The Sun. — London, England, 1845-07-23 00:00:00

THE __SUN, LONDON, WIODNESDAY EvENING, JULY 23, 1845 conclude withoat saying that he was lost in surprise at the manner in which the question had been dealt with by the Government, particularly when he recollected the petitions *at had been presented to them, praying only for an inquiry. lie had intended to move for a Committee in the early part of the session upon the subject, but having been pre_ .vented iu that, he had now nothing to do but to pray her Ma iestY follpolnale in inquiry, with a view to having the party who as redl wy guilty brought to punishment, for he did not seek to shield even the Raja if he were guilty. He (Mr. Hume) did not mean to attribute motives to any party, but he did think the Government were in error, and should have pursued a different sours°. Now he would wish to know what the Go vernment intended to do in this ease ? Surely it was one which demanded being as sternly dank with as Captain Boldero, who he believes' to be as honest a man as any in that House. If, then, the Government did not mean to allow this to be cloaked up, he hoped the Government would direct an in quiry to be made into the conduct of Colonel Ovans and the Raja. The Hon. Member concluded by moving the adoption of the motion of which he had given notice. Dr. BOWRING seconded the motion, and, in doing so, said he could not but express his concurrence in many of the observations of his Hon. Friend, but he should not enter into any details, as the present state of the House did not afford afford him much encouragement for doing so ; yet, let him ask, should this unfortunate man make an appeal in vain to that House ? He hoped not. Mr. E. TENNENT said that the charges against the Reje of Sattara had been fully investigateal by a oomr tent tribunal, and the decision of that tril had been confirmed by the Governor of Bombe 'in."' by the Court of Directors, and approved by t' and cessive Governor-Generals. and by three succr dree sue ofControul. It must be recollected that in ti• 4 ive Boards . .e deposition of the Raja of Sattara no dynasty had been r . throne of Sattara had been established verthrown, as th e tish Government. The Raja of Sato. •Iginally by the Bri .ra to the British Crown, and having broke his allegiance against the British authority in ID? entered into a conspiracy la, he was deposed and con fined. The Hon. Member ft- " , copies of the evidence were c Montrose had said th a t no not so. supplied to the Raja. That was Mr. HUM—When Mr. E. TENNV i s the evidence ? ATCopies were not supplied in every instance, but the substance if the evidence was supplied, and the reason that NT , the . , the mate of the names of the witne s ses were with held persons whose names were so withheld were the ini ut,cts of the Raja, and, of course, would have been undee pis controul. WILLIAMS said, that notwithstanding the great 41 ',,lity with which he had advocated the conduct of the Govern ment, he had totally failed in defending them. He had totally failed in his facts. He hoped that Colonel Ovens was a high minded man, but as no inquiry had been made into the charge of conspiracy against the Raja of Sattara, he thought that the Honotrable Gentleman, even had he possessed more eloquence than he did, would fail to clear the Government of blame. The Raja presented a petition to the House, stating that he was the victim of fraud aed malevolence, and praying -the House to institute an inquiry upon the subject. He hoped, therefore, they would rekuest her Majesty to institute this in quiry, and thus he in a better position to come to a proper con clusion on the merits of the ease. Mr. HOGG said that when such charges were made against a high-minded and ar qon. Gentleman, bethought that he was in duty bound, is justice to that individual, to make a few ob servations, and if the House would allow him ten minutes, he would not tax their indulgenoe farther.—(Hear.) The Raja was a moat suspicions man he had been born in captivity, and so had his father and granifathers. There was every differere . „ between interference with independent Princes and thAi lja of Sahara, with whom they had a distinct right to in' . moment he broke the covenant. The Raja was tr .r k-e the rig to with draw from the allegiaece of the British ' .l.tevernment the sepoys. That was no light offence,) but it was terther certain that he was ir 4er , jas i ng __ the array witbia his dominions, and a commission was out to inquire into the truth of the lee cites. The commis sion went to ' Sahara, examine:l' witeessee, and came to the eonclusion that the Ilajahad P -ttemeeted to corrupt the sepoys, :led withdraw them from their 61egienee. Sir Robert Grant cid not like to do anything beeesh—the Governor-General re garded the Raja with great apprehension, and at length II came to the op'.r.seen that the Raja could not he lutther trusted. It ewe quite clear that be was connected with other ex-Rajas. for disloyal purposes. The evidence be fore the commissio4 consisted of the examination of forty indi viduals, and wer et to show that an attack on the treasury was meditated. tehundant documentary evidence was exhibited to prove the', t h e Ra j a was guilty. The Raja had no right to hold covntneetication with the Portuguese Governor by the compact, but 'yet he did so. The letters which this Raja addressed to other Reles were produced, and he would give no other