being proved to be bad, the court could not apportion the punishment. " Young v. the King" had been relied upon on the part of the Crown. He had carefully examined that case, and he did not consider that the decision pronounced in it had any bearing whatever on the present. It had been said, that in the " King v. Mason," a misdemeanour was charged on two counts, and therefore the judgment was sustained. Now that was not the fact ; and in the "King e. Fuller," it was clearly laid down that judgment could not be passed if there was any good count. From all these authorities, it appeared that the rule in criminal cases, on a motion in arrest of judgment was, that the court having ascertained, before it pro nounced judgment, what counts were good and what bad, awarded the punishment, as it thought right, upon the offences contained in the good counts. It appeared to him that a court of error was in precisely the same predicament. It had no more jurisdiction over the quantum of pu nishment, and no better means of referring one por tion of it to one count, or another to another, than a civil court had with respect to damages in an action. In both cases the judgment proceeded on an indict ment which was found to be defective, and having come to one result upon the whole, which the su perior jurisdiction could not apportion, the same necessity existed in the one case as in the other, of holding the whole to be bad. It had been urged that much inconvenience would arise from adopting this rule. lie felt satisfied that the inconvenience which would arise from the opposite course would be far greater, and would in many cases be productive of great injustice. The only inconvenience was, that the prosecutor would be com pelled to be careful as to the counts upon which he reste 1 his case ; whilst the rejection o' the rule would deprive the defendants of the benefit of a writ of error. The rule contended for by the de fendants was founded on principle, and necessary for the purposes of justice; and it was in perfect analogy with the decisions in civil and criminal cases. The opinion which he had then expressed he formed early in the argument. He had carefully attended to all that had been urged at the bar by the majority of the judges against it, and he bad not found any reason for altering his view. Lord CAMPBELL then proceeded to read his judg ment. He said it was now his duty to state to their Lordships the opinion which, after great considera tion, he had formed upon the questions of law raised by this record, and to these, of course, he should strictly confine himself. In the first place, he had no doubt that there were various good counts in the indictment. A conspiracy to effect an unlawful purpose, or to effect a lawful purpose by unlawful means, was, by the common law of England, an indictable offence ; and if several persons deliberately plotted mischief to an individual or to the State, they were liable to punishment, although they might have done no act in execution of their purpose. Where they had actually done what they intended to do, it might be more proper to prosecute them for illegal acts; but in point of law, they remained liable for the offence of entering into a conspiracy. The first five counts in this indictment clearly charged the de fendants with having conspired together to effect un lawful:purposes. The fifth count was strongly objected to. Ile considered that any person who deliberately attempted to promote feelings of ill-will and hosti lity between different classes of her Majesty's sub jects, to make the English hated by the Irish, or the Irish by the English, was guilty of a most culpable proceeding, and that, if several combined to do so, they committed a misdemeanour, ter vaich they might be indicted and punished. He was likewise clearly of opinion that the plea in abatement was bad in form, if not in substance, for not averring that there were not other witnesses duly sworn, on whose evidence the indictment might have been supported, and for not showing that the witnesses who were examined could not, on account of their religious profession, have been lawfully examined without being sworn in. Ile thought the Court of Queen's Bench was fully authorised to continue the trial in the vacation, and that the order for that purpose, though conditional, was quite sufficient. In his opi nion, the rule of the common law requiring the con tinuance of the order did not apply. The question raised by the writ of error, coram nobis, was more doubtful. The assignment of error in respect to the witnesses not having been sworn in court, was free from defects fatal to the plea in abatement. Ile had no difficulty in over-ruling Mr. Steele's point, that there was no statement written on the indictment of the names of the witnesses sworn. 1 - I.e was at first much struck with the objection to the validity of the judgment by reason of the form of the recognisance into which the defendant was required to enter, and he was by no means free from doubt upon it then, although he was not prepared to say that it would be a sufficient ground for reversal. It must be taken to be part of the sentence pronounced upon the j i defendant for the offences of which he had been found guilty, and it could n o t b e separate d f rom the finding . The recogni sances i mposed i n th i s case might lead to perpetual imprisonme n t. Magna Charta provided that no fine should be. im posed upon any party which it was out of his power to pay. The effect of the sentence, in this case, would be, that if the required recognisances were not found, the party would remain in prison for the rest of his life. He felt still more difficulty when he came to the next part of the case—probably the most important part of it, as it was not merely a technical question, but one which affected the administration of justice—he meant the constitution of the jury by whom the defendants were tried. The only question here was, whether the challenge to the array was a remedy which the law allowed. (The Noble and Learned Lord here read that portion of the plea of the defendants which applied to this part of their case.) Now, he was clearly of opinion that the defendants ought not to , have been tried by a jury constituted in the manner described in the case of the plaintiffs in error. It was there described not merely as a casual omission of names, but the averment was that the names had been fraudulently omitted. He conceived that under such circumstances the panel ought to have been quashed. No other remedy was suggested. His Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack had suggested no remedy. If the jury list was found to be defective, the jury list of the former year ought to have been brought into operation as though no list had been formed for the current year. lie , confessed that he should not have been inclined to ad- i vise their Lordships to reverse the judgment merely upon this ground upon his own sole opinion, but since writing his judgment he had listened to the argu- , ments of his Noble and Learned Friend the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench, and also those of Mr. Justice Coltman. The jury were unanimous in the opinion that the finding of the jurymen on the Ist, 2d, and 3d counts of the indictment were contrary to law. His opinion was that the punishment must be taken as having been awarded in respect of the supposed offences charged in the bad counts. According to the plain use of language and the corn mon sense of mankind, the defendants were being punished on charges which aid not amount to crimes, and for crimes of which they had not been con victed. With respect to the bad counts, it was said that it was a rule of law if there were any good