The Sun. — London, England, 1845-03-13 00:00:00

there was much to be said in favour of the motion of the Hon. Member for Birmingham, and there was certainly much plausibility on the face of it, yet he felt compelled to divide against him on the present occasion. —(Divide, divide.) Mr. SPOONER said he would say but one word in reply to what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Cockermouth. He must say that for the sake of showing how fallacious was the supposition that if an insurance were discontinued the office would return the premium. The office would, it is true, return something, but on most lives, and especially in young lives, the whole amount returned would not be more than two per cent. There was, therefore, nothing in that. He thought that the House was bound to act conscientiously, and if they could not do all the good they desired, they at least might do some good. There was a peculiarity about the income-tax. It interfered with the whole arrangement of a man's expenditure. He would suppose the case of a man enjoying a cer tain amount of income by which he ranged all his ex penses. Among other portions of his expenditure he had insured his life; then comes the property-tax—this was a charge which he could not avoid, and there was the danger of losing, if not the actual loss, of the only provision which he was able to make for his family, and, therefore, he thought that a difference ought to be made to meet the case. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the Amendment... Against it - Majority against the Amendment. —6l Mr. WAKLEY said, that in bringing forward the motion of which he had given notice, he thought it necessary to explain that his object was not to inter fere in any way with the collection cf the tax upon property and income. The Bill before the House was entitled, "A Bill for Levying a Tax uprn Pro perty and Income," but unless the clause of which he had given notice was introduced, it might be called " A Bill for levying a Tax on Losses. His (Mr. Wakley's) object was to relieve those parties who were assessed to the whole amount of their nominal income, and who yet suffered serious losses from the insolvency or bankruptcy of tenants, or, as in many cases, from their absconding, and he thought that he might, with great reason, ask the House to remit the charge for income-tax on the amount of those losses, when they had been fully proved be fore the official parties whose duty it was to make the assessment. Many parties complained that this tax was a great evil, and he (Mr. Wakley) was ready to allow that it was so, but still he thought that any evil was endurable which was to continue only a limited period. And when two parties who were complaining to him of its oppression, how peculiarly it fell upon their cases, he was in the habit of telling them that it would not hurt them much, as it was to continue only for .three years. He would therefore tell the Right Hon. Baronet that the public expected this tax to cease at the end of three years. He had voted for the imposition of this tax, and under the circumstances he thought that it was a wise pro position, but he did not believe that tax could be con tinued in its present shape at the end of that time. There was already great discontent out of doors in consequence of it, and if the same disposition to reject , any modification of the tax remained that had already been witnessed, he would say that it would be impos sible to continue the tax at the end of the time for which it was now voted ; but he believed that the amendment which he had to submit was necessary to render the tax palatable. He was ready to grant that they could not tax property without taxing income, but he at the same time conceived that in order to avoid the dishonest influence of the tax it was neces sary to introduce a clause to save the imposition upon losses. He did not wish rnetely to avoid the tax upon assumed losses, but on those which were capable of proof. He didlnot ask that the Commissioners should have power—he did not say that they should at once remit—but that they should have the power of remitting the tax in all cases when it was proved that losses had been incurred by the causes which he had assigned. He would, therefore, beg to move that a clause be inserted in the Bill to the following effect : " And whereas doubts have arisen whether the landlord for the time being of premises charged under Schedule (A) is liable to the duty charged on the said premises under the said last-mentioned Schedule, whether the said landlord shall or shall not have re • ce:ved the rent in respect of the said premises ; be it enacted, and it is hereby enacted, that it shall and may he lawful for the Commissioners for General Purposes, acting for the district in which the said premises are situated, on appeal to them made for that purpose by the said landlord or his agent, to dis charge the said assessment, or such portion thereof, at the rate of seven pence in the pound, on such amount of rent as the said landlord shall prove to their sat'sfaction he has wholly lost, and has not been able and is not likely to recover in respect of the said premises, and on which he would have been liable to pay the said duty, by way of deduction, in case the occupier for the time being or any other person for him had paid the said rent." Tho CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he ought to thank the Hon. Member for Fins bury for having so well answered the lion. Member for Cambri , lge, but with respect to the amendment which the lion. Member had submitted to the House he felt that he must be as hard upon that as he had been on other cases. He felt that certainly there was considerable reason, in a prima facie aspect, in what had fallen from the Hon. Member. But there was me objection which, in his opinion, was fatal to it. It should be recollected that the landlord pos sessed peculiar powers over the tenant, and if he lost his rent in the first instance he would very possibly have the power of recovering it afterwards. It was not to be supposed that if a tenant were in debt for rent he could at once remove from the place that he occupied; and if he did so it was not likely that he could remove his goods along with him (Hear, hear.) Were this amendment to he carried, and were the Commissioners invested with the power to allow the reduction of the tax, it would lead to very great inconvenience. If a landlord were, indeed, to suffer such a loss, which was not, as he before said, very likely, he would have to blame his own folly in not having made either a proper agreement with his tenant, or a proper reference respecting his character. He thought that under these circumstances the land lord should pay the tax in the first instance, and take his chance of recovering the loss. Mr. WAKLEY said that he felt the necessity of this clause very strongly, and was very sorry that the Act of the last three years, had been without some such clause as he had proposed—yet he would not divide the House upon it, for after the bad success of the attempts of the Hon. Member for Birmingham (Mr. Spooner) he saw that it was fruitless to divide, unless he had the sanction of the Government, and he was unwilling to give unnecessary trouble. But he must say that he bitterly regretted the opposition which was given by her Majesty's Ministers to any attempt to alter the income-tax for three years. He felt boiled to assert that, though this tax was contrary to the prejudices and en tirely opposed to the feelings of the people of England, they had borne its imposition with an admirable patience, and they had exhibited a temper under its infliction beyond all praise.—(Hear.) For their sakes, therefore, he trusted that the same opposition would not be continued to altering this odious tax. Under the circumstances, and with the example of the fate of the amendments of the Hon. Member for Birmingham, he begged to withdraw his motion. Mr. CURTEIS said that he trusted that the notice that had just been taken of the feeling s of the people, and of their dislike to this tax, woul not be lost on her Majesty's Government. The motion was then withdrawn. Mr. FOSTER said that he had no hostility to the tax himself, and, generally speaking, in his opinion it was a good tax, and he believed that the opposition was not to the tax itself so much as to its inquisitorial nature. His amendment, if adopted, would tend to remove this objection, and he therefore hoped the Government would net oppcse it. All who were engaged in trade or manufactures were assessed in Schedule D ; but if they wished to keep their affairs private, they were at liberty, on appli cation, to make their returns under Schedule C. his amendment was to this effect : " And whereas all persons, corporations, and com panies carrying on any mines of lead, tin, coal, copper, non, or other undertaking s of the like nature, are now chargeable under schdule (A); be it enacted, that from and after the passing of this Act the said persons, corporations, or companies so chargeable in respect of all such undertakings shall be assessed for the same under schedule (D), in like manner, and with the same option of privacy, as other persc ns, corporations, or companies chargeable under that schedule." He could not understand on what grounds any opposition could be offered to his amendment. Large mining establishments were generally—he must say always—situated in remote districts. In towns a man was not so much under the supervision of his neighbours, and his return was Not so likely to be canvassed by those about hi m . N ow , f ur min ing establishments, the introduction of this amend ment would relieve the officers of the establishment from a great inconvenience, for at pr esen t th ey were obliged to disclose the whole of their affairs to the public around them. Those were tailors, shoemakers, _l 4 s . .eople of a similar grade ; and was it right, he atiltA • .0 ask, that the affairs of companies of this mug. (V l —_,..,_ al • should be laid open to such investigation? '' . --- - - 7- i His ain_Odment was necessary to make the Bill con - ':-- sisted. The measure ought to be so in all and (very - -I'' - A - e aOtle of Ili part , . As he had said befor e, he -could l --4- '''' • ' "A'not understand the reasons, if there were any, for c-4 \"<'k?" - ' . • osing this amendment, and he therefore hoped he 0\ - _, -- -A - i 4 4 ) .R . ,z --- ,-.