answer enan that anybody might write letters in his name, and 'ealled far his answers to these letters. What course could be painted, the Raja's guilt having been established? No other than that which the Indian Government had pursued-- to remove the Raja from his Government. There was every , dispoeition to treat the Raja kindly, and the Court of Directors gave directions to Sir James Carnac to do so. Sir Jedies Carnac came to a conclusion, upon examining the facts in India, that the Raja was guilty, but determined upon waitie ic upon the Raja, personally, and entering into a communication with l'im. The correspondence on this head, on '!,e part of Sir James Carna,e, recited that circumstances h.ad come to the knowledge of the British Government tis":s the Raje had en tered into communication with persons hostile to the British Goverement, and these funs been proved, the British Government required him to e - e...rer into a renewal of the treaty by which he held leis 1 2'.ej. The Raja refused to sign this 'treaty, though S'ir James Cernac did all in his power to induce him to sign His bad advisers still guided him, although 'he avowed repeatedly that his ruin was impending. Had he signed ''.tat document he would be now in possession of his lisj - end of his power. Reference to the papers would the .4 that of all curses that could be inflicted on India, This greatest was that of Europeans, and others, -worming themselves into the confidence of these iPrinces, and then advising them to their own destruction. 'The Raja, he repeated, was treated in the kindest manner, and everything was done that could be done to elicit the truth. The Baja reftv.ed to take any part in the investiga tion, saying it was incoissisteut with his high position to be confronted with witnesses. lint it was not true that he bad ' taken no part in the examination. He suggested several ques tions, and wished to bring in a member of the Supreme Court i tio defend him, which request w. 3, of course, refused. This petition had never been out t,f Colonel Oven's possession. There was a detneesteettee proof that he wrote it fur the pine pose of setting his sun at liberty. Now what was the state meat of the Hex!. Gentleman ? That he was confined in a dungeon at Doonah. Why what cid Mr. Hutt say? Why that he had hired a hone foe the use of the pri +-toiler. The man who wrote the petition hail stated 'that he was to receive 1,230 rupees for writing it. 'This was the secret of the attack. He had written is first, a secotad, aril a third petition, till at last the Govern ment got tired of this pratteeding, and at last resolved that they would receive no more petition• from this m tn. He then tried another movement, and getting the papers into his hands, eeent oa to sue the Raja for the money. • This man had -afterwards confessed that the whole was a lie from beg,inningte end, and the proper ceuree, if this were true, was to prosecute Colonel Ovens. But the feet was, that every body connected with these affairs had been traduced, from Sir Robert Grant and Mount Stnert Elphin.toae, down to Colonel Ovens. They were all in the same boat. The Governors of Bombay, the three last Presidents of the Board of Controul, and nearly all the Directors were in cempany with Ovans. The Directors were careful in employing their servants, paid them well, and reproved them severely if any defalcation of duty were proved. nut in this instant 0 the Court had not thought it necessary to etibjeet so useful a servant as Colonel Ovens to any inquiry, but be would read a letter received before the last Board from t'tal offlaor is which he expressed his readiness to meet the eh srge, and he was ouly seriwise I that - such a motion should ever he beenght before the British House of Commons. With ta,s. obeervations he would leave the case, with the utmost vonfidenee, to the House. Sit. COL EBfeOOKE said that this was ho er parte state m, A, and it was in evidence that the whole inquiry was con (footed oil ft‘e same principle, and altogether a violation of natural justice. He read a minute of Lord Auckland to show `tat this evidence oti which the condemnation of the Raja had been arrived at. The object of the minute was to show that against a eelpless neighbour every care should be taken that no irjustioe should ho committed. Would the Government say that Sir James Carnac did not call on the Raja for a confession of his guilt?—( Hear, hear.) Ho called the Raja before him, and mode a great parade as to fr:o kindness which he had shown to him on various occasions, and endea►oured to induce him to sign the treaty containing a confession of his guilt, which, how ever, he refused to do. The Raja had other reasons than a confession of his guilt to induce him not to sign the treaty. He would net acknowledge that he had done injury to the Bri tish Government, or that he had been guilty of impropriety— for the simplest of all reasons, that he was innocent of both. He was then deposed, because he would net comply with so odious a request. He should, howaver, leave the question to the House to decide whether the conduct which had been pursued towards tt.e Raja was in accordance with fairness or justice. Mr. WAKLEY considered that the Hon. Member would gain nothing by leaving the question to the decision of the House, for he was sure on a division that he would be placed in a minority, as was too frequently the case in that House with