counts, a bad count would not vitiate the judgment. It would he strange if such were the universal rule. Such might very well be the case where only one corpus dilicti was charged in an indictment consisting of more than one count in utile per inutile non vitiatur ; but where the separate counts of an indict ment charged distinct offences, they must be consi dered as separate indictments, and, as had been shown in the case of Feargus O'Connor, where the court had arrested the judgment upon one count as soon as it was discovered to be bad. They were told that they were to presume that the court below knew what counts were bad, and what were good, and passed judgment upon those counts only which were good. Such an opi nion would be contrary to the whole spirit of our law, which supposed judges to be fallible, and provided a machinery by bills of exceptions, writs of error, and other expedients, for the correction of any errors into which they might fall ; and it would be contrary to fact, for all the judges in the Court of Queen's Bench in Ireland had held the sixth and seventh counts to be unexceptionable. He would suppose a case, in which there were two counts, A and B, A being a good count, and B a bad one, the court below held B, which charged a grave offence, to be good, and A, which charged a light offence, to be bad, and passed sentence on the count B, would it be held that a court of error, finding the count B to be bad, would be bound to subject a man to that severe punishment, because A, charging a lighter offence, was good ? This doctrine was attempted to be upheld on authority, and by the general opinion of the profession. The dictum of Lord Mansfield referred solely to motions in arrest of judgment, and not to writs of error. It had no application at all to the present case; and in the cases of the " King and Mason," and the " King and Young," the point had not been raised. The case in " Russell and Bligh" amounted to nothing, as the Court had no power to consider any thing but the point reserved; and in the " King and Powell" it was decided that misdemeanour and offence must be con sidered as a novum collectinum, and as both counts were held good, there could be no doubt that the judg ment was correct. In indictments for perjury, if one assignment were good, that would support a verdict, because perjury was but one offence, and one good assignment was sufficient to support it, how many bad ones soever there might be in the indictment. It was said that this indictment ought to be supported on the ground of expediency. He could not see what inconvenience could possibly arise from taking a verdict upon such count, and passing sentence only upon those counts which were good. He understood that Mr. Baron Rolfe had passed sentence in an indictment for murder in which one count was bad, but in such a case no practical difficulty would arise, as where one felony was proved it was sufficient to support a verdict of guilty, and it could never be worth the while of a person con victed of felony on one good count to sue out a writ of error. But in cases of misdemeanour it was very different, for according to the present loose system of drawing up indictments, a pleader having drawn one good count, might go on drawing other counts, each increasing in vagueness and ambiguity, until he involved the party indicted in such perplexity, that there would be the greatest difficulty in ascertaining of what he was accused. There could be no difficulty in taking a verdict of acquittal, or entering a nolli prosequi on the counts that were bad, and passing judgment only on those that were good. It had been said by the learned judges, with the ex ception of Justice Patteson, on the good counts only, and not on the three bad ones ; and yet those counts contained the most serious charges, including that of creating discontent in the army. Now, could their Lordships concur in the incredible fiction, that the judges, having the general verdict, so far neglected their duty as to overlook those grave charges ? He would remind their Lordships that they were not bound by the opi nion of the majority of the judges. The appeal was not from the Irish to the English judges, but to that Chamber, in the exercise of one of its most important functions, which he hoped their Lordships would long continue to exercise for the benefit of the coun try and the protection of its liberties. The LORD CHANCELLOR then put the question thus —ls it your Lordships' pleasure that the judgment be reversed ? Lords Denman, Cottenham, and Campbell said, " Content." Lord Brougham and two or three Tory Peers (lay Lords) said " Not Content." The LORD CHANCELLOR was about to put the ques tion again, in the usual form, previous to taking the numbers or dividing, when— Lord WHARNCLIFFE rose, but on the suggestion of the Lord Chancellor, he sat down, put on his hat, and addressed the House from his seat. He said that he did not think it desirable that their Lordships should divide, as there was a majority of the law lords in the House in favour of the appeal. He humbly recommended those of their Lordships who were not law lords—and who, not having heard the whole case, were not so well qualified to judge of the question—to abstain from voting. It was far better that the character of the House, as a court of appeal, should be maintained, and that their decision should be against the opinion of the majority of the judges— even though in this case it should produce great inconvenience—than that those Lords who had not heard the case should, by their interference, reverse the judgment of those members to whom the deci sion of such cases was usually committed by the prac tice of the House. Lord BROUGHAM entirely concurred in the opinion of the majority of the judges in Ireland and England. But he also agreed with the Noble Lord who had just spoken, that it was more advisable that those of their Lordships who had not heard the case, should not vote. He deeply lamented the division to which the House would come ; but he would now only say, that when he differed from the majority of the judges on the question of Presbyterian Marriages in Ireland, he did so upon the authority of Lord Stowell and other eminent persons. Lord CAMPBELL had voted with his Noble Friend on the question of Presbyterian Marriages, and for the same reason. He would now only say that the dis tinction between lay Lords and law Lords was not known to the Constitution, but that it was the rule of all courts of law that no judge should decide a case which he had not heard. The Duke of CLEVELAND was understood to say that he had paid great attention to the case, and that he thought he had a right to vote upon it. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE said that if any other lay Peer voted, he would vote also, although he thought it would be calamitous for the character of the House, as a judicial body, if the established rule in such cases were departed from. After a few words from Lord VERULAM, the whole of the lay Peers withdrew. The question was again put, and Lords Cottenham, Denman, and Campbell having voted for the reversal of the judgment, and Lord Brougham against it, The LORD CHANCELLOR said—My Lords, THE JUDGMENT IS REVERSED. Their Lordships then proceeded to give judgment m some appeal cases. HER MAJESTY'S MARINB EXCURSION.---WINDSOR, TUESDAY EVENING.