- --- ;_,:should-not have a refte,,al from the Government to Nee.-. , _ maks the alteration he proposed. to * The amendment was then put. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said big chief objection to the amendment was that, when the Bill was introduced in 1842, the miners themselves i^ THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, MARCH 13, • 1845. desired to be placed under schedule A, and the same principle was adopted in all former Bills. He was afraid, therefore, to swerve now from this established rule, or he would have no objection to accede to the amendment of the Hon. Member. Mr. FOSTER said the Right Hon. Gentleman had urged no argument against his proposition. He did not wish to compel miners to claim under schedule D, but to give them the option of doing so. The clause was then read a second time. Sir R. H. INGLIS did not call the attention of her Majesty's Ministers to the motion he had upon the paper with a view of obtaining their concession now, but with a view to obtaining their sanction at some future period to the principle he wished to lay down. If the present were a time of war he would not, for one moment, offer any obstacle to the con tinuation of the measure in its present form, but as they were now at peace with nearly all the world, this objection could not be raised. Every day's ex perience convinced him that the tax was not to be limited to three years ; but, on the contrary, it was likely to be made perpetual, and under such circumstances he was desirous to modify the measure in such a way as to make it more en durable. If, therefore, he could not carry his amend ment, he wished to put on record, for the guidance of their successors, an expression of opinion that some at least of the present House of Commons were favourable to his proposal. He believed he had stated, on a former occasion, that numerous instances had come to his knowledge where clerks 2nd others, whose incomes were 1501., had got their employers to reduce their salaties, t enable them to evade payment of the income-tax. By this means a man, whose salary was 1501. was reduced to 149/., this saved 31. 10s. a year, He wished, therefore, to save his fellow-countrymen from this temptation to commit fraud, as well as from suffering actual distress, which had in some cases re sulted from the tax. They were told that the revenue would suffer a loss of one million sterling, if the House adopted his proposition. He conceived this sum was considerably- overstated, but in order to meet this objection, he had thought it advisable to modify the proposition of which he had given notice, by limiting its operation to those classes who were peculiarly affected by the pre sent tax. Instead, therefore, of the notice which stood on the printed paper, he wished to substitute the following:—" Provided always that the said rates and duties shall not be assessed or taken upon any in come whatever, excepting with respect to the sum by which such income shall exceed 1501." Now this would meet many cases where the tax pressed with severity. For instance, there were in this country 5,489 benefices, varying from 1501. to 5001., who would derive considerable benefit from the introduc tion of such a prorision.—(Hear, hear.) lie knew what the result of a division would be, but to avoid being taunted by any future Chancellor of the Exche quer that the measure in its present form had been fully sanctioned by the House, he felt called upon to put it to the vote.—(llear.) Mr. SPOONER seconded the amendment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the question involved a general principle which could not be settled by the operation of the tax upon one particular class. He thought he should be able to show his Hon. Friend that his proposition was im practicable, and that it would not remove the present facilities for evading the tax. His Hon. Friend said a clerk who had 1501. a year could get his employer to reduce l.is salary to 1491., and thus evade the tax. But would his Ilonourable Friend's amendment remove this objection? Could not a man who had an income of 5001. reduce it to 499/. ?—(Hear, hear.) Surely, then, the amendment was objectionable in this particular. But his Hon. Friend's proposition was open to other objections. A man might have an income from land, amounting to 500/. in one part of the country, and an interest to the same amount in some railway company in another part of the country, and thus he would have an opportunity of availing himself of his Hon. Friend's amendment in two instances. He might claim to deduct 1501. from his 5001. arising out of land in Yorkshire, and claim the same exemption on his railway interest in Sussex.—(Hear.) Unless, therefore, they introduced some system of combined examination to meet these particular cases, the amend ment would produce no good, and for this reason it was his duty to resist the proposition. After a few words from Sir W. CLAY, The House divided, when there appeared— For the amendment 25 Against it Majority against the amendment —34 On the re-admission of strangers to the gallery, we found Sir W. CLAY addressing the House. He said, that in all direct taxation there was much rudeness, roughness, and unpleasantness mixed up. He gave the Right Hon. Baronet credit for showing good rea sons against the several amendments that had been proposed, inasmuch as they would all be attended with hardship and inequality. But the Right lion. Baro net's answers proved that hardship and inequality were inseparable from the tax. There were many theore tical arguments in favour of direct taxation ; but there was this advantage in indirect taxation, that it left (very man to a certain degree the master of his taxation. All indirect taxation pressed upon expenses, and many of the assessed taxes pressed wholly on luxuries. But the income-tax was a tax upon prudence ; and he did not agree with the saying that the miser was the fittest person to be taxed. The miser was the greatest benefactor of society.—(A laugh.) It was the miser that carried out all your great improvements.—(Oh, oh, and laughter.) The man who kept a pack of fox hounds was no bene factor of the community. The man si ho benefited society was he that did not spend his money in I luxury, but spared it, and applied his savings to public improvement% (Cries of " Oh, oh," and " That is not a miser.") He (Mr. Clay) did not wish the tax to be extended to Ireland, but all the arguments against that extension applied to the im position of the tax in this country. He would not detain the House by offering unavailing opposition, but he could not allow the Bill to pass without enter ing his protest against it. Sir R. PEEL thanked the Hon. Gentleman for the tone in which he had expressed his opinions, and for not persisting in an unavailing opposition, although the Hon. Gentleman had given the Bill his parting malediction.—(A laugh.) He did not think it was a proper time, at this stage of the Bill, to enter into the question of direct and indirect. taxa tion. He would only say that much must depend upon the circumstances of the country to be taxed. But he must say that if there were in any country taxes which pressed upon industry, and at the same time a palpable tendency to accumulate, then pro perty might be directly taxed.—(Hear, hear.) But in a country like the United States, where there was but little accumulation, he thought it might be well to adhere to indirect taxation. He must know all the circumstances of a country before he could give an opinion. Put of this he was convinced, that if a tax on property were to be imposed, it should be on income, and not upon accumulated capital. Nothing could be more dangerous than to tax accumulated capital.—(Hear, hear.) It would be a check to that feeling which led men to endure present toil for the sake of future serenity and enjoyment; and he be lieved there was great truth in what Dr. Johnson said, that a man could not be more innocently employed than in accumulating money.—(A laugh.) Such a tax would derange accumulation, and tend to transfer capital to other countries. At the same time he would confess that he thought the greatest check to the improvident application of the income-tax was the inequality of its operation.—(Hear, hear.) A tax on accumulation would not easily be made productive, as capital would be transferred to other countries. He was not now going into the question as to fixed incomes and floating incomes.—(Hear.) Some Gentlemen had said that they could show how he could raise three or four millions. Very well. But let them be upon those (the Treasury) benches, and let him see how they would propose their taxes— (Laughter.) Other gentlemen asked why was not the tax extended to Ireland? But why not extend other taxes to Ireland? Why not extend the soap tax, for the first time, to that part of the kingdom, where it was most destriale to encourage the use of soap.—( Laughter.) They were making a great, and, he would say, a bold experiment in their fiscal system, and the fact was that the country was of opinion that the present was a time when the property of manufacturers, and the condi tion of the working-classes rendered the experiment desirable and practicable.—(Hear, hear.) Those upon whom the income-tax pressed were willing to bear the burthen fur the sake of an experiment, hav ing for its object to better the condition of those below them, as it was the earnest desire of the affluent classes to do.—Hear, hear.) Their objec tion to the tax was as great as could be, and the reason of their acquiescence was an honour to them and to the country. Ile (Sir Robert Peel) would not contemplate the discussion which was likely to arise when the renewal of the tax came again before the House.