respect to measures which deserved a better fate. It would be better to leave it in the hands of the Government. He consi dered the Raja of Sattara a most injured individual, and it would be a blot on the character of that House if they refused to inquire into the circumstances of the case. The Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Board of Control had stated that the witnesses examined with respect to the subject were unwitrthy of belief. If this were true, he could not under stand why the Raja was dethroned upon such testimony. He asked those who would not blindly follow the Government, if they considered, Niter what they had heard that night, that the Raja of Sattara was any thing else than an innocent and an in jured man? Sir James Carnac went out to India with a favourable impression on his mind towards the Raja, and every .thing that had occurred went to show that be considered the Raja an innocent man, and ►hat he was not acting with a man who had shown himself a traitor. Mr. B. BARING said the offence imputed to the Raja of Sattara was, that he had committed an inf rac ti on o f a treaty that he had committed murder and other seriou s offences: rendering him amenable to the laws of the country. They had the authority of many persons who had filled high offices in India, for saying that at the time when the circumstances before the House occurred, that tart of India was in a more serious ferment than it had been for many years before. Sir James Carnac was sent out to endeavour to conciliate the country, but he was directed not to effect this at the sacrifice of the honour of this country, or of its interests in that part of the world. He would refer the House to the minutes of the Indian Board, in which they approved of the deposition of the Raja. But they had stronger evidence than that, namely, the evidence of the Raja of Sattara himself. He thought if these proofs did not satisfy the Hon. Member for Montrose that the Raja was punished, not for refusing to sign this document, but for re fusing to acknowledge the articles of the treaty entered into by himself, nothing would do so. Mr. HUME replied. H e ac k now l e d ge d t h a t h e h a d never heard art! so extraordinary an ans wer as h e h a d h ear d that night. Hon. Member had characterised the witnesses in India as reckless in th e extreme declared honestly that, in his opinion, tha t th e assestions. n o e f Members in that House were equally reekless.--(Laught the r..) The Hon. Member for Beverley had all owe d that inquiry was conducted in private, and th a t not a friend of his was allowed to appear before that tribunal, and when the inquiry was ended the Raja was called in and informed rtehfautsethde.eidence would be read to him. The Raja indignantly The Raja ad th i o n u t g e l r i_t himself the injured party b.eause the Company fPred with him. He did not think that the Right Honourable l' Bermet would lend himself as an instru . nent of Pgainst an innocent man. In the history of injustice no act oppression v oit!d appear of a darker dye than the conduct of the Indian , vernment to the unfortunate and innocent Raja of Sattara. 11A, wa. quite surprised at the two letters that had been read. The letters of Colonel Ovens showed great sensibility as to the e'iarges made ilpinst him. Why did he not adopt the modes f prosecution 'Which were open to him? He need not go to India for the purpose. The simple facts were these, that the Raja of &Hera was accused of crimes of which he was not guilty. He was called upon by Sir J. Carnac to acknow ledge himself guilty. He refused to do so, and he preferred, like an honourable man, to give up his possessions rather than declare that he was culpable when he was innocent. In this case, he (Mr. Hume) was doing his duty. If the Raja was proved to be guilty. let him endure the suf f ering to which he was ;condemned, He had no desire to lessen our power in India. On the contrary, let it be known, in 'lndia that there was a place to appeal to for justice. On +tliese grounds, he would not press for a division.—(Hear, he ar, and a .‘ ) Gentlemen opposite would do him the justie e to •_clr-,„ 1e , 1 that he had never interrupted the course 4 ) ( th. Go a vert men e t and the Court of Directors.—( Hear, h rry " ) When he first read the statements against the Raja, he thOtt; t the Prince gra s guilty. But when he read all the dr y ,; his mind.—(Laughter.) urnent • he changed After a few words from Mr. HOGe The question was put and negative(' DANISH CU without a division. Mr. HAWES said, that in co' JIMS• of the session, and representatir Asequence of the late period , of the House, he would put as made to him by Members Danish claims to the early - off his motion respecting the ADJOtI part of next session. Lord J. RUSSELL aNED DEBATE. the adjourned debate said, that as it was not likely that night, he wished tr upon New Zealand would come on this Sir R. PEEL J ask if it might be brought on to-morrow ? was understood to say, that although it would jovernment business, he would not stand in the assumption of the debate to-morrow. BUTTER AND CHEINE. cor ll di fr r . ...WART *en rose to bring forward his motion an che ig to notice, f or a re d uct i on o f t h e duties upon butter and .