—Ten of her Majesty's ponies and six of his Royal Highness Prince Albert's saddle horses left the Castle this morning, and were conveyed by the Great Western Railway from Slough to Paddington, en route to Woolwich, to be embarked on board one of the Government steamers for Scotland. They are to reach Blair Atholl by Monday next. The present arrange ments are, for the Queen and the Prince Consort to take their departure from the Castle on Monday, proceeding from Windsor to the Farnborough station (where pre parations are now in progress for the accommodation of her Majesty), and thence by a special train to the coast of Hampshire, whence they will set sail in the Royal Victoria and Albert yacht. The Court is not expected to be absent from Windsor for more than three weeks or a month. irittrlt Wbitton IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) H OUSE OF LORDS. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) CARRILL V. GLEESON. In this case the judgment of the Court below was affirmed with costs. CORN AVERAGES. GENERAL AVERAGE PRICES OF BRITISH CORN, For the Week ended August 31,1041, made up from the Returns ol the Inspectors in the different Cities and Towns in England and Wales, per Imperial Quarter. Wheat 503. Ild. Oats sarley 3ls. Ild. I Rye AVEILAGES OF TH Weeks ending iwnEAT. BARLEY. July 27 ...... 52 9 Aug. 3 5l 0 10 ..... 17 .... 24 ...... 31 34 2 34 0 34 6 34 6 33 3 34 1! IMPERIAL AGGREGATE Ai Wheat......, 50s. 6d. I Oats B ar l e y Sta. ad. Rye DUMB OW ri Wheat :. ........ tee. Od. Oats ..... Barley •••••••.... 4s• Od. I Itye •••.. be ready for next session of Parliament, wh n chester, 87 ; South-Eastern, 39i; Trent Valley, 12 ir; i he hoped and trusted, whatever might be the majority 1 York and North Midland, 100 ; Paris and Lyons, 21 ; i by which the Right Hon. Gentleman was supported in i Paris and Rouen, 381. that House, that there would be found a sufficiently ; The following is an extract worth notice. It is taken independent body to express the public opinion with from the Toronto Patriot :—" The rapid increase in the regard to the baseness, illegality, injustice, and cruelty size and population of our flourishing city of Toronto, of the incarceration of those gentlemen.—(Hear, hear.) cannot fail to strike with surprise and pleasure every Mr. OTWAY CAVE seconded the motion. Ho re- person who has returned to it after an absence of two or gretted that Sir R. Peel should have ;allowed to pass three years. The last ten years have witnessed changes without reprobation the principles acted upon by his which half a century would hardly bring to pass in other Irish Attorney-General—viz., that of taking the law into ; less favoured localities. In 1834 the population was just nine his own hands. He (Mr. Otway Cave) lamented it the thousand. It is now at least twenty thousand. This more, that in a country so circumstanced as Ireland rapid increase has been chiefly the work of the last four was, and where it was of the utmost importance that obe- or five years, and, strange to say, more particularly dience to the law should be inculcated, an visible since the much dreaded removal of the seat of example of so contrary a tendency should be set Government. The latter event did unquestionable mis in the highest places. He greatly feared that such an ex- chief to the interests of Toronto, but the resources and ample, which was no other than that of appealing to advantages with which Providence has blessed her, have brute force instead of reason and argument, and consti- made ample amends for the losses she may have sus tuting yourself to be judge in your own case, might be tamed from the caprice or chicanery of political jugglers. caught at by the Irish peasantry, and considered as a " King James arrogantly threatened to remove his sanction by them of the practice of resorting to what Court from London, and divest that renowned metropolis had been called by Mr. Grattan " The wild justice of of its character as the scat of imperial power. revenge." " ' We, poor citizens, ought to be grateful,' was the The motion having been put, bold answer of the stout-hearted Lord Mayor, ' that your Sir R. PEEL said that nothing could be more incon- Majesty cannot remove the Thames from London.' venient than, under present circumstances, to enter into " A representative of our Queen despoiled Toronto of a discussion which could not be brought to a close. It her political supremacy, but her noble harbour, and was probable that the proceedings of the House would splendid agricultural resources in the rear, were pos be interrupted even before he had concluded his address, sessions of which no Executive caprice or tyranny could even if he thought it proper to enter into a discussion. deprive the loyal old city ; and so she has continued to He should only say, that whenever the opportunity arrived, increase and flourish, uncheered by a solitary ray of -he would be ready to vindicate the course taken by her official favour or Viceregal sunshine." Majesty's Government. The Hon. Gentleman seemed to Of colonial arrivals, later in point of date than those forget that seven out of the nine judges were of opinion before received, there are none to-day. that the proceedings were in conformity with the law. A large purchase of Consols was made this morning He should not provoke nor enter then into any partial —namely, 100,000/. by a trading broker, and the prices discussion of the subject, but would content himself with advanced from 981 to 991 for the Account, and from saying, that whenever the period arrived he should be 99-a to 99i- 1 for Money. The Government brokers prepared to vindicate the course taken by her Majesty's did not make any purchases to-day. The Stock Mark, t Government. Her Majesty's Government had recourse is extremely firm, the decision of the Peers on the writ to the ordinary course of law—they asked for no extra- of e rror having given much satisfaction. For Ex ordinary powers, and though it was admitted that chequer Bills the premium is a trifle lower. India Stock the period was one of danger, they only was at 281. looked for a remedy to the ordinary tribunals. The Foreign Market is rather buoyant for Spanish, With regard to the particular motion he should not offer Brazilian, and Danish Bonds, but not much business is any opposition to the production of the papers ; and doing. Railway Shares are in good demand. though there would not be time to send a message to the BRITISH FUNDS THIS DAY ATONE O'CLOCK. (From the Official List.) House of Lords, he would take care that that should not Bank Stock ~.. ~ ..... ..................... — i prevent the communication being made to the House of 3 per Cent. Reduced Annuities ........ ..... .. 99%% Lords in the usual manner. With regard to what the pper Cent. Consols. Annuities 0 814% 9913( New 3% per Cent. Annuities...." .. ........... Hon. Gentleman had said respecting his Right Hon. Long Annuities. Expire sta Jan. 1860 l2 7-16 Friend the Attorney-General for Ireland, he thought Ditto 30 Years, Expire 10th Oct. 1859 after the manly explanation he had given of his conduct, India Stock Consols for Account ... ..... ........ ....... ...... and the provocation he had received—which few might Exchequer Bills, 130. 1544 have been able to resist—the Hon. Gentleman should 40004 not have adverted to that circumstance. The Hon. 5001.... ........... ..... Ditto Small... . , — .....«..... 75 73 pm. Gentleman the Member for Finsbury had used very Ditto Advertised...— — hard expressions in designat sng the conduct FOREIGN FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK of the Government. He denied the charges Brazilian Bonds, 5 per Cent. implied in th em but as that was not Ditto New Bonds, 1829 and 1839 , Danish Bonds, 1825, 3 per Cent. C9 the occasion to enter into a discussion on the subject, Spanish Bonds. Five per Cent 1840 2.•ei he should wait un til ano th er opportun i ty arr i ve d.—(H ear .) Ditto for the Account ... ...... .... ........... Ditto Passive Bonds. Lord JOHN RUSSELL felt the inconvenience of Ditto Three per Cent. ........«.......4.......