—(A laugh.) The Ilouse would not ex pect him to say now what course be might take upon that future occasion. lie had stated already the pre parations which were going on in the glass trade.— (Hear.) Suppose, then, the thousands who were now unemployed— and other thousands—should find em ployment ? Suppose the glass manufacture of this country should come into competition with Belgium ground a to s tryit nowfo and B o h em i a — m i g h t not the couistry, on the same thacergut'he application e,!eedin the o income c - t tr i x a , xa b - e inclined tion, it not exactly in this shape Was it therefore to be expected that he should now pledge himself to the repeal of the tax in three years ?—and he said this without Relying any reserve. —(Hear hear.) The affluent classes in this country willingly acqui esced in the tax, for the sake of an experiment which had for its object the relief of those who most stood in need of it--(hear, hear)--and be could not say what their feeling might be at the end of the term, and upon the issue of the experiment. Mr. HAWES did not deny the claims of the poorer classes to be relieved ; but the Right Hon. Baronet had not done anything to relieve them from the burdens that were most felt by them. The Hon. Baronet had not taken off the taxes upon consump tion, nor those which interrupted trade, and made subsistence difficult. He was not obliged to vote for the income-tax, because it rendered the Minister to be independent of other sources of revenue, and able to keep up the fiscal system that supported monopoly. He thought that they ought not to submit to the in come-tax till the burdens on the industry of the country were removed, and till the indirect taxation ‘,‘ as placed on a sound basis. With regard to the administration of the tax he had heard with great pleasure what had fallen from the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) and the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer on that subject, but believing that the tax was unjust, he could not—though he would not divide the House again upon it—sit down without joining his Hon. Friend in giving it a parting male diction. Mr. J. S. WORTLEY said that the argument of the lion. Member for Lambeth was, that he would wish to see the Minister in difficulty that he might be Vompelled to adopt certain measures, forgetting that when a Minister was in difficulties he had recourse to an increase, and not to a diminution of taxation. His Right Hon. Friend had put the grounds of the tax on a proper foundation. The people of the country had not submitted to the tax so patiently from any pre ference of direct over indirect taxation, but because they saw that it enabled the Right Hon. Baronet to make a great experiment with regard to the taxes levied on the people of the country, and afforded him a prospect of lightening the burdens which fell on the more indigent classes of the community. Mr. HAWES explained. Mr. WARD said it appeared to him rather sur prising that no person was going to divide the House, notwithstanding all that had been urged against this tax.—(Hear, hear.) Understanding that the Hon. Member for Lambeth intended to divide the House on the present occasion, he came down to vote against him, although he did not expect to see the tax done away with, nor would he entertain any expectation of the kind when his Hon. Friend became Chancellor of the Exchequer.—(Cheers and laughter.) His Hon. Friend talked of just taxation, but where were the elements of just taxation to be found ? He (Mr. Ward) acted with a large body in the country, who were known under the name of "Free-traders," and he recognised a broad riistinction between free trade principles and those on which the Government acted, but he could see nothing but a question of degree and not of principle between the present Chan cellor of the_Exchequer and the would-be Chancellor. —(Cheers and laughter.) He would vote with as great cheerfulness as ever he did with his Hon. Friend, if they recognised the principles which they seemed to like but which they did not espouse.— (Cheers.) Ile did not think there was more to be gained on one side than the other.—(Hear, hear.) It was a question of ,'egree between the present Go vernment and the future Government, but there was this difference, that the Right Hon. Gentleman op posite (Sir Robert Peel) always did what he said, but his lion. Friend near him said a great deal more but did nothing.—(Ministerial cheers.) They had plenty of pretty schemes from them, but they never ent beyond schemes.—Loud Cheers.) They found that the Right Hon Baronet was able to carry his measures by a happy combination of circumstances, and that was a happy circumstance for the country. He had heard complaints in that house of the budget of the Right lion. Gentleman, but he did not think it was a fair criterion to apply to that measure that a man gained but 3d. in his fustian or 2d. in his sugar.— (Hear.) He looked to the immense em ployment it would give at home by increasing the ex port trade, and enabling them to compete with foreigners in other countries.—(Cheers.) fie believed that their trade would be increased 25i millions in consequence of taking off the duty on the raw mate ' rial.—(l-lear, and I.lughter.) And, notwithstanding all the taunts that had been thrown against him and those with whom he acted, he was not agiamrd to ex press himself in favour of the measure of the Right Hon. Baronet, and he had come down to the House that evening for the purpose of recording his vote in favour of the income-tax —(Cheers.) Mr. CURTEIS said, that if he did not divide the House on the present occasion, it was because having recorded his opinion against the measure, and having already divided the House twice upon it, he thought it would be pertinacious on his part, if he were to set up his own opinion against the declared conviction of the House.—(hear, hear.) His objection to the tax was not that it was a direct tax, but that it was an inquisitorial tax. He was sorry to see that they had made such a bad fight against the income-tax. The Noble Lord the Member for London, under whose leadership he had acted for many years, and for whom he had the greatestrespect, had, be regretted to say, only put one vote on record against the tax — (Hear, hear)—on the motion of the lion. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Buller.) He was sorry the Noble Lord had not made a better stand against it. For himself, he gave every possible malediction that could be given to the tax.—(Laughter.) Mr. DARBY could not agree with the argument of the Hon. Member for Lambeth, for the Hon. Gen tleman's argument was, that all the labouring capital of the country should be displaced for the purpose of rendering things cheap ; forgetting that if things were cheap and labour displaced the people would not have the means of buying those cheap things. Sir C. NAPIER said he rose for the purpose of remarking on one great injustice of the income-tax. It appeared that while all the civil officers in Ireland, who were well paid, were exempt from the income tax, the officers of the army and navy, who were most inadequately paid, were obliged to pay the tax. Now that was most unjust. He knew the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer would reply that their navy all over the world paid the tax, but he begged to remind him that the Governors of their colonies also paid it ; and if that were so, where was the justice in exempting the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and the other high civil functionaries there, from the payment of the tax. He hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would give some explanation on that head. Mr. TRE LAWNY supported the motion, and after a short discussion, in which the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER joined, the Bill passed. The Sugar Duties Bill was read a second time, after a short discussion, and ordered to be committed on Friday. The Customs Export Duties Bill was also read a second time and ordered to be committed. On the proposition that the Justices' Clerks and Clerks of the Peace Bill be read a second time, Mr. T. EGERTON objected to the Bill. General JOHNSTONE supported the Bill. DARI3Y hoped, if the Bill passed, the ma chinery would be less complicated than that now pro. posed. He was fearful that the expense to the public would be increased by the Bill. Mr. BROTH ERTON supported the Bill. After some observations from Mr. DlcxErtsort and Mr. HENLEY, Sir J. GRAHAM said he had undertaken this measure from a sincere desire to promote the better administration of justice, and he was quite ready to listen to any suggestions fiom Gentlemen possessing practical experience on that subject. Many of the objections to the measure applied rather to the details than to the principle. The principle was that, upon the whole, justice would be better administered by public servants receiving salaries for the duties which they performed ; the principle was that, with reference to the whole body of the country, whose interests were involved, salaries were preferable to fees. He believed, also, that in the end economy would be promoted by the measure under considera tion. The Hon. Member for Cheshire said that if the Bill passed, enormous salaries would be granted by magistrates in quarter sessions. Mr. T. EGERTON said his observation was, that the magistrates would he obliged to pay large salaries in order to obtain efficient officers. Sir J. GRAHAM said he could conceive no trust more sacred than that vested in magistrates by this Bill, and he felt persuaded that no prodigal salaries would be awarded. It was objected that magistrates' clerks were unknown to the law. They were not un known to those who had to pay the fees.