• _.ese. The Hon. Gentleman commenced by observing that ..nere was a quantity of butter destroyed every year, which would otherwise be used for the benefit of the poor. It was well known that last year twenty thousand hundred weights of butter was destroyed. He had moved for a return of the ex tent to which this destructive process had been carried. The provision trade of this country was one of enormous importance, because it would increase our trade with America. He was well aware that even the simple motion, of which he had given notice, had attracted attention in America. He would refer the:Government to the circular of those eminent brokers, Messrs. Keeling and Hunt, of the city of London, which had shown *kat by a reduction in duty there would be an immense amount of increase of revenue ; that as the duty was now levied, it was a tax of twenty per cent. upon cheese for the poor, and fifty per cent. for butter; and in that valuable and comprehen sive circular of those eminent gentlemen they had so clearly shown the benefits which would arise to the poor, that he would not trouble them further on the matter than referring them to the circular which was well known and understood by the Board of Trade. He simply proposed that these duties be repealed. If they went into committee, he would be happy to hear the arguments of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as he well knew that they would be well an swered by those Gentlemen who took ails side of the question. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he certainly proposed resisting to go it, to Committee. He would confine himself merely to finanr' ia l reasons f or not acceding to the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman. Under the cir cumstances he held it his duty not to allow a further reduction as it could not be done at tb' is season of the year without in volving the country ildered that in one yea , . in " r siderable difficulty. When he con the duty amounted to 347,3001. he could . not accede to t', e The commercial he, proposition of the Hon. Gentleman. erests of the country would be materially affected. It wooli -- have no other effect than deranging the progress of trade ),y suppressing the duty just now. He would reserve his opie,*ton till the finances of the year were stated, and then he wood state the course which he would advise them to ado p t ' F _ se confined himself to the position that it would be most -attntive to the revenue to alter this duty at this period of tF ee year. Mr. M. GIBSON said that the only reason which induced 0 him to oppose the present proposition was that the duty in creased the revenue by 347,000/. So that if they could show that it imposed a greater tax upon the people than it produced a revenue to the State, that argument would be defeated. It was quite requisite that the duty should be taken eff, as it pressed most heavily upon the manufacturing and agricultural population. He himself knew that in the county of Suffolk the people were in the habit of consuming an immense quantity of foreign cheese, as that which was home-made there was quite unfit for human beings, and he considered that they were grievously injured by the destruction which had been stated by the Hon. Gentleman who had already addressed the House. He would rather discuss it as a question of simple taxation than on fiscal grounds, as it was invariably argued by the Government. The later was a fallacious principle, and he loped it would so be regarded by the House. Mr. HUME considered the course adopted by the Govern ment perfectly consistent, and even honourable, so far as re garded the defence of their original principles, inasmuch as they were right in not holding eut hopes to the labourer which could never be realised. Mr. P. HOWARD considered that at that late period of the session the House ought nut to entertain a measure of such importance, and involving interests so intimately connected with the welfare of the country. He could not see why butter and cheese should not be treated as favourably as silk. 311 r. NEWDEGATE trusted the House and the Govern ment would protect the agriculturist and reject the measure. Mr. F. EGERTON said the Hon. Gentleman opposite said that the landlords were picking the pockets of the rest of the community. Why they might just as well say that the manufacturers of Lancashire were picking the pockets of the rest of the community. Dr. BOWRING said there might be some analogy between 1 the two cases, if the manufacturers of Lancashire called upon the people to pay a higher price for their articles than they could, get them elsewhere. The manufacturers required no protection for themselves. They wished everything to be open to fair competition. Sir R. PEEL said he had been rather curious to know what the motion of the Hon. Gentleman would be, provided they get into Committee. The Hon. Gentleman had been exceed ingly tender on that point. He had said that his own opinion was decidedly in favour of an absolute repeal of the duty. That was to be implied from all the doctrines which he had ever expressed. In his notice at an early period of the ses sion, the Hon. Gentleman intimated that he intended to move for the absolute and total repeal of the duty. That was accord ing to the free-trade principles which were held by the lion. Gentleman. But when his ( Sir R. Peel's) Right Honourable Freed said that this was a question of duty, amounting to 350,0001., the Honourable Gentleman then said that he meant only to prope4e a reduction of the duty. Mr. EWA RT intimated dissent. interfere with r we) , of the r' Sir R. PEEL—WeII, then, the Hon. Gentleman now left the matter in a state of uncertainty. An absolute repeal of the duty would involve a loss of revenue of 3Ei0,000/. Now, could the lion. Gentle.nan expect her Majesty's Government could possibly accede to such a proposal ? Ihe Government had carefully considered, at an early period of the year, all the reductions they could wake. They had found themselves in possession of a large surplus, the result of the income-tax, and they .