« ........4 aes,i entering at that moment into a discussion on this sub- Ditto for the Account 33%% jest, but he sh ou ld re i terate hi s o pi n i on th a t th e tri a l ' Dutch 2l per Cents — Ditto for the Account. which Mr. O'Connell and the others had received Dutch 5 per Cents 100%% in Ireland was not that trial which would give an PRICES OF SHARES THIS DAY AT ONE. impression of fairness and justice. He should be pre• RAILWAYS. PAID. PER :MARL Birmingham and Gloucester...... 100 ......... 112 to 111 pared to enter into a discussion with the Right Hon. Ditto New Gentleman on the subject more particularly since his Caledonian , I . Dublin and Brighton opinion had been confirmed by that of the House of bsad Cashel...-. ........ ..... 2% 7414 ... to Lords, who decided that the conviction was not accord- Eastern Counties ing "to law.—(Cheers.) He should contend that it was Ditto New Registered 81. 6s. Rd. Eastern Union 5 .. not a trial by a fair jury—(cheers)—but by a jury Edinburgh and Glasgow 5O .....«.. 67 . elaborately put together for the purpose of Great Western conviction—(Loud cheers) —charged by a judge who Ditto Fifths l2 25k% ... to Hull and Selby did not allow any evidence of any weight in favour of London and Birmingham. 100 the accused to come fairly before his mind, but who Ditto New Thirds charged more violently than the Attorney-General Dit o Shares 2 2 .". ..... 33 26........ to 25% London and Blackwell 16% ...... 6% .. ... to accused—(Loud cheers)—towards a prejudiced jury, in London and Brighton 5O 48% such a manner as to prevent justice being done to the London and Greenwich London and South Western 41% 82% ..... to . ,— people of Ireland as it was to the people of England. Ditto Eighths He trusted the effect of those proceedings would be to Lynn and Ely N....... 4% prevent any similar proceedings from taking place again, Manchester and Leeds 7O 125 .. Ditto % Shares and to give an assurance to te people of Ireland that Midland Counties lOO lOB 109 ... to 107% from the highest tribunals in this country they would Northern and Eastern 45 56 South Devon obtain that justice which was denied to them at home. South Eastern and Dover 33% 38%% ... to - -(Loud cheers.) Ditto New Sir T. WILDE thought it would be inexpedient to York and North Midland Ditto ' enter into discussion then, but as the Right lion. Gen • Ditto Selby Scr Branch ip tleman hail said that seven out of nine of the judges Paris and Rouen 2O .....«.. 38% were of opinion that the proceedings were in conformity Rouen and Havre. with law, he would state what the effect of those JOINT STOCK BANKS. opinions would be in the law and Legislature of the Commercial of London country. An objection was taken to certain counts of THE REVIEW.—His Royal Highness 1 " the indictment in Ireland. The judges there were came to town this morning from' unanimously of opinion that the sixth and seventh counts witness the review review in H eel- - were good beyond any doubt. They referred par- Hess the Prince of P titularly and expressly to those two counts, and more particularly under them the traversers were punished. suite, his Gree There was no principle of law more settled, more so- in-Ch;-'' lemn, and more important, than that every record must speak for itself; and that no proof, however clear, or however cogent, could be received to contradict a record. There was another principle, that that which they could not disprove they were not allowed to presume. The main ground on which it was attempted to support this judgment and this conviction was, that the Irish judges did not act upon the 6th and 7th counts, on which every judge who had pronounced his opinion, and every man who had looked into the case knew that they did act, and upon a presumption against a record which never yet was made in any court of justice—a presumption which could not be made even where it was proved. The foundation on which it was asked to support this conviction, and to continue the punishment, was, that the judges had not acted on two counts which they ' , lad acted upon more than all the rest. If that principle were acted upon the effect would be to neutralise every writ of error in' the House of Lords. How was the House of Lords to know what had been done below, except from the record? The record was sent up to inform them of it, and was to be considered as conclusive. How, then, could it be pre sumed that the Court below had necessarily done what was right ? If that was the case, where would be the use of a writ of error ?—(Hear, hear.) Every text book told the student that if he wished to learn the law, he must look to the judg ments of the court as they were collected from the record. There was not a single authority of the slightest weight which did not lay down that doc trine. Yet to his astonishment he had been told in that case that they were to guess and presume. If every court was in its turn to presume this and that to be good, the effect would be to embarrass every man who was placed on his trial. The Usher of the Black Rod, Sir Augustus Clifford, here attended at the bar, and summoned the House to hear the Royal Assent given to certain Bills by Com mission, and to hear Parliam,ent prorogued. On the return of the SPEAKER t o th House, attended by several Members, the Royal Speech on the proroga - tion was read from the Chair, and the Members separated THE RicviEw.—His Royal Highness Prince Albert came to town this morning front WindQor Castle, to witness the review in Hyde-park. His Royal High ness the Prince of Prussia and the gentlemen of his suite, his Grace the Duke of Wellington, Commander in -Chief, and a numeroue staff of military officers were present. The illustrious party arrived on the ground at eleven o'clock when the review immediately commenced. ELECTION OF CHAMBERLAIN FOIL THE CITY. GUILDHALL.-(THIS DAY.) _ _ This being the day appointed for the nomination and election of City Chamberlain, vacant by the death of Sir William Beygate, the approaches to Guildhall were crowded at an early hour. Placards setting forth the claims of the rival canlidates, were marched up and down King-street, and the other great thoroughfares leading to the Common Hall, and the other appearances denoted the interest that was excited' by the expecta tion of a contested election. Precisely at twelve o'clock the folding-doors leading into Guildhall were thrown open, and Mr. Alderman Brown, with the gentlemen composing his Committee, and many personal friends, passed into one of the Coun cil chambers. Mr. Alderman Humphery and his friends arrived at twenty minutes to one, and were received with cheering. A strong force of the City police attended to keep order ; and the arrangements were so admirable that but little exertion was demanded from them. The Lord Mayor took his seat. Among the Aldermen present were Sir Peter Laurie, Gibbs, Farncombe, Sir John Key, Challis, Thomas Wood, John Johnson, and Mr. Hunter. The COMMON SERGEANT, in the absence of the Re corder, explained the purpose for which the Court was called—namely, to elect a Chamberlain in the room of the late Sir W. Heygate. Sir P. LAURIE rose amid cheers and hisses. He had a very pleasing duty to perform. He had to propose his excellent friend Alderman Brown.—(Great cheers and hisses.) There was no pleasure without a mixture of pain. He regretted personally the death of Sir W. He}•gate. He introduced him (Sir P. Laurie) to the Corporation.