—(Hear.) Many Hon. Members had said that clerks had no power to prosecute ; he had thought it better that, on the whole, the matter should be left open to discus sion. With respect to clerks of the peace now exist ing as such, he proposed to give them compensation for any loss which they might sustain, calculated on their receipt for the last twenty years. lie had no doubt but under this Bill the services of eminent persons would be obtained at comparatively moderate salaries. He proposed to leave in the hands of the magistrates power in certain cases to remit the fees. One great object of the Bill was to take precautions against the appointment of inferior persons. He had known many cases in which per sons who were not qualified had held the office; and he wi,hed to prevent a recurrence of that evil. With respect to uniformity of fees, he thought the interests of those who sought justice, whether in the superior or the inferior courts, required that for the same' judicial act in this country persons should pay the same—and that a moderate price— (Hear, hear)—and they could only secure uni formity in the mode proposed by this Bill. On the present occasion he wished the House to con sent to the second reading, and the details of the measure might he considered in Committee. The Bill provided that proper legal assistance should be given to prisoners, and that this assistance should be professional ; that the salaries should be fixed by the magistrates throughout England, and that this salary should be sufficient to command this assistance. The Secretary of State would be bound to fix an equal rate of fees throughout England, and he believed the cognizance shall be for the appearance of the said puta five father at such General Quarter Sessions of the Peace as is required by the said Act, and his trial of the appeal thereat, and the payment of such costs as he shall be then and there ordered to pay; and if at any time before the hearing of the appeal the pultive father who shall have entered into any such recognizance, shall give notice in writing of his abandonment of the appeal to the mother of the child, in whose favour the order shall have been made, and to the justice or justices before whom the said recognizance shall have been taken, and shall pay or tender to the said mt ther all sums then due under the said order, and such costs and expenses as she shall have incurred by reas9n of such notice of appeal, the said recognizance so entered into by the said putative father hall not be estreat d,nor in any manner put in force, or otherwise proceeded with." Mr. BOUVERIE thought there was much in justice in these causes, and he should oppose them. Sir JAMES GRAHAM further explained the nature of these clauses. After a conversation, in which Mr. Bouverie, Sir J. Graham, General Johnstone, and the Solicitor. General took part, which bore upon the point of the mother of a bastard child receiving relief from the workhouse during her confinement, and an allowance from the putative father at the same time, the clauses were adde4 to the Bill. The house resumed, and the Bill was ordered to be reported to-morrow. The House then adjourned. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION'S. (From the Poles and Proceedings of the HOWL of Commons.) • TUESDAY, MARCH 1!. POOR-LAW. Motion made, and Question proposed, " That the Petition of the Ratepayers and Inhabitan. s of 11,chitale, presented on the 25th day of February last, be referred to a Select Committee of this House, to inquire into the Administration of the relief to the Poor in that dis trict." The House divided : MINORITY-AYES, 16. Ainenvorth, Peter Hindley, Charles Sibthorp, Colonel Blake, M. J. - Johnson, General Williams, William Borthw•ick, Peter Manners, Lord J. Duncombe, T. 'Morris, David TELLERS. Entwisle, Wiliiam O'Conor, Don Ferrand, W. F. Escott, Bickham Paget, Lord A. Crawford, W. S. Hamner, Sir J. Pechell, Captain MAJORITY-NOES, 59. Arland, Sir T. Gladstone, Captain Nichol', John . . . , . Gordon,Alford, Viscount G Captain Packe, C. W. Arundel, Earl of Goulburn, Henry - Patten, J. W. Baird, W lliam Graham, Sir J. Plutnptre, J. P. Baring, W. B. Greenall, Peter Praed, W. T. Bohlen], H. G. Hale, It. It. Pringle, Alexander Bowles, Admiral Hamilton, W. J. Shaw, Frederick 'Bowring, Dr. Hope, G. W. Smith, T. B. C. Brotherton, J. Hussey, Thomas Somerset, Lord G. Bruce, Lord E. Hutt, William Stuart, Henry Buller, Sir J. Y. Jermyn, Earl Sutton, Henry Cardwell, Edward Legh, G. C. Thesigcr, Sir F. Clayton, R. R. Lincoln, Earl Trotter, John Clerk, Sir G. Mackenzie, W. F. Vivian, J. Ennis Compton, 11. C. Marshall], Viscount Warburton, Henry Corry, Ilenry Martin, John Wawn, John 'l' Denison, E. B. Maule, Fox Wood, Colonel T.j Dickinson, F. 11. Maxwell, J. P. TELLERS. Fitzroy, Henry Meynell, Captain Forbes, William Iceville, Ralph Young, John Gaskell, J. M. Newry, Viscount Lennox. Lord A. LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF CHANCERY, Ma* 12. The Lord Chancellor sat in Lincoln's Inn-bald to-day. IN THR CASE. OF THE LUDLOW CHARITIES. The arguments in this part heard case were resumed and occupied the Court the whole morning. VICE-CHANCELLORS' COURT,March 12. (Before the VICE-CHANCELLOR of ENGLAND.) CLOMAM V. TIIE RANK OF ENGLAND. The arguments in this part-heard case were resumed to-day. Mr. BETIIELL replied, and His HONOUR - gave judgment, ordering the Bank of Eng land to restore the stock (6,000/.) which had been fraudu lently removed by the trustee Piccard. His Honour also or dered the Bank to pay the whole of the costs of the suit. (Before the Vice-Chancellor KNIGHT BRUCE.) ELLICE V. GOODSON. The arguments in this part-heard case were concluded to day, with the exception of the reply; and, in consequence of the absence of Sir Thomas Wilde, his Honour ordered the case to stand oiler till the Saturday before the first day of Easter Term, upon the understanding that on that day either Sir Thomas Wilde, Mr. Bethell, or Mr. Heathfield, would reply. (Before Vice-Chancellor WIGRA3I.) The further arguments in the part-heard case of Mayhew v. Edmonds occupied his Honour the whole morning. SECONDARIES' COURT, March 12. (Before Mr. Secondary POTTER.) CHURCHILL V. KING. This was an action brought by Mr. Churchill, house- agent, Castle-street, Holborn, against Mr. King, clerk to Mr. Sylvester, attorney, Dover-road, Borough, to recover 10/. 10s., on a bill of exchange, drawn by a Mr. Hvam, and alleged to have been accepted by the defendant. The bill, on pre sentation for payment, being dishonoured, the holder insti r . tuted proceedings to,recover the amount. Mr. Tezirml, who appeared for the plaintiff, called Mr. Kinning, a respectable accountant, to prove the 'handwriting, which the latter swore distinctly to. Mr. King, who conducted his own case, advanced in defence . the plea that he had never accepted the bill in question, and called a number of witnesses to prove that the signature to the acceptance was not in his hand-writing. After a short consultation the jury found a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount of the bill, with interest, 101. 13s. 6d. in all. The defendant then asked if the officers of the Court would be allowed to impound the bill in order to ensure its produc tion at the Central Criminal Court in a new trial? The SECONDARY intimated that he had so power to do so. The defendant next wished to move for a new trial, on the ground of the verdict being against evidence. This the SECONDARY overruled, and said he was perfectly satisfied with the verdict of the jury. Mr. King then withdrew, expressing himself very much displeased with the result. MIDDLESEX SESSIONS. (Before Mr. Serjeant ADAMS, and a Bench of Magistrates.) These sessions commenced on Tuesday at Hick's. hall, Clerkenwell-green. The calendar contains a list of seventy six prisoners, of whom sixty-five are charged with felony, but there were many other prisoners brought in during the day. Edward Smith, a respectably-dressed young man, repre sented as a medical student, was indicted charged with having stolen twenty books. of the value of 12/, Bs., the property severally of John Vincent Thompson, John Taylor, and Sir Claude Scott, trustees of St. George's Hospital. Mr. Adolphus appeared for the prosecution. The prisoner pleaded "Guilty." The prisoner was then arraigned upon another indictment charging him with having stolen ten books, the property of University College, an the 3d of February last. To this indictment the prisoner also pleaded " Guilty," The prisoner was next arraigned upon an indictment charging him with having stolen ten other books, the pro perty of University College, on the sth of February last, and pleaded " Guilty." Mr. PAYNE, who was retained as counsel for this prosecu tion, said it would appear that the young gentleman at the bar had been carrying on a system of stealing books from the different hospitals in the metropolis for some time ; for not only had he been indicted by the two hospitals already named, but there was another hospital, the Middlesex, which had preferred a bill against him. It appeared that the prisoner had come from Scotland, where he had been adopting a similar line of conduct, and that since his arrival in London he had, as a medical student, paid these felonious visits to the various hospitals, commencing with St. George's. In the case of the University College, the books he had taken were of considerable value, one of which, worth 21., he had sold for 103., and it was upon his second visit to the same shop, to dispose of the books he had stolen from the college on the sth of February, that he had been stopped and given into custody. Mr. ADOLPHUS said that the books which had been taken from St. George's Hospital had been the subject of four or five different visits. The Learned JUDGE said it was extremely painful to see so apparently respectable a person placed in such a situation. The case was a very bad one. The sentence, therefore, was, that the prisoner should be imprisoned in the Westminster Bridewell for three months and kept to hard labour, for each offence respectively, each term of three months to commence at the expiration of the preceding three months. The prisoner was removed from the dock in a fainting fit. Edward Duckett, a labouring man, pleaded guilty to an indictment charging him with having stolen a case of surgi cal instruments, value 31., the property of the President and others of St. George's Hospital. The Learned JUDGE told the prisoner that he was a most ungrateful fellow, for, having been received at the hospital as an in-patient, he had availed himself of the opportunity of robbing those who were exerting all their medical and sur gical skill with a view of restoring him to health. The sen tence upon him was, that ke be imprisoned in the Westmin ster Brielewell for six months. John W. Plater was indicted for having fraudulently ob tained seven books, of the value of 71. 