-e..iitted nut less than 3,400,0001. of permanent taxes. He reduced the sugar duties to the extent of 1,2.)0,0001., and he had been told that the quantity cosucued would not coun terbalance that reduction. Hs proposed the at,elute reduction of the duty on g!ass. A duty to Ore extent of 909,000/. also repealed on various articles which erd-ivituted the founda- Lion of many manufactures at the present moment. He thought the removal of these impediments would be attended with many advantag's to general trade, and his anticipations had not been disappcinted. The Government had remitted duties to the extent of 3,490,000/ , and it was met with the entire ap proval of the House ; and then in the month of July, at nearly the termination of the session, a proposition was brought for ward to compel a further reduc•ion of 350,0001. With so small a surplus of revenue it would not be advisable to make such a remission. In addition to the motion of the Hon. Gentleman, another Hon. Gentleman had given notice of a remission of duty on no le-s than eighty different articles of im portation. It was not a very large amount, it was true, but it would not be whe policy to diminish in any degree, however small, the surplus revenue that existed. He was determiced to consider this question entirely on financial grounds, and if Hon. Gentlemen were dissatisfied they ought to propose a vote of want of confidence in her Ma jesty's Ministers.—( Laughter.) He, upon general principles, declined expressing any more definite opinion on the subject. Colonel SIBTIPORY said if a motion of a vote of want of confidence in her Majesty's Ministers were made, the Right Hon- Gentleman: would, doubtless _have _recourse to assistance from the other side. Sir ROBERT PEEL observed that apparently he lost their confidence every evening, ( Laughter. ) Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL recommended his Hon. Friend :o withdraw his motion. Mr. EWA RT said he should press it to a division. The House then divided, when there appeared : For the motion Against it Majority On our reladtrliasion to the gallery, we found Mr. FORSTER moving the repeal of the duty on eighty-four articles of which he had given noti.T for this evening. He expected the Right Honourable Baronet would tell the House on what ground the duty on these articles were retained. The whole of the duty on these com modities only amounted to 38,233/. annually. Sir R. PEEL said that her Majesty's Government bad re pealed the duty on 400 commodities during the last two years, and it was their intention to take the subject into their further con sideration, with a view to the great simplification of these du ties. He hoped, therefore, the Hon. Member would leave the matter in the hands of the Government, who had already shown so great a desire for their reduction.—( Hear. ) Mr, HUME supported the motion. The duty being re moved from so many article would relieve the labours of the Commissioners. He hoped, that during the recess the Right Hon. Baronet would prepare a Bill to reduce or abolish the duty from many of those articles that at present were in cluded in the tariff. Sir R. PEEL could not make any promise as to what course he should take. After a few words from Mr. Hume, Mr. Forster, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the motion was withdrawn. OTAHEITE. Capt. PECHELL wished to ask: the Gallant Admiral a • question respecting a circumstance which had happened at Otaheite, in which a British officer on board the Talbot had re- fused to recognize the French flag. He wished to know if it was so, and the circumstances under which it took place. He would now move for the return of which he had given notice, of the number of petty officers, able, and ordinary seamen, and boys, borne on the books of her Ma jesty's ships undermentioned at the latest period to which the same can be made, out; distinguishing those that have been lent fr om other ships or from the service of the dockyards :—Queen, Trafalgar, ^ St. Vincent, Rodney, Superb, Albion, Canopus, and Vanguard. Sir R. PEEL explained that the officer of the ship in question had refused to salute the flag of the French Admiral on acr•ount of the protectorate, and hence the officer was interdicted f rom go i ng on shore in the island unless he re cognised the flag. After a brief conversation, in which the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER and Mr. Smut. took part, the motion was agreed to. The LORD ADVOCATE obtained leave to introduce two Bills relative to the laws of Scotland, relating to heirs, and vlith regard to Crown charters and precepts from Chancery • • The Documentary Evidence Bill vas read a second time, The Real Property Bill was read a second time. The Assignment of Terms Bill was read a second time. The Granting of Leases Bill was read a second time. The following Bills were also read a second time :—Customs Laws Repeal Bill, Customs