— (Cries of " What a pity.") The office of Chamberlain appeared to him (Sir Peter Laurie) to be very much misunderstood. It was supposed to be a mere place for shelving a man upon a fine annuity, but he could assure them it was a most laborious office. He had usually from two to three hundred cases of master and apprentices disagreeing, and about 700,000/. passed an nually through the Chamberlain's hands. This was no political struggle. If it were he (Sir Peter Laurie) would not be there to propose his friend Alderman Brown. He had been now for twenty years with Alderman Brown in the Livery, and when their franchise was in danger, they put Alderman Brown at the head of their party, and succeeded in securing their liberty.— (Tremendous confusion and cries of " No, no.") One word more. He was glzd to see so much uniformity among them.—(lncreased confusion, laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh.") The Chamberlain► of London was not so well off as they were. He had only one days holiday throughout the year.—(Great laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh.") When they saw his friend walk the streets as Chamberlain, they would say, "he is an honour to the City," and they like him would feel proud that they had assisted to make him so.--(Loud cheers and groans.) T. A. HANKEY, Esq., rose amid tremendous confusion, and said he was proud to second the nomination of Al derman Brown, whose character and station was a suffi cient guarantee for a due attention to the duties of that important office, the City Chamberlainship. His cha racter was unimpeached—it was unimpeachable. He had filled his Aldermanic chair as none had done better, and in every station to which the City had called him he had proved his public worth and his private virtuas.—(Tre mendous uproar, and cries of " Out, out.") He thanked them for their kind attention—(Great laughter)—and would conclude by seconding the nomination of Alderman Brown. Alderman HOOPER rose to propose to them his friend, Alderman Humphery. In doing so he was proposing a man every way qualified, if honesty, talent, and in dustry could entitle him to it.—(Great cheering.) He should be sorry if Alderman Humphery's appearance in the field so late, and the very inefficient personage who now proposed him, should operate against him. The duties of the Chamberlain had been alluded to by his friend Sir Peter Laurie. He would not recapitulate them. but he would say without fear of contradiction, that no man was more fitted fur the office than his friend. He was a thoroughly practical man. He had served in the offices of Alderman, Sheriff, and Mayor, and he had re presented the city in six or seven Parliaments. He would again propose WI them Alderman Humphery.—(Cheeri.) THOS. SIMP . soN rose to second th e nom i na ti on . H e found himself in a peculiar situation, for here were two able and honourable gentlemen in the field. But they all knew that there were degrees of comparison. Alderman Brown would make a good Chamberlain, but Alderman Humphery would make a better.—(Loud cheers.) He stood there, not as a political partizan, but as the friend of Alderman Humphery, and he was sure the more they knew him, the more they would appreciate him. PETER ALFRED TAYLOR, Esq., said he would detain them but a few minutes, as he thought that anything said from that hustings would have but little influence on their vote. He would merely mention the gentleman whom he meant to propose—Mr. G. H. Heppel.—(Loud laughter, cheers, and cries of " oh, oh.") Whatever talents may be claimed by others, he was certain might . be claimed for Mr. Heppel, He thought was high time that this office should not be a prescriptive right to the Court of Aldermen. That Court did not at pre sent stand so high that they should select a person to fill this important office from it.—(Loud cheers.) Was. WANSEY, Esq., said he seconded the nomination of Mr. Heppe!. He had known him long, and held him in high estimation. He did not think that the Court of Aldermen was the best school to select the public ser vants from. Aldermen were taxed somewhat with spending the public money, and be thought the duty of the Chamberlain was to keep it. The speaker then passed a high eulogium on the late J. T. Travers, Esq. He was sure that if that lamented gentleman were ali ve , he would vote for his friend, Mr. Heppel.—(Cheers.) D. W. WIRE, Esq., said he was not about to make a speech, but to ask a question of each of the candidates. The question he had to put was this, and he put it to Alderman Brown first. If elected to this office of Cham berlain, would he resign bis gown ; and would he con cur in any reduction and regulation which might be pro posed hereafter ? The same question he put to Alder man Humphery and to Mr. Heppel.—(Loud cheers.) Alderman BROWN returned thanks to all in that Halo and part'cularly to the seconder of his friend, .Aldertan Humph, ry, for so he was proud to call, him.—(Che er Si He will ed that this Hall had not bee n made a politien arena, and however some gentlemen of the Wanseio school might wish to do so, he was certain that tb attempt would meet with their reprobation.—(Ch eer While returning thanks to Alderman Hooper and the gentlemen who had seconded Alderman Humphery, begged to remind them, that their assertion that tbOP, gentleman was more fitted for the office ; chamberlain, was a matter of op inion only, 'OIL% were better left to the Livery to decide. He wa s that his political opinions differed from many of theme,but he claimed the right that they themselves exerted_ the right of every honest Englishman to retain his 0 7; opinion. He had not the slightest doubt of the issee_L" that election. He had received assu r a nces of glee% from his-friends, which it was for them to realise• answer to Mr. Wire, he would say that tha t g entian: had acted with his usual candour , i n g ivin g i:otice of.n; intention to put the question. If by th eir kind 00145 he was called to the vacant office , ho w ou ld not retsill„; gown on him, and he had such confidence in the red tude of the Court of Common Council, that wha tel io course they would adopt he should have no hesitati on following.—(Loud cheers.) 11 011 Alderman llvairnEnv rose amid loud cheers w lasted a considerable time. — His frien d Alderman' Blip assured them of the certainty of his elect ion. He trey/ Alderman Humphery) had only arrived iniLottde n hit days ago, or he would have,heen as prominen t as or friend had been in asking their support. Wh el t ot William Heygate was very ill, it was well known 0 0 a canvass was ready to be set on foot, and w hen of gentleman died—on Wednesday—upon the T hu r ` o ¢,) notices of candidates were in the newspapers.-4 6" the The speaker then referred to the mis-statementPs Lev, clay of election. He had no doubt it was a Mi s t )1; but it was in print. — (Laughter.) Howe ver, the'ileat, was, and he offered himself as candidate before tgol He (Alderman Humphery) thought that he WO tie for the office:, if integrity and business habits, e(1.11!leat hoped, to his friend Alderman Bro w n , w ou ld be suihr e o fur it. This was no political office, and he did not 03.4 to make it a political question. The office P IO unfortunately for Sir William Ileygatc and for 4 40 family, was held by him ; and he was very sure thst,';, ' excitement had assisted to injure his health very nj siderably. He hoped, however, that excitement -Y( 7p not have any ill effect upon himself or Alderman Dre.fol —(Loud laughter.) He would not re comme nd his frLgo Alderman Brown, however, to depend upon the %el sent out to ascertain the sentiment; of the Livery. f o ci were obliged to return a good report, or the y wool?, 0 be paid. Whatever was done on this o”casion an:antioro done good humouredly, and he would not be th e friend to any man if his vote were recorded 0,1,000 him. With respect to Mr. Wire ' s questio n, be 10 at once lay down his gown in the event of hi s frr elected. To the second question, he was at oltee„ pared to accede to the wishes of the Counci l, or t" up his office.