75., the property seve rally of Mr. James Parker, Mr. William Rogers, and Mr. W H. Tinney, barristers-at-law. The Learned Juncx sentenced the defendant to four months' imprisonment in the Westminster Bridewell, with an intimation that if he were to make his appearance at that bar again under similar circumstances, he would most un doubtedly be transported. (Before the ASSISTANT JUDGE and a full Bench of Ma gistrates ) A powerful and athletic-looking man, named TVilliam Gatehouse, was indicted for a most savage and brutal assault upon a police-constable, named Thomas Cooke, by which his life was seriously endangered. It appeared that a person named White, was given into the constable's custody upon a Charge of indecent assault, when the prisoner, who is an acquaintance of his, attempted to rescue him, and in so doing knocked him down and kicked him about the lower part of his person, about his head, and on the body so dreadfully, that he became totally insensible. Medical evidence was adduced to show that owing to the injuries he received he was for some time unable to attend to his duty, indeed during part of this time his life was despaired of. The jury returned a verdict of Guilty, and evidence was brought forward to show that prisoner had been twice before convicted of violent assaults upon the police. Mr. Do.i.:sm, who appeared as his counsel, raised a point that the constable acted illegally in the first instance, and the Learned Judgo said he should respite judgment until the first day of next session, in order that lie might consider the ob jection. _ . - The grand jury came into Court and announced that they had got through all the indictments which had been preferred at the present. ession, when the Learned Assistant Judge discharged them afterlhanking them for their promptitude and attention. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL. THE HEIR-AT-Law - Sociorv.—On Tuesday Henry Schole field applied to Sir Peter Laurie for his advice under the foi -1 lowing circumstances : Ile stated that he was a power-loom weaver, and that he came from Lancashire on behalf of a number of p 6; sons there who had lost their money front seeking advice at the Heir at-Law Society. About two-and-twenty years ago a slim of 4,000 E was left by a gentleman for the next of kin. Abo Zit sixteen months back some parties of the name of Smith for warded documents through him to the Society for the pur pose of obtaining the legacy; at the same time a fee of 21. 4s. 6d. was sent. After some time a letter was received from Mr. Ross, acknowledging the receipt of the fee. In December last the Society sent a letter, stating that the counsel's opinion was rather favourable towards them, and that they would require 101. more f or th e pu r p ose of Ming a bill in Chancery. The only obstacle to them getting the money would be, whether their claim came within the statute of limitations. The money was sent, and they had never heard anything more of the affair since. In conse quence of the reports in the iewspapers relative to this Society, these parties in Lancashire sent him up for the pur pose of getting their money back or the deeds. He had called at the office several times, but could not see any one. Sir PETER LAURIE—AII I can say is, that you will never get one shilling back. Applicant—Yes, I expect the 101., for here is an acknow ledgment for it. _ Sir. P. LAURIE—Yes, this is Mr. Ross's handwriting, for I know it well. How came you to correspond with the so ciety? Is there any agent issuing prospectuses in Lanca shire? Applicant—No, there is not; but a person down there happened to have one, when some individuals, thinking they had claims to property, and imagining the society . was an upright and fair one, immediately solicited their advice. Sir P. LAuniF.--All I can say is, I wish I did not know so much of Mr. Ross as I do. The only thing I see you can do is that, if those you represent . can afford it, to indict the par ties for a conspiracy. Mr. Ross is the same party who pro posed the erection of a bridge at Holborn-hill some time back. If those parties who have been duped Were to meet, as in the case of the West Middlesex Assurance Company, and pro ceed against the parties, I have no doubt that you would all get your documents back. Mr. Scboleficad said that he did not think he should be able to stay in town, in consequence of his finances being so low. He thought it very hard that persons in his station of life should be thus robbed. Sir P. LAURIE said that he was very sorry for him, but he did no see how he could help himself. The applicant then left the Court.. LAMBETH. ALLEGED Cant. CON. AND BATTERY.—OR Tuesday, John Hodges. a well-dressed young man, who described himself as a pencil-maker, residing at 14, Francis-street, Waterloo-road, appeared before Mr. Henry, on a warrant, charging him with having violently assaulted Mr. Augustus Frederick &Rand, a chemist and druggist, Princes-street, Westminster-road. Mr. Effland, who is of a slight figure, and youthful appear pearance, deposed that, on the night of that day week, he was in his surgery, about to sit down to a "frugal supper," when the defendant entered bis shop, jumped over the coun ter, and rushed into the surgery. He then accused him (witness) of having his wife harboured there, and made use of the most insulting epithets towards him. Mr. HENRY—Was the defendant sober at the time or not? Mr. Effland—Sober, Sir, why he's a teetotaller, and a Re chabite, and, of course, was perfectly sober. Mr. ENRY—WeII, proceed to state what followed. Wit ness—Well, Sir, he caught hold of .me and very nearly strangled me, and when he found that I was ready to drop from exhaustion on account of the strangulation, he gave me a very violent blow on my mouth, which cause d me to bleed very profusely. Mr. HENRY—The defendant, you say, accused you of har bouring his wife and I suppose of an improper intimacy. Have you anything to say about that? Mr. Effland—He does charge me with that, your worship; but I defy . him to prove it ; and, in fact, it's a complete conspiracy against me. Mr. HENRY—Did the defendant accuse you with having his wife in your house on the night he came there? Witness —He did, your worship, and looked about as if expecting to find her, but I told him I should allow him to go all over the house to satisfy him she was not there. Mr. Hitsftv—Had the defendant on any previous occasion charged you with an improper intimacy with his wife? Wit ness—He has done so, your worship, and they have been parted on that account, but they have since made it up, and lived, as I believed, happily together,.and so far from my car rying on an intimacy or correspondence with his wife, I ain quite ignorant of their present address, and I defy him to prove an intimacy at any time. Mr. HENRY (to the defendant)—You have heard the charge against you—what have you to say to it? Defendant—l do not deny the assault , but I shall tell your worship how it was. The fact is, that this person (complainant) had been our medical attendant, and when attending my wife while labouring under an inflammation in the bowels, he availed himself of the opportunity of seducing her, and weaning her affections from me. From some circumstances which I had observed, as well as from my wife's conduct towards me, I suspected something wrong between the parties, and my suspicions were confirmed one Sunday evening im mediately after I left home, for the purpose of going to &Lira, and my wife, no doubt, thought I went there ; but instead of going to church I went to Vie house of Mr. Effland, and there found my wife in the sur gery, with her cloak and bonnet off, but her excuse was that she went there for medical advice. This, however, was the cause of a separation between us, and my wife, as I thought, went to live with her mother. After a short time I consented to take her back, and• she came home, but from subsequent inquiries which I instituted, I found that, instead of living at her mother's while away from me, she was actually living under the protection of Mr. Effland, under the assumed name of Clare. He, however, made up his mind, as he had taken his wife back, not to move in the matter, provided there was not a continuation of the intimacy ; but he soon discovered that the complainant had found out the residence of him self and his wife, and had actually sent her a letter by his apprentice on the evening of Sunday week, while he was at church. Mr. Effland denied this, and said his brother, who was his apprentice, was in attendance, and would satisfy the magis trate the defendant was wrong. . . . The brother was then calla and, upon being sworn, po sitively denied having delivered a letter at the house of the defendant on the evening in question, or at any other time ; and Mr. Henry ultimately bound over both parties to be of good behaviour towards each other for the space of three months. fees so fixed would, wi th a moderate scale of salary, command adequate assistance. He believed that the measure, if permitted by the House to become law, would have a salutary effect on the administra tion of justice throughout the country. — (Hear, hear.) He thought it would not be attended with any great expense ; and though the county-rate might be a little increased—which, how ever, he did not anticipate—yet the inhabitants of the districts who now paid the fees would be re lieved. Whatever might be the effect on the Govern