Management Bill, Customs Duties Bill, Warehousing of Goods Bills, British Vessels Bill, Ship. ping and Navigation Bill, Trade of British Possessions Abroad Bill, Customs Bounties and Allowances Bill, Isle of Man Trade Bill, Smuggling Prevention Bill, and Customs Regula tion Bill. The Coal Trade (Port of London) Bill was read a third time. On the motion that the Fees (Criminal Courts) Bill be read a seoond time, Mr. ESCOTT said the subject was much misunderstood. He wished to abolish those fees which were really unjust. Thus, when a poor man was convicted in a criminal court, and the judge deemed a fine of ls. sufficient—was it not most unfair that fees*. the amount of 21. or 31. should be impo.ed ? Certainly the law did not give the Justices, at Quarter Ses sions, power to adopt any but a legal table of fees. They had no right to exact any but legal and reasonable fees. No law was in existence to justify the extortion which was too fre quently inflicted on p ar ti es , whey were too powerless to resist them. But if there were abuses in the present system—if poor men were to be dragged before justices, and, whether ged or not, called upon . to pay fees —and if there d w i rre ha l r aws to justify these exorbitant fees, it was their duty helpless did not suffer f as legislators to rectif y them, and to see that the poor and tru e r t e h ad em. He therefore earnestly trusted that the Bill would be second time. The ATTORNEY_ GENER A L , whilst he dep recated any hasty legislation on the subject, was ' wi ll ing to admit that abuses did exist, to the great injury of the poor, and th a t h e was anxious to do all in his porer to remedy them. By the Act of Gecrge 111. all persons convicted of misdemeanours we're free from all fees whatever. By the 53d of - George 111. it was provided that persons charged with of fences, but who were discharged either by the grand jury, or before the trial, were not liable to pay fees. With regard to acquittals, no fees ought to be charged. But there were some cases where the exaction of fees was both salutary and just ; as, for instance, where parties were admitted to bail, or where they had traversed for their own convenience. He repeated that he considered that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Escott) had been:too hasty. He was willing to aid him to a reasonable extent, but he was not prepared to go to the length of abolishing fees altogether. They should apply their legisla tion to those cases in which a person had to pay fees ten times larger than the amount in which he was fined. Let them not, however, adopt a course which could not fail to entail much mischief on the country. If his Hon. Friend did not confine his Bill within proper limits, he should feel it his duty to oppose it. Mr. AGLIONBY had had many opportunities of judging of the want of such a measure as that before the House, and he could not conceive why the Government should oppose the Bill on the second reading, when the necessary alterations might be made in Committee. He hoped the Bill would be read a second time on that understanding. Sir J. GRAHAM considered that fees ought to be paid when a person was admitted to bail, and that there were in stances where they ought to be remitted. Believing that the Bill would do much good, when certain alterations were intro duced into it, he should support the second reading. The House then divided, when there appeared— For the second reading ... 4O Against it Majority —34 The Bill was then read a second time and ordered to be com mitted. ThP Unions (Ireland) Bill, the Jurors' Books (Ireland) Bill, the Testamentary Dispositions Bill, the Drainage of Estates Bill, and the Customs Acts Bill were forwarded a stage. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the laws relating to real property. Agreed to. The Heuse then adjourned at a Quarter to Two o'clock. HOUSE OF- LORDS, July 22. Their Lordships assembled at Five o'clock. Messengers from the Commons brought up several Bills. On the motion of Lord STANLEY, the Highway Rates Bill, the Militia Ballot Suspension Bill, and the Railways Sell ing or Leasing Bill were read a first time. WASTE LANDS (AUSTRALIA) BILL. This Bill pasted through Committee. ART-UNIONS BILL. This Bill passed through Committee. UNLAWFUL OATHS (IRELAND) BILL. This Bill passed through Committee. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BILL. Lord STANLEY moved the second reading of this Bill. Lord MONTEAGLE suggested the establishment in Dublin of an Economic Museum of Geology in connexion with the Dublin Society, or with some other central establishment in that city. Such an institution would be of great advantage to those engaged in the tilling of land, and he hoped if the Government had not given their attention to the subject, that they would do so at the earliest opportunity. The Duke of WELLINGTON was understood to say that the Government had turned their attention to the subject. STANDING ORDERS. Lord CAMPBELL said, on Monday next, he would move the repeal of the standing order passed in 1721, forbidding any person is publish the life of any deceased Lord—(Laughter)— of that House, whether spiritual or temporal, without the sanc tion of the relations or heirs of the deceased—(Continued laughter)—and that the Lords be summoned. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. The Marquis of CLANRICARDE gave notice that, on Friday, he would move for a list of Bills introduced into the House since the Ist of July. LOAN SOCIETIES BILL. This Bill was read a third time and passed. HOLYHEAD ROADS BILL. This Bill was read a second time and ordered to be committed, RELIGIOUS TESTS. The Marquis of BREADALBANE presented several peti tions from Scotland, praying for the total abolition of religious tests. In presenting these petitions, perhaps it would not be out of place for him to express his extreme regret, that a measure relating to the abolition of religious tests which had been brought forward in the other House of Parliament, after having been assented to in the first instance by the Government, should be opposed by them on its sec rnd coasi•ieration.— ( Hear, hear.) He confessed when he considered the policy they had adopted in regard to Ireland, he could not help thinking that they had acted with some degree of inconsistency towards Scotland. Lord STANLEY denied that the Government had been guilty deny inconsistency. The policy they had . pursued to wards Ireland did nut, certainly, go to the establishment of new tests ; but it did not disturb those tests already in existence. Lord CAMPBELL protested that Government had been guilty of gross inconsistency towards Scotland, and declared that their late opposition to Mr. Rutherford's Bill would have the effect of turning out Sir David Brewster. The matter then dropped. PRIVILEGE. Lord BROUGHAM said he wished to call their Lordships' attention to a question of privilege. It was known to their Lordships that he was one of those who was always found in a minority of that House—who entirely disapproved upon prin ciple of all unfair and forcible exercise of what were called the privileges or powers of Parliament. He, however, did not object to their due and proper exercise, when their use was intended to remove obstacles to the progress of some of their proceedings; and after the course which had been taken in both Houses of Parliament but a few days ago, he should have deemed it to be his bounden duty, even if he were not the person concerned in this breach of privilege, to bring the present case before their Lordships. It would be necessary for him to allude to a paragraph which had been published in a newspaper, and which took notice not only of what passed in their Lordships' House, but also what passed in Select Committees. They comment on the speeches made, and write the grossest fabri cations on the individuals who are engaged in them. The present question to which he was about to call their attention was this :—Some months or weeks ago he was informed, by the Votes of the House, that a Railway fill had been re ported against for inourherable breaches of the standing orders. A motion was then made by Mr. Fitzstephen French (a Noble Lord here mentioned the name of another Member) —then it was not Mr. Fitzstephen French, but another Mem ber, who made a motion to rescind the resolution of the Committee. A small majority having been obtained, the Bill was allowed ti, proceed. lie (Lord Brougham) at a subsequent period gave the pasties notice not to throw away their money, as it was probable that errors would be also found against the standing orders of the Howie of Lords. Mr. Fitzstephen French then waited upon him, and desired to see biro on the subject. He gave the gentleman credit for perfect sincerity and the must patriotic motives for his con duct with respect to the Bill, and if he got the House to rescind the vote, he was sure that he did so upon the purest and most high-minded principles. He ceased, however, to entertain the idea that his conduct was so wholly disinterested. He had found out, in the course of the evidence, that the Directors had not only taken twenty shares as their qualification, but had also taken each of them 500 shares above their qualification, and had sold them so as still to have a number of shares to the amount of their qualification. The Gallant Gentleman who came before them had made from 7001. to 800/. and other Directors had also sold their shares, and had profited to a propartionate extent. tie was surprised to see how the conduct of two persons had been commented on elsewhere, while others without number had done precisely the same thing. Now, there was this difference in the conduct of the two parties—that the former had no shaves in the railway till after the Parliamentary and other proceedings in connexion with it were brought to a close; the latter had obtained shares while the Bills were still pending, and it may be naturally sup posed that their votes were not wholly unaffected by their in terest. He stepped nut of his way a little to revert to the case of Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero, believing, as he did, that they were the victims of what might he called a Pharisaical purity. But he would add that if they had been guilty to the same extent as other Honourable Members, it might afford some pretext for the unmeasured indignation which had been poured out against them. Mr. French had applied to him, and told him that he did so in consequence of the absence of his Noble Friend behind him (Lord Clanri carde) who he (Lord Brougham) was led to believe was the patron of the Bill. The answer, however, which he gave him was simply this, "We allow no canvass on private Bills." A Committee had been appointed to inquire into all the merits of the case. Mr. Smith, a parliamentary agent against