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. Il EPPEL said that Alderman Brown had 651 J this was likely to degenerate into a political ques ti f d would not be made so by him, but he wished to ':-100, this office from the domination of the Cours of Al rle doir The speaker then adverted to the history of the 'Joe* berlain's office as connected with the Court of Al d tit and he came forward to contest the principle, 0000, office should of necessity devolve upon an Aldev.so Having done so much, he would now go to the potyef let the Livery record A their votes whereilier willed it.—(G rent cheering.) He thnn k r: eco r ; for their patience, and with respect to t"," e ede r part of Mr. Wire's question he would at once 34" the wishes of the Council.—(Cheers.) _i t , of P ; A question was put by a gentleman in the 13-/" ho o- Hall to Alderman Humphrey, whether he h ad ; party to the taking away of Mr. Wallis's license , 0 41 ) Alderman HU6IPHREY said he had nothing t ec l ° o ll , ll. it; afterwards he had given him his vote as a ro o gr e d D. W. HARVEY, Esq., said that ho had an tin ° able aversion to fruitless contests. He perfect l f, with the principle enunciated that de/ Mr. Heppel. If the office of Chambe rlain an appendage of the Aldermen's Ce ttrt ,s l ts would save public time, were the form of basin:O.:l were enacting that day to be avoided. Why she not merely send out their heralds and their marsh o dd their men in gold—(Laughter)—to Aldgat e i li c ato o f (Laughter)—to Temple-bar, and to Newgate"„ 6,0 s laughter)—and let them proclaim it with noku trumpets, from the house tops, that their broiDerAg gate is dead, and that Alderman Brown, as senior 17 man, is elected to the vacant office.—(Laughieriiial# speaker then, after referring to John Wilkes , ft would refer to a nobler and a finer instant' elected the constitutional lawyer who n"'"", , last forty-eight hours vindicated the P°', i woeU trial by jury in the person of Daniel O'Ce-e:,, It was upon political grounds that theY s, ?op Mr. Denman ; then why should they say thee, tical questions should be kept in the back bGovis There were twenty-six magistrates sat a t 011 A hall, and, with a little calculation, the)_., ' r ) find that the labour of each Alderman, '',„r three hours in fourteen days. Were they p aid el se —(Cries of " Oh, yes.") But was there nothingio 1 11 0 The speaker then enumerated the gift s , in hands of the Court of Aldermen, 1 0 1 strain of the raciest satire, enuraera t " good things" and the feast days of the Civic beePitl he then concluded with the celebrated (Pl et t t „ . l :lo Junius—" That even property would be Pr e c) " their possessors had not the spirit to uphold tiler, After a few remarks from Sir JOHN KEY, in re e to a p when t he e ersonal matter Pr , The show of hands were taken, hers seemed .pretty equally divided bet ween 0 Aldermen, three or four hands only being hel i ste Mr. Heppel. qhe 0 01 The COMMON SERGEANT said that the —4 of opiuion that Anthony Brown, Esq., ba d the '" a, of the Livery. eci ldivr A poll was demanded, and the poll comet C S iet CS THE FUNDS—( CLO SING v ' -I BRITISH FUNDS. f i r Bask Stock 3 per Cent. Red lOO D ln i d tt i o an ße S n te ci c s k. ..... " ..... 3 per Cent. Cons . 2% per Cent. Red Ditto New Annuitie... New 3% per Cent lOl rEx. Bills, 1,000 1 . New 5 per Cent. Ditto 5001. ..... Long Annuities to expire Ditto 5ma11......•••"'Yr.m.. Jan 'lB6O l2 7-16 Bank Stock for Met . "' 19' O ct. 1 860 l2 5.15 Insols for Jan. 1860 ! India Stock for Mc' / FOREIGN FUNDS. t ••"" Austrian, 5 per Cent ...... - Portuguese 5 per -en Belgian, 5 per Cent. ...... ..... 103 'Ditto, g Nevr ' Ditt o... .. " .. ,,.." Brazilian Boi ds Buenos Ayres, 6 per Cent — Russian, 5 per t A :1 Chllian, 6 per Cent .... Colombian, 6 per Cent Ditto, 1824 Ditto 3 per Cent ..••••• Cuba Bonds, 6 per Cent — Ditto; Deferred•••" * " • ' .. .. Danish, 3 per Cent Greek, 18..5, 5 per Cent — [Exchan o g Mexican, 5 per Cent per Laset*;.. s ..„.. Ditto, 6 per Cent., 1837. Peruvian, 1it.25, 6 per Cent 23 Ditto, 5 per Cent •*" SHARES. Birmingham and Gloucester (100 paid).. ......«• 51, Bristol and Gloucester, 30 paid .... .................... Caledonian, 5 paid ........... ......... « ..... Eastern Counties (23 paid) .................... ..... Ditto Registered (Si 65 8d paid) ......... Ditto Perpetual, 5 per Cent., 13s .... paid,r4e Ditto ditto, paid, No 2 ...................."....•••. Great Western (75 paid' . . ...... ........ eb Ditto Half Shaves, 56 paid ..... .............. 66 Hull and Selby, 50 paid ........ ...................•••••• ... 48 , London and Brighton (50 paid) • .. . ....... .. S . 14. 0 London and South Western (411. 6s. ..... Ditto Eighths (15s. paid) .......................... 11 London and Croydon (Trunk) ........ ..... ...... Manchester and Leeds (70 paid) ................ .«••• Ditto, Half Shares, LO paid ......................... Newcastle and Darlingron Junction, '2l Paid. ..... • r 4 Northern and Eastern (45 paid) .............. ;`7t Ditto Scrip (15 paid) ......... .................... Ditto Quarter Shares (l 2) paid) . ................. 1;3, Norwich and Brandon, 4 paid ............. -•••"......" A South Eastern and Dover (33 25 4d paid) "*"-- ' 4 Ditto New Shares, , paid ..................... . ........ Yarmouth and Norwich (18 paid) ........ ••••••""".. / • York and North Midland (5U paid) ..... ............. Orleans, Tours, and Bourdeaux, I pai d . ; iBO Paris and Orleans (2 , 1 paid) .................... •••“."• t ipV . 7 Paris and Rouen, 20 paid ................ h : ------- _ .-Tr - •- r e [ADVBRTISEMENTI—A MAGIC Clirn ft. LOWAY'S OINTMENT AND PILLS. un- :re e d 1)1 residing in the Calton, Glasgow, had been n,ssion her youth with a contraction in the knee , ° l-_, 00 4 4 fl! a fall, which produced fifteen abscesses in al s jci t b s 'etti r , of the leg and thigh. It need scarcely b° g r ate s had had the advice of medical men of the t .gbuts!,t ) nence, but all failed to afford the least reliehacte; now be seen walking about Glasgow P er A f t f l isli f _A te- faj l d abscesses healed, and her limb solid, en `l es i` - str ii other means but these wonderful medi e-ri t, 22 4, 06 1 Sold at Professor Holloway's Establishnlceinby (where advice may be had gratis) , ° I, at t he respectable vendors of medicine tbro ng° world. ni - IA r the P e BIRTHS. , ; „tbire 1 a ill , On the 31st ult., at Clarkston, in Stir, - ;_ COY— the Major R. Garuiner, of the Hon. East low - 40* i vice, of a daughter. • southauir" ' of On the 2d inst., at Bittern-grove, ne ar lady of Alexander Hues, Esq., of a son. , oart' ,fr On the 3d inst., the lady of Solomon il• A O' Carlton-villas, Maida- lof d tighter. lils'' I, va e, a a , tre at, 0 , On the 4th hie., in Upper Stainforws road, Mrs. Thomas Barton, of a son. ao of G , On the 4th inst.., at Higham-hill, Walth Bury Capel, of a son, stborn. the lII V On the 4th inst. t H ddestlon, ,a e 4 Herta, Stokes, Esq., of a tiauglitzr I' II ';' ir HARRIED. Ai h, O f On the 2d inst., atLearnington Captain bierev.:at of rp Marian D'Oyley, widow of the late J. 1- flog' " u. ' - ' ' '' , o o i c7 ,,, ,r " , hill-park, Southampton. On the 3d inst., at St. George's, Camhol '' - ' n el .i'steri t t... sl°' Rogers, M.A., Oxford, of the Inner Temple , b 3 ° b to er tleairii-Grove, of William Nichol''' . Esel" 71i' c o, o r On the 3d inst., at Leamington Captain lir,,°:, 05, 11 1 0c p. Regiment Madras Native Infantry,' to Mary I.,\P e ;ri i '' ~ 11 A'l RectorVi i ; of f a c u l g a h re t n er do o n 9h am e a l i a c t a e . Rev. Wilton li isr tiro li l O ff, On the 3d inst., at St. Hanover -sg° d t ° 4 511 Martyn Riccard, Esq ,. of Srogutth Molton, DES, e' 1) io• Ann, only daughter of the late R. R ainer, .0+ niugton. ronles A der° On the 3d inst., at St. Mary lebone Church, ~ h All Morgan, Esq., to Mary, secon - d daughter of JoleP Esq., of the Holme, Regent's-park. ii Ol d DIED. On the 24th ult., at Dover, Exon of the Yeoman of the Guard. poili' r On the 29th ult., at Sydenham, o.xforclshire' rifil° of of Mr. J. culted 41. t he lady es On the 30th t G S'bella 100,,1 , a uernsey, i ' d, illo Stirling, of the Bombay Army. bola ° t io On the 31st ult., at`Houghton Hall, C0,n 1 .,,t, of Robert Grant, Esq., eldest sun of Sir J. R. tAr'''' Carlisle. .. 