meat, when an individual were placed in the painful and agonising position of being put on his tr'al, though innocent, and if he should be acquitted, he was bound to say that to exact fees from him did appear to him a monstrous proceeding. Wherever the charge might fall, it ought not to fall on the in nocent party who had just obtained an acquittal. What ever might be the differences of opinion in the House on other points, with respect to salaries or fees he ex pected entire concurrence on this. subject. There might be points which he had omitted, but, he had enuleavtured to notice all the most prominent ones that had been brought forward. Some of the objections made by Honourable Members applied rather to details which were open to consideration in Committee; but the great point now to be considered was the principle oF the measure, one which he be. lieved was incontestible, that justice would be better administered by servants receiving a salary, than by servants receiving fees. After a few words from General JOHNSTONE and Mr. TURNER, Captain PECHETT. saw nothing in the Bill v. ith which he could cordially agree. But he thought the Right lion. Baronet might have added a provision to restrain magistrates' clerks from acting as political agents ; in a small town it was very objectionable that they should be entrusted with this power. He thought, too, that petty sessions should always be held in a public building. At present, in many places, the sessions were held in a public-house, where prisoners and witnesses were detained for many hours to the profit of the landlord, who charged nothing for the room in which the magis trates met ; it was plain, therefore, that he derived some advantage from it. Mr. ESCOTT thought most of the remarks that had been made applied rather to the details than the principle of the Bill. At the same-time he had heard enough to be perfectly convinced that his Hon. Friends themselves who had made the objections were not at all aware of the evils this measure would re- move. Those evils were not equally diffused over the country; there were counties in which the vigilance of the magistrates and the better feelings of the officers of the courts of justice, had, of themselves, put an end to the most illegal and unjust part of the system, and he believed Oxfordshire was one of those places. This Bill established a system of payment of clerks of the peace by salaries instead of fees. That might be an excellent principle, but the Bill was not the one he had asked the Right Hon. Baronet for, last year. The measure for which he asked him was a short declaratory Act, which should put an end to the existing system of unjust and illegal fees. One clause would have done this; by the concurrence of all who bad spoken on both sides of the House, there could have been no objection to such a Bill. But he was far from sayingthe Right Hon. Baronet was not right , in going farther than this ; it was enough for him to know that the Bill, as it was introduced, would abolish these unjust and illegal fees. He was sure many Hon. Gentleman were not precisely aware of what the system really was. 'Three officers were ' affected by this Bill, clerks of the peace, clerks of assize, and clerks of the magistrates. Each of these ' officers in different counties, to different amounts took these unjust fees on different pretences. The clerk of assize took them under the sanction of the most extraordinary Act of Parliament which ever was passed, or had ever disgraced the statute-book of , the country, and which he did not hesitate to declare ' was a fraud on Parliament and the country. 'This was the 55th of Geo. 111., chap. 50. By this sec tion acquittal fees were abolished in the cas e o f pri soners,but, by a subsequent section,a compensation was given from the county-rates for `` all such fees," an d under these fees that compensation was unjustly re ceived. But strange to say, the clerk of the peace did not take fees,' or was not entitled to them, under this Act. The fees were granted under different Acts. The duty of the justices was to make out a table of the fees that ought to be paid, which was to he sub m itt e d to the judges for their sanction, and if they should approve of it, then they were paid. But under the present system was it not too bad that fees should he taken from defendants while there was no authority whatever in the Act for doing so ?—(Hear.) Yet it was a well-known fact that there were certain sums put down in the list as fees to be paid by defendants, and that had gone on for years without being exposed. He did not seek to attach blame to any body for permitting this practice to continue, because what was everybody's business was nobody's, except - that he did think the parties ought' ohave looked after these matters before. Besides this,the clerks of the j ustices also took fees from defendants, and that,too, there was no Act of Parliament to authorise. But it was done in this way : A bill of costs was made out, in which was included certain sums alleged to be the t fees to be paid by defendants, and they had to pay them. Surely this should not be allowed to con tinue, for if there was no authority f r it by Act of Parliament, what authority was there ? Was there any man who, standing in the capacity of a defen dant, should be asked to pay fees ? Hehad had an op portunity of pleading " Not guilty," and taking his trial ? (Hear, hear.) H e k new h e was now speak ing in the hearing of many Hon. Members learned in the law, and they well knew that there was no law to sanction such a course as that of taking fees from a defendant by a Queen's officer, ever since the time of the laws of Edward the First. He had heard of instances where the fees tak en f rom d e f en d an t s as 31. and 41., bef o re a man in theamountedp to such a of thing a defendant was a ff or d e d 'an opportunity of pleading " Not guilty," even upon a charge of a trifling assault.—(Hear.) Was it not too bad that such a practice should b e permitted, and yet it was no unco mmon o c c u rre n c e that such a thing was_ .. done to one par t y b y ano th er from mere spite ; and the defendant often happened to be a poor man, who had to b eg a l oan of Si. b e f ore h e could be in a position to defend himself from such a truckling charge.(Hear, hear.) He would not trouble the House further on this subject, but he trusted that the Bill now before the House would have the effect of remedying and removing these il legal abuses. Mr. MILES concurred in the principle of the Bill, but he differed from the provisions of many of the clauses, and hoped the abuses complained of would not be permitted any longer to exist. Mr. HAWES approved of the Bill, and hoped it would be passed, as nothing could be a greater abuse than to have the fees exacted in the manner stated by the Hon. Member opposite. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL was afraid the answer which he had to give to his Hon. Friend the Member for Somersetshire would not be ver y satis factory to his Hon. Friend. If the fees were settled by Act of Parliament, most unquestionably it would be perfectly legal to take those fees. His H on . Friend had, however, imposed a much more difficult task upon him, as his Hon. Friend had called upon him to state the law and the facts of the case. Now, if his Hon. Friend had stated what were the facts, he (the Solicitor-General) would, to the best of, his ability, have stated what the law was. There was a wide difference of opinion between his Hon. Friend the Member for Winchester, and his lion. Friend the Member for Someraetshire, as to the facts of this case. This matter was now pending in the Courts. He would have in another place to argue this question. The facts would be there ascertained, and judgment would be given. He must, therefore, decline to give an opinion on the law of this case, and leave the facts doubtful for the present.—(Laughter.) Mr. WA KLEY sincerely hoped the fee system would be pursued to the highest Courts. He did not think the Hon. Solicitor-General had answered the Winchester, whether question of the Hon. Member for whether parties who had taken illegal fees, and which illegal fees were afterwards abolished, were entitled to compensation in respect of those fees. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that it did not require a lawyer to answer that question. There could be no doubt that such persons were not entitled to compensation. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on the 14th of April. BASTARDY BILL. The Howe then 4N ent into Committee on this Bill. Sir J. GRAHAM said the object of the Bill was merely to correct matters of form. Mr. COLLETT thought the words " putative father," were very indistinct, and he therefore moved that they be left out.—(Laughter.) After a few words from the SOLICITOR GENERAL, the clause was passed without a division. The remaining clauses of the Bill were then gone through as also the schedule without any opposition. Sir J. GRAHAM th en move d the following ad ditional clauses : " And be it Enacted, that when an order made under the provision of the said Act shall, prior to the passing of this Act, have been quashed for any defect therein, and not upon the merits, it shall be lawful for the mo ther of the bastard child, in whose favour such order shall have been made, to take Proceedings for the ob taining of another order, according to the provisions of the said Act, at - any time within the space of three calendar months after the passing of this Act, although the period limited for her application to the justice under the said Act shall have expired. " And wher eas p ower i s g i v en by the said Act to the putative father to appeal against an order made upon him by the justices in Petty Session assembled, giving notice of appeal as therein specified, and also sufficient security, by recognizance or otherwise, for the payment of costs, to the satisfaction of some one justice of the peace, Be it enacted, That the condition of any such re. THAMES POLICE. DEFRAUDING A GAS COMPANY.