0 ,0 , John parker .ICIIOI ife ------ f - 0 -1/ . 1 ' 11141 London: Printed and Published by WO W oa t S 0 Pe No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sus th o Strand, in the Precinct of the SaVon,u+ •"" Bliddlole; Thunday, geptailm b; Jo"' sEAFORD V. MORRIS. The decree in this case was affirmed as to the copy hold property, and reversed as to the freehold, with liberty to enter another appeal. THE CASE OF MR. O'CONNELL. _ Lord CAMPBELL moved that the reasons given by their Lordships in giving judgment in the case or the Qticen v. O'Connell, be printed.—Agreed to. ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS OF CONGRATU LATION. The Earl of DELAWARIt brought up her Majesty's gracious answer to the Address of Congratulation on the birth of a Prince, which was agreed to by their Lord ships on the 6th August. The answer was as follows: " I have received with extreme satisfaction your loyal address ; I heartily thank you for your congratulations, and I receive this address as' an additional proof of your loyal attachment." The Duke of WELLINGTON moved that her Ma jesty's gracious answer be printed with the Votes, — Agreed to. TREATY WITH MECKLENBURGH. Viscount CANNING laid upon the tab!e trelties which had recently been entered into with Mecklen • burgh-Schwerin. ROYAL COMMISSION. The LORD CHANCELLOR then directed the Black Rod to summon the House of Commons to the bar. On their arrival the ro) al assent was given by commission to the undermentioned Bills : The Joint-Stock Companies Regulation Bill, the In solvent Joint-Stock Companies Regulation Bill, the Joint-Stock Banks Regulation Bill, the Art-Unions In demnity Bill, the Merchant Seamen's Bill, the Courts of Law (Ireland) Bill, and the Irish Fisheries Bill. The Commissioners were—the Lord Chancellor, the Duke of Wellington, the Duke of Buccleuch, the Earl of Delawarr, the Earl of Dalhouic, and Lord Wham_ cliffe. The LORD CHANCELLOR then read her Majesty's most gracious Speech (for which see another column). After which the Commission for proroguing Parliament was read, and the Lord Chancellor declared the Parliament to stand prorogued until Thursday, the 10th of October next. The Royal Commissioners appeared in their robes. There were a few ladies present, who occupied the front Opposition bench. HOUSE OF COMMONS. (Continued from our Afternoon Edition.) Sir R. PEEL laid on the table papers and returns. Mr. HAWES moved for returns relating to the Lae disturbances amongst the negroes in Dominique. POST-OFFICE INQUIRY. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE gave notice that next session he would call the attention of the House to the unsatisfac tory nature of the repbrt of the Secret Committee of Inquiry into the opening of letters in the Post-office, and that he would submit a specific measure on the subject. He would also more for the repeal of the rate-paying clauses in the Reform Bill. LORD STANLEY'S RESIGNATION. Mr. KEMBLE moved for a new writ for North Lan cashire, in the room of Lord Stanley, who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds. FRANCE—OTAHEITE — MOROCCO. Sir C. NAPIER had to put a question to the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) which he hoped it would be consistent with his duty to answer. In the course of the session the Right Hon. Baronet had stated, with the frankness which became a British Minister, that a gross outrage had been offered to a British subject in Otaheite, and that he had no doubt the French Government would disavow the conduct of the Admiral. Since the affair at Otaheite a French squadron had been employed upon the coast of Africa, and had bombarded Tangiers. Another squadron had since been dispatched to Mogadore, and had taken possession of that place. Another squadron had been sent to Tunis to prevent the French fleet from intimidating the Dey. Independently of that, they had put several new ships in commission, and augmented their naval force, whilst we were dimi nishing ours. We had called home and paid off one of our ships from Otaheite, and, in the meantime, the French augmented their force in the South Seas. We had since paid off two other ships. The question he wished to ask was, whether France had made any reparation for the gross outrage at Otaheite ; and, if not, whether we were to be left in the unprotected state in which we were in all those places where the French were exercising their naval forces ?—(A laugh.) The Gallant Commo dore then made some allusion to the French seizing the " Queen," which excited laughter, but was not heard distinctly in the gallery. Sir R. PEEL said he would make as frank an an swer as he could. With respect to Tangiers there was no reason to doubt the assurances of the French Go vernment, often repeated respecting Algeria and the countries adjoining, including, of course, Tunis and Mor roco.—(Hear.) With respect to Otaheite, I have to state, said he, that a discussion has taken place between her Majesty's Government and the Government of the King of the French as to the occurrences in that quarter which were calculated to disturb the friendly relations of the two Governments, and I have the satisfaction to state that these discussions have been brought to an amicable and satisfactory termination. The negotiations which have passed will be communicated to the House, and I trust that for the present the House will not ex pect me to enter into detail. Mr. HINDLEY (amidst cries of " Order, order,") begged to ask what was the Right Hon. Baronet's opinion of the conduct of the French Admiral to Mr. Pritchard, and whether any reparation had been made for that conduct ? Sir R. PEEL—Sir, I have already stated that the dis cussions have been brought to an amicable and satisfac tory t e rmination—(Hear, hear)—a termination satisfac tory to both countries—(Hear, hear)—l mean, per fectly consistent with the honour and the interest of both countries.—(Hear, hear,) LORD STANLEY. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said, that having heard a new writ moved for in the room of Lord Stanley, he begged to ask IN bether the Noble Lord was still at the head of the Colonial Department ? Sir ROBERT PEEL said that his Noble Friend's position in the Cabinet was not in the least affected by his acceptance of the Chiltern Hundreds.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that the answer was not sufficient, although it was given with such pleasure and facetiousness by the Right lion. Baronet. The Noble Lord held an important office in the Cabinet, and he thought the people would desire to know why he re linquished his seat in Parliament, and, therefore, the question was a legitimate one.