—Tnesday ' Henry Nicks, the landlord of the Cricketers public-house in London-street, Ratcliffe, was charged on a summons with committing a fraud on the British Gaslight Company, who sued for a penalty of 10E It appeared that the defendant was a gas consumer, and that his bill for the first quarter, commencing in September, 1844, was a very large one, but in the succeeding quarter the register, as denoted by the meter, exhibited a very great diminution, and a suspicion arose in the mind of Mr. Grum wood, the Company's inspector, that a fraud was being prac tised. On the Ist of. March, in company with another man, named Coote, he examined the meter in the defendant's cellar, and found the inlet pipe disconnected from the ser vice pipe, and the outlet pipe belonging to the meter dis connected from the fittings or pipe leading to the burners in the bar, parlour, and tap-room, consequently the meter was out of action, and no gas passed through it. Another pipe was connected with the service pipe which led to the burners, and no register was kept. Any quantity of gas could be con sumed without the Company knowing anything about it. It was also proved that oa a former occasion Coote wished to examine the meter, and was told their was a fierce dog in the cellar, which turned out to be false. Mr. BRODERIP sentenced the defendant to pay a fine of 81. and the costs of the prosecution. The penalty was paid. MURDEROUS AsSAULT.—Tuesday two young men, named Thomas Wilmott, a currier, and John White, a cigar manu facturer, were brought before Mr. Broderip on remand, charged with wounding William bridges, a painter and glazier, with intent to do him bodily harm. The prisoners have been in custody since the 10th of February, and the prosecutor, who became an inmate of the hospital on that day, could not attend till yesterday. It ap peared from his evidence that early on the morning of the 10th of February he was in the Globe and Friends public house, in Morgan-street, St. George-in-the-East, when a quarrel took place between him and the prisoners. Wilmott struck him under the ear, and he returned the blow. A row ensued, and the prisoners, who struck the potboy with some hard substance, which one of them had tied up in a handker chief, were turned out of the house. A few minutes after wards Bridges left the house, and found the prisoners waiting for him. White struck him with some instrument, which appeared to be about ten or twelve inches long, on the fore head, and inflicted a dangerous wound. He fell to the ground, and when he rose he laid hold of his assailant, on which the other prisoner, Wilmott, struck him with some thing he had in his hand, supposed to be a stone. He was removed to the London Hospital, and Mr. Ward, the house surgeon, stated that when he was brought there he was bleeding profusely from an irregular wound on the scalp, a little above the left brow. The man was for some time in danger.—The prisoners were committed for trial. IRELAND. DUBLIN, MARC!! 10.—The weekly meeting of the Loyal National Repeal Association held to-day was numerously attended. Mr. O'Connell entered the Hall at half-past twelve o'clock, and was greeted with enthusiasm. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was accompanied by Mr. W. S. O'Brien, M.P., John O'Connell, Esq., M.P., James Kelly, Esq., M.P., and R. Albert Fitzgerald, Esq., M.P. On the motion of Mr. O'CoNNELL, seconded by W. S. O'BRIEN, the chair was taken by Alderman Kerhan, the senior alderman of the city of Dublin. The CHAIRMAN addressed the meeting briefly. Mr. LIVINGSTON, a native of Nutport, county Mayo, but now residing at Liverpool, handed in 51. 55., the renewed subscription of Mr. John Langan, of that town ; 51. ss. from the members of his family; and 37/. 145., the weekly sub scription of the Liverpool repealers.— (Cheers.) Mr. O'CoNNELL, moved the hearty thanks of the Associa tion to Mr. Langan, who, he said, was as good a patriot as ever stood in shoe- leather, had prospered in life, and was ready to share that prosperity with his country by contri buting largely, indeed he might say munificently, for the restoration of his native Parliament. _ Mr. R. D. BROWNE seconded the motion, observing that no man deserved more from his country than Mr. Langan, who could show what an Irishman could do when opposed to the Englishman. Mr. O'CoNNELL moved that four Glasgow Repealers be struck off the roll for misconduct.—Motion carried. Mr. M‘NEVIN then came forward to address the meeting. He commenced by referring to the proposition made by Mr. Roebuck to extend the income-tax to Ireland, and observed that he had indicated the grossest ignorance by his proposi tion. He next adverted to the Land Commission, and re marked that it had been a total failure, and that its labours were directed to prove what was as plain as the immortal physiognomy of Lord Brougham himself, that Ireland was inhabited by a people that were badly fed, badly clothed, and badly housed. He next called upon the men of Ulster to preserve, as they would their lives and honour, the tenant-right of that province, and then said, in reference to the visit of the Queen to Ireland, that the man who compro mised the right of domestic legislation in consequence of the royal visit, was a traitor to his country. If this were offered as a bribe to the Irish people, not by the Queen. but her Ministers, it would be rejected.—(Hear.) Her whole nature would recoil from the base surrender of national right—by men who would be satisfied with the substitute of scram blings for the crumbs which might fall flora the royal table at the Castle, or the lordly board of those who would be for a while the resident nobility of Ireland. He begged of his countrymen, however, to excel their proverbial courtesy and gallantry, and uphold the hospitality of the Irish soil in the reception which they would give the Queen. He was only anxious that when her Majesty returned to England, she would go back instinct with a knowledge of all the feelings of the Irish. When her Majesty came to Ireland she would be received as she deserved to be, with enthusiasm by the Irish people.—(Loud cheers.) Mr. O'CoNNELL here said, that the period had arrived when they should send petitions to Parliainent for repeal. Although they did not expect that the Legislature would soon grant the measure, petitions would serve as a sort of caution to whatever wise statesmen . succeeded the present absurd Admiuistration, and induce them to look to the state of Ireland, and agree to the peaceable agreement which they (the repealers) required. Mr. FITZGERALD, M.P., for Tippeary, having read a com munication from the country, observed, that in the recent debate in the House of Lords, the Duke of Wellington was reported to have uttered a very egregious falsehood, in de claring, that at no monster meeting held to advance the re peal cause was a single petition adopted. He (Mr. Fitzge rald) could give a most decided contradiction to that asser tion, for he had read and proposed a petition at the Cork monster meeting. Mr. O'Costxtra. said that the Duke of Wellington was in 'le of asserting what was positively untrue, and the re capao. have been mistaken on the occ asion allud e d to. porter s of such importance , that h e would move, be- The matter ss. --se, that a Committee be app ointed to in form the meeting is... 'lie exact number of petitions which quire Awl report ' , aster Meetings held in Ireland. had been adopted at the rck •••••1,- Mr. W. S. O'BRIEN, then brought forwar d tiler,r; cond report of the Sub-Committee on the removal front ort land of poor persons born in Ireland. There was at Col a Bill before the House of Commons relating to PoTity settlement in England, and it became the dutyAbp Parliamentary Committee to say how the Iris 01;0 would be affected by it.—(Hear, hear.) The li nn ,or Gentleman then read some extracts from the repo rt L"d 10 1 10 0 rating instances of persons who had resided in Erig"`',,,a years being transported to Ireland because they oPP parochial relief, and concluded by saying that, Env Irish Parliament, their people would not have to go t at t o land to seek employment.—(Cheers.) He moved th report be adopted by the Association. es Mkt Mr. O'CONNELL, seconded the motion. It ll' der ful to think of the cruelty which was practised It:, thef t 4 colour of the Poor-law Act. Of what countrY le k e : 7 , l os ° facts related? Was it of the Hottentot, or the (Iles'harv -- it the"' . Australia or New Zealand? No, it was of f* hear.) Some of the newspapers accused him of hatisfsa t h e land. He had no hatred towards England, but he e oe most thorough hatred of the crimes perpetrated in t', e , n est of that country.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Gentlem'lorel adverfed to the inquiry between the Poor-law Comer' and the guardians of the South Dublin union in re Un ioa to the appointment of a physician to the tend" Gentlemen connectod with the press had o'ilbertei at the Commissioners' inquiry, but 31 r . the Assistant-Commissioner, had all but kicked 000010 the room. He (Mr. O'Connell) had always been 0141 4 i; the introduction of the poor-law into this country, e,,,,10 the risk of his popularity, and he would like to see toPtlrsbl° now who would vote for its continuance. The gu ll r oe and Learned Gentleman concluded by saying that the, rh et*/ e law should be either remodelled or repealed.-6-i -e h C 4 ' Mr. O'CONNELL, in a lengthy speech, moved that t,„!„,, e ir mittee appointed to draw up a report on the Land sion report have leave to sit again.—Motion 56 ' 1 The rent for the week was announced to be 477 a .00 STOCK EXCHANGE, DUBLIN, MARCH 10.---COle QUO Three per Cent. Consols, 99 1 / % ; Ditto Three-and-340" ter per Cent. Reduced, 102% 103. City of Dublin Steam 52%; Dublin and Glasgow Steam Company, 44 eIY Company of Ireland, 14 ; Dublin and Drogheda Bailivar..oo Great Southern and Western, 11 1 ,1 2 ; Ditto Ex ;el 7 l Cork and Limerick, 7 ; Irish Great Western. way, 2 3 / 1 ; Wexfbrd and Carlow Junction, 2%; Du I/; Enniskillen, 2% %; Waterford and Limerick, fast and Ballymena, 3% 4; Cork and Bandon, 9 . 4• Dublind r0f,04, SPORTING IN BETTING AT MANC CHESTE E ;RHTECusisTL.ELR Efi N v e : 11 to 1 agst Cataract 22 to 1 agst StrathsPef 12 to 1 agst Semiseria 27 to 1 agst Zanotti , < OO 13 to 1 agst The Era—taken 30 to 1 agst Pride or 16 to 1 agst Obscurity 40 to 1 agst Trueb°lo4 20 to 1 agst Winesour 7 to 1 agst The Iris ;BY. 1300 to l agstioa agst Boe e ntorc uc t ,.....f 1000 n W A SP FIGHT BET EEN YOUNG S AND JORDAN FOR £lOO. pbtst eti On Tuesday the adjourned fight between th ese ee bruisers came off. It may be -remembered the e P.d, contended a short time since, which terminated The %eight battle ; the match was subsequently rene wed• c ale ° to of the men was limited to 9st. 71b., and they wer' t. " 6- o • ci Owen Swift's, on Monday. In betting sto 4 were f ope e• on Jordan ; his opponent having last the sig ht ° A• his chance of success was considered less certain . conceli train was engaged on the Brighton railway for the flo ti '' o l ance of the combatants and their friends, all a ,A; common was the locality selected for the corw-prello all parties having duly arrived, the neees- 4 , 1 itr„, t e o naries were arranged and a ring was formed . ThePit l i time the spectators might be computed at 2, 00 u nde r 0 , stripped, and were brought into the ring—Ba in da rt 0 0 0 protection of Jem Turner and Driscoll, and Jor&, litti conded by `themselves nd Fuller. The pugilists she°lo. and putting into attitude, commenced,w,,edgrpf men appeared determined on mischief, and disP''. l 6, o o:,iti c?nrage and science, and one hour was occupied A ." bsci h eri visible change on either side. When 50 rounds be e p, fought, the betting was in favour of Sambo. It 111- e il observed that Jordan, having exceeded the stipulaog,oo he was compelled to fight without shoes, his opPone iodi9g4o, with spiked shoes, and who availed himself of tc,„ the feet of Jordan, and mutilating t h em e xceediogl'pe t el was offered by the friends of Jordan obe pe rmitte o o°o shoes, but was not accepted. They continued ro tbe oil b oll for two more hours ; at this time eighty-seve, ll _,,,be been fought, and it was now manifest that P g r;,, the more favourable position as to victory. 1 Q :41)0,._, 1 . the contest—both displaying great game ;the nuing to thrust the spikes of his shoes iorc:;i t hsrO c ed his antagonist at every opportunity, 11 °'..," - nt: 6 %0 the unanimous groans. of the spectators. Freqe-ocii;:000 were made to the umpires, but who decided it fair? th ree the rules of boxing. The fight was kept up for rcods•4l' and forty-seven minutes, during which time 1 0 ' . . en tn i th e contested, when Jordan, from the great punis h- U ri 01 0 1 from Sambo, was compelled to yield in his fav ti oer. sponge was thrown up, and Sambo came off the c ork science of both men was much admired, and tu e Jordan was considered almost unprecedented. 13 to 1 agst Idas 27 to 1 agst Miss Whip colt—ti jor THE TRIAL OF TAW ,,,,r AYLESDCRY, TbESDAY EVENING.—The Tawell (for the murder at Salt-hill), which is a bio.'o o pointed to commence at nine o'clock to-morrow 1,000 ing) appears to have excited more universals: 10,,, any event that has occurred for some years P c'ort'lo it' else is talked of in the town, and even at the f 00'01 desite the ersonal interest of the majority e tend p ance th p ere in the cases under adjudication, 011otoge sum and substance of the conversation —the hegloololf the end with every one in the densely-crowded 9 P" e do " the trial," " the trial." f 1 P re ' c o lfs; Yet great as the interest excited by this 50,..- u t gre- undoubtedly is, its manifestations have been 1 11 ,.. e 1l 1,0 11 aggerated. Not contented with the libertie s ''" c oes ro •ee' l :, lives, health, business, and occupations of th e e s even the solicitor of the prisoner, as well as l'i s tor act l y e s'''; lugs in the very limited field enjoyed by him t bst ot oo ti ports have been for some days freely circula te e m 10! 0 bed in Aylesbury had been engaged for three We ortif fo ' r that anything better than a " shake down" uP°,.; an Ojibbeway blanket for coverlet; could not tioe bad co; than a inea a night. t IP! 11 0Pe Pt : t " Thewish" of some proprietors of excellell 100,40 pied feather beds, with full and comfortable tstPliersy" " may have been parent to the tbOught," b!.. 1 " jer° r the slightest foundation, in fact, for the rep th ° " ss i ,t 4e il The town is just as full as an assize towe,yid A C „%t heavy calendar, usually is at such a time , 7, 0 1 , 4 able influx of visitors may be expected to-ls° • ft e 9 is all. oast tb's tic The grand jury, shortly after three returned a true bill against Tawell, an teebeir of those sent before them, they receiv'ea pat,",,ti.4o" with the customary thanks, from Mr. Bane 4 to ,V e 7 4 0 prisoner is said to be in excellent spirits, of receiving an acquittal. His wife aPPor, tbs ' r e sheriff to-day for five seats in the Court data/. if teP for herself, the remainder for friends. was OW Mr. Bevan, the prisoner's solicitor, who • e „ be ,to sented as being very seriously indisposed, 1 " . tf by the last train at eight o'clock. ter,k'Do Mr. F. Kelly, the eminent counsel, wh o ': u st g u i e ll, be some-(Heaven knows 1)-where else, bilsj r. e a 1 ef o the five o clock train. The High Sheriff S , '"l o bset c t ot° issued printed notices of the regulations to eend e rl 16 Iv Court during the trial. None but cetut s ,,,, i be ds engaged are to be admitted to the table. frier' e s entirely reserved for magistrates and thelLettersollop grand jury gallery is to be occupied by the .1 moned on this inquisition ; and the Pet l tbe so i l i er4 appropriated partially to the reporters o jeer with `iov i it., and local press. The remainder of it, toge.,as i°, lo or cross gallery, is to be given up to .) 4 `; g,h There is some talk about trying to get til, r % 010 es co o po case to-morrow. That will be scarcely wi" lll ,itee f o re ' 0 for possibility, seeing that there are thirty- 0 ° 1 ; 0 1V' . otie back of the indictment, and that a great O bese go called for the defence. However, that must to-morrow's consideration. f tl) ,4 s. MARKET NEWS. (YES I i ss i COEN EXCHAN G°. n 6 , t o' ° The supply of Wheat of home produce ° t ber I ' l '4o l° rably good. The best parcels sold freely , o , i i t tle ere is at previous figures. In Foreign Wheat verhisit l : l ,. yet holders held at full prices. Barley anr ate rAt average supply, and sluggish demand, at Grain as on Monday. i e ssf ij, ARRIVALS. oats. i V I Barley. 6,750 1 790 qrs. e, 680 _ 1 _... ----- 00 1'4 Malt, 5,360 qrs. g je T o. u w e a e s f, in fro a m very 4d s t l u o g is is 6 h d wrtrrzcoArzs.• , vet tb a rf 0 1 ; We had only a moderate supply of MO" 4 1 1 0 011- 4; J O' 3s 10d to 4s 10d; and Pork, 2s 8d to 45 2d P el carcass. 40'0 1 ;sta3tieu,ttliotnl;utairel.)6'i toersssio.- bj COAX. 111115I.SSW' ~...Intleil Prices per ton at the close of the market •, 3 fll I,f 0 0 i Hartley, 16s ; Chester Main, 16s; llasting43. 0 1 ° 90 Madomsly,lss 6d ; Nelson's West 'Hartley, 1,"140100.°19,4•1 14s 6d ; Oakwellgate Main, 14s 6d ; Potts .0,01)11Koa Ravensworth West Hartley, 16s; South - 1. West 6,ilf Tanfield Moor 19s 6d ; Twizell Main, 1 , 1 ! Sir. ii tit4 4 ,' ° 16s 6d ; West t Wylam, 16s • Wvlam, 1 56 "` 17 6 v." 1' el" 17s 9d; W. E., Goslbrth, fBs; -W. E., Ilild% 0006 Killing north, I6s ; Wharncliffe, 175 6d; E d e 17 6 ; )10 BrAddYll's Hetton, 20s 3d ; East Ilett°l'W..E•tddmo'lo; 20s 6d ; Hetton, 20s 3d ; Lambton, 20s 3d ; iie btao,; / 199 0 ,,! lis9d ; North Hetton Lyons, 176 fid ; l'e . arsclacrnoor ................./. Russell's Hetton, 198 6d ; Stewart s, 2° 5 „.,; tb Pl f 4 llartlepool, 20s 3d ; Heselden, 17s 3d; •'`lk e es, ' ~A,v' Adelaide, 19s; Barrett 18s • Richardson's. „ 3(l_ d ie - Coxhoe,6s • Tee. 19 ' s 3(1. Woodefield. IjsbipS"' water Hartley, I 6s - : Sidney's Hartley, 16s ' -- for BERTHS. ON t ip ir On the 10th inst., at the parsonage, 10r5datibItsts'it0' the lady of the Rev. W. H. B. Stocker, of $ lei rid,o On the Ist inst., the wife of William Sa l &lal'pli A geon, of Henry-street, Avenue-road, lieg e° . g ► ° ' Airr On the Bth inst., at Dover, Mrs. Glendinto P . v 1 0. i near Sevenoaks, of a daughter. on , Apit On the 9th inst., at Clapham-cnra— s' i 3t/13 0 0 Turner, of a son. C. ooPeet On the 9th inst., at Mile-end , Mrs. ot;01;04 a daughter. Oil! On the 9th inst., at Dorchester-terrace, 1 41.. Francis Hargrave Curtis. of a son treat, On the 10th inst., at Northumberl a nd -5 it o Hennell, of a son. Ot ielk t ejal , MARRO:D. lir 1 of of On Tuesday, March 11, at St. Gilesia'`Esce to t& Rev. IIT . Watts, M A., James Adamson, , lot, P'" ~ • ter-A k " 0 10 4 ' ( . 1 Forfarshire, and of Lincoln's Inn, barns ~, o l i t of fourth daughter of Charles Gustavus , AI, 10 1,,,, _ a CO P ile, Barming-place, Kent. es .11..0 On the 11th inst., at St. Clement Parlie.s.pr, fv•cip744 Rev. Joshua Frederick Denham,' M• A " Oa" Al Saint Mary-le-Strand, Robert Aitchison,„oool4 .. Park, Hornsey, youngest son of the late ,l ii ` ti ote r ,, Psr Esq., of Edinburgh, to Elizabeth, tee af.focolo Truwhitt, Esq. solicitor, of Cook's-court, m p ot) Long Lodge, Esq., ft * il ti DIED- i0n,40101 40 On the sth inst., in Gloucester -place, 1 p_ ax " Manuel de la Torre v Antunano, aged 0- toc l ;iiillt" . .,0 On the 6th inst. ,111 r. 11. Barrett, late of the 1 o r On the Bth inst., in Well-street, liacl‘ 00 Esq., aged 84. - _ jte CoP On the 9th inst., Richard Spratt, 1,44 4 96th Regiment, aged 55. Wheat. 2,030 qrs. English • • • • . Irish ••.• • • • Foreign • • • • • • 1 4k al 111)0 & ha / 00 C Lonalu: Printed and Published , No. 112 Strand, Printer, at Th hY in e Su ? "is Strand, the Prechact of the Savoy', Middlesex Thursday, March 13, Leto. THE 1 2 , In - )/ G4 elt i nt ri e l Lords to tni 18 4 Comm] Aliti c i to n_e tO t Amu 9 u'un, e /t telele plitope°rluvallis „ - stabria n kA e " 1111 41 bin e Men 4,;;Tttreeq, l 7 t \t'e tr:r t a: Ye n an i t O . r wich r e h n i s c . II: l e 4, 7 1411 Lhgthbtetft: CRELM E r ?y• BRA 4q 4k L e n I gth, kgist 4 , t pi ttt