—(Hear, hear.). Several petitions of course were laid upon the table ; when Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, who was interrupted by cries of " Order, order," said he did not wonder at the im patience of Hon. Members opposite, as they must be tired of wheeling about so much during the past session. —(A laugh.) Although he knew he had not much time, as he expected the Black Rod to make his appear ance every moment, the motion he had to make was of importance, and he would take the opportunity that remained of making it, It was for a copy of the opinions adduced by the judges on the questions of law propounded to them in the case of " O'Connell and others against the Queen," with the copy of the notes of the short-hand writer appointed to report the proceedin g s. Those opi n i ons h a d a l rea dy been laid before the House of Lords, and were by this time circu lated throughout the country; and there could be no objection to produce them in that House. He un derstood that Mr. Gurney had taken notes of those opinions, which, he believed, were cor rectly reported by the press; and it would be see n that some of them reflected th highest credit upon the judges. (Hear, hear.) The opinions of one judge (Lord Denman) ought to be laid on the table and printed in letters of gold.—(Hear.) It was still recolltctcd what had taken place in that House last session, and all the vapouring there had been about " convicted conspira tors," and how the Right Hon. Baronet took credit to himself for having brought the convicted conspirator to condign punishmeut; now itproved that he (Mr.O'Connell) was no conspirator at all—(hear, hear, c heers, Oh, and laughter) —and that they (the Ministers) had been guilty of the grea t est i n j ust i ce , He (Mr. Duncombe) had been called to account in the House for having denounced the manner in which the prosecution of Mr. O'Connell had been conducted when he laid the petition from his constituents on the table. It proved now that the only conspiracy which had existed was concocted in the Horne-office and carried into effect in the Queen's Bench, Dublin—(Cheers, laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh.") When he looked at the unfair advantage taken of Mr. O'Connell—(Cheers)--the fraudulent j ury list—(Cheers) —the packing of the jury —(Cheers)—the partisanelip of the judge—(Cheers)--the employment of spies and the suborning of the reporters, he felt that the question had ended as it ought to end, in the disgrace of those gentlemen opposite, who had engaged in this conspiracy against the due administration of the law and the rights of the Irish people.—(Cheers.) Those persons had Fad three months false imprisonment, and a vindictive feeling, and a sort of part malice and ma lignity were exhibited by the Government towards those individuals.—(Hear.) When a Bill was submitted by Lord Campbell to the other House of Parliament, for the purpose of suspending sentence till the validity of the judgment was ascertained, it was rejected because it was supposed it might bo favourable to Mr. O'Connell theand This ioo k o e t d h e like n a ti v e i m o d e l leo spiritwere oinlleg thea ll y p a c r o t n o vi f c ted. the o for Ir r ea e r x i p es ect of Hear, Government, and what the peop le of this countr y had now a iglhntd...... to (C s what h e t a h r e , _ m wh ea a n t t t d re paration and atonement they were to make for the gross insult offered to the leaders of the Irish people, in whom they placed their confidence. Talk of the question of repeal, the Government had promoted and given an impetus to repeal, which they would find it difficult now to stop.—(Hear, hear.) They created an impression among the English people, that if they themselves were Irishmen they would be repealers, in consequence of the misrule of the c ountry.—(Cheers.) They had insulted Ireland, and it would never be forgiven by the Irish people. It was a disgraceful proceeding, and would never be forgotten by the people of England. He in tended to move that a message be sent to the House of Lords for a copy of the opinions of the judges in the case of the Queen v. O'Connell, so that it might be laid on the table of the House, and might 20.. 71.1 Beans 375. Od ~...345. 2d I Pease 33s. iOd LAST Six WEEKS. OATS. I RYE. BEANS. PEASE 20 10 '33 9 37 1 ,37 4, 20 3 L 7 6 34 7 36 5 20 1 35 9, 35 0 14 2 20 0 35 H 1 35 7 33 7 20 4 36 6i 35 10 34 0 20 7 34 2137 0 33 10 VZ/LAGIE OF THE SIX WEEKS 20s. 41.1 Bean' .35g. 10d 358. 81.1 Pew... ..... 34a. 10J. VILEIGN COIN. • _ _ 63. Odd Beant ..... 7.. Ed .•—• 75. 6d.1 Peas C••—,... 8 ed MARKET NEWS.-(THIS DAY.) HAY PILARICETS. SMITTIFIELD.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 31 15s to 414 s Useful ditto, 41 6s to 4112 s ; fine Upland ditto, 4/ 14s to 513 s ; Clover Hay, 41 lOs to 6/6s ; Oat Straw, 116 s to 1/ 8s ; Wheat Straw, 11 8s to 1/ lOs per load. A moderate supply and a steady demand. Prices about stationary. _ _ CUNBERLAND.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 31 l Gs to 4l 6s ; Useful ditto, 418 s to 41165; fine Upland ditto, 4/ 173 to 51 6s ,• Clover Hay, 41 16s to 61; Oat Straw, 118 s to 11 10s; Wheat Straw, 11 lOs to 11 12s per load. Sup ply tolerably good, and trade dull. WIIITECHAPEL.—Coarse Meadow Hay, 3110 s to 4183 ; Useful ditto,4llos to 41 15s ; fine Upland ditto, 4/ 16s to 51 3s ; Clover Hay, 4/ 15s to 6/ lO s ; O at Straw, 1/ 6s to 1/ 8s ; Wheat Straw, 11 8s to 11 10s per load. Trade throughout dull, at the above quotations. —s were 'I l e ngeneralsupported. Beef, e eheref from o m =EAT icesaz.ziis. to daylliijk a m 2s 6d to 3s 10d; Mutton, 2 s 8 d to 4s; Lamb, 3 s 6d to s sil, heavy, SEP T. and ric 4. —The 6d; Veal, 3s 4 d to 4 s 2 d ; and Pork, 3s t o 3 s Gd per 81bs. A RU NDEL, SEPT. 3 . — Prime Downs sold a t f u ll cur rencies. In other kinds of stock n ex t t o not hi ng was doing. Beef, from 2 s 6 d to 35 10d ; Mutt on , 2 s 8d to 4s ; Lamb, 3s 6 d to 43 4d; Veal, 3s 4d to 4s ; and Pork, 2s 6d to 3s 6dper 81bs. CHICHESTER, SEPT. 4.—We had a very dull trade this morning, at barely late rates. Beef, from 2s Ed to 3s 10d; Mutton, 2s 8d to 4s; Lamb, 3s 6d to 4s 6d; Veal, 3s 4d to 4s; and Pork, 3s to 3s 8d per 81bs. Suckling Calves, 185 to 30s; Quarter-old Store Pigs, 16s to 19s; and Mulch Cows, with their Small Calf, 161 to 181 los each. SoUTHALL, SEPT. 4.—Owing to the supply of each kind of stock on sale to-day being large the demand was throughout heavy, and prices had a downward tendency. Beef, from 2s 6d to 3s 10d ; Mutton, 2s 8d to 4s ; Lamb, 3s 6d to 4s 8d ; Veal, 3s 4d to 4s 4d ; and Pork, 2s 6d to 3s 8d per 81bs. Supply : Beasts, 54 ; Sheep and Lambs, 3,048 ; Calves, 60 ; Pigs, 57. ROMFORD, SEPT. 4.—With the exception of the primest Old Downs commanding a steady sale at full prices, the demand here to-day was heavy, on the fol lowing terms :—Beef, from 2s 6d to 3s 10d ; Mutton, 2s 8d to 4s ; Lamb, 3s 4d to 4s 6d ; Veal, 3s 6d to 4s 4d ; and Pork, 2s 4d to 3s 6d per Blbs. Suckling Calves, 18s to 32s ; quarter-old Store Pigs, 16s to 20s; and Milch Cows, with their small Calf, 161 to 191 each. MONEY AND COMMERCIAL NEWS CITY, QUARTER TO THREE. There was another quiet market for Cotton at Liver pool yesterday. Sales 2,500 bales, including 500 for export. Prices were fully d. per lb. lower than last week. A 'good deal of steady business was done in Shares, especially in London and Dover and the French lines.—Bristol and Exeter, 111 ; Bristol and Gloucester, 561 ; Dublin and Belfast, 3/ ; Edinburgh and Glasgow, 65 ; Glasgow and Greenock, 13 ; Grand Junction, Half, 85' ; ',- ; Liverpool and Manchester, New, 35 paid ; London and Birmingham 321. Shares, 33 ; Manchester and Birmingham, 51 ex. div. ; Midland Counties, 109 t ; North Union, 126 ; Sheffield and Man- G' 3 : 4 4Y At llrsp bra -_____ TH That De held i astant, Drobati o , t ors, on 1 ( 1 ,0001,) ther e i n , The t he dory ° Pen for The eb enabl e d t aee° n u 11( pew ea ;74t . a . bie: zor terlse, • IP' Th 44 1 it ` Age. • • • th e th e; Al itut ey b et° li e all 6413;r a' Pro se , 04 very , thu . that! ger n ry John] D Ittio_Drol p ecuu ej witz• ith • oUtit; th cr e l 07l st} , *re ir k i t a i c v oeg t l. l !anCe fi The ILntio Win4riaurnh, ; r • t 7 The di . etb aber J