the Bill, came to him, but he (Lord Brougham) refused to have any communication with him. He had no communication with Mr. Croucher, nor did he make any use whatever of the written communications which he had read. One he laid upon the table of the House, the other he put in his pocket and had not read up to this hour. The Noble and Learned Lord then read from the Times newspaper a report of the speech of Mr. F. French, which had been delivered in the House of Commons on the previous evening, in relation to the conduct of Lord Brougham on the Committee appointed to inquire into the charges of Mr. Pym, on the Irish Great Western Railway. He characterised the attack of Mr. French as foul, libellous, and untrue. He had only done his duty, that which he was bound to do, and could not consistently with his duty avoid doing. He was not a shareholder in any railway, and was actuated by no other motive than that of a faithful and conscientious discharge of his duty. The only railway ever he had a share in was 20 years ago, when he was politically connected with the town of Liverpool, and took a few shares by way of patronising the undertaking, but sold them off as soon as he could get them off his hands.—(A laugh.) Why the question was perfectly aft , polite to the inquiry, and the Committee would not have been performing their duty had they neglected to put it. The same reply might be given to the charge that he asked if the shares were at a discount. To be sure he did ; but the question was put in a purely inquisitorial capacity, as they were bound by the orders of that House to put it. The next accusation vrai that " he suppressed evidence which disproved the case he wished to establish." That assertion was untrue, but while untrue, it was impossible; and if the man who made it had not been in such a fury as to have lost his reason, he must have seen the absurdity of supposing that a Member could, in his individual capacity, have practised such a course, had he desired. But the whole was a precious jumble, and a precious falsifica tion. Well, after going on some time and discovering the practices of the Company, " Oh," said they, w hat has been done in the Dublin and Galway is what has been always pursued in other Companies." To prove this, a Mr. Joseph Parkes, an attorney, well-known about Parliament, was called, bat he only proved that he had no connexion whatever with the rail way. "But," said he, "it is frequently done in the London and York, the Western, and all other Companies." They asked him if he had personal knowledge of that fact—had he ever been present at the time of making allotments, granting scrips, and making certificates. Well, it appeared, he had never even appeared before a Committee, bad never been sworn—and they, finding that he knew nothing, and that if sworn fifty times he could give no useful evidence, declined swearing him also.—( Hear.) But, though Mr. Joseph Parkes could give no evidence in chief opposite to the case, on cross-examination it was elicited that he knew that the London and York Company had acted in the same manner. So they sent for Mr. May, the secretary of that Company, and examined him ; and he (Lord Brougham) never knew of anything equal to the contrast be tween the proceedings of the two bodies; he never saw, nor in his imagination could he conceive, anything more widely different. So far from the York Company following the course complained of, they never, in one instance, had adopted it. In the Galway line, 970 applications for shares had been made, only 111 of which offered any reference whatever, while the London and York never received a single application without one or more references attached. But when they got these 111, what did they do with them? Mark—the London and York had sent a man round the coun try, inquiring, for a month, into the character of every refe rence they received ; but out of the 111 sent in to the Galway Company, just 29 were examined, and of those 29, 14 were found to be false, fictitious, or paupers' claims; and therefore they stopped short, fearing, he supposed, that if they went further they should fare worse. Brit one of the parties to whom an allotment was made, was a pauper woman called Margaret Meredyth. She had 248 :shares accorded her, and the reason Hesseltine gave for considering her a fit person to invest property to such an amount in railway schemes was, that she resided at Lower Tooting, Surrey. The woman her self, when asked if the signature to the application w as h er own, replied she did not know, for she could not read„.. (Laughter.) And, on cross-examination, this innocent woman I asserted that neither could she write.—( Loud laughter.) But among Mr. Hesseltine's certificates for solvency was one from a man called Pecton, whose actual existence was afterwards disproved, and another from a man called Baldwin, who had been for the last fourteen years in the West Indies. Again, when Mr. Briden was asked how he had ascertained the vali dity of the references, or the respectability of the referees—Oh, he had trusted to Mr. Harrison, and when Mr. Harrison was asked how he had executed his trust—Oh, he bad committed it to Hesseltine, and Hesseltine in like manner commissioned Lew, and that man, it appeared had taken the names home and searched the character of each reference in so short a space of time, that it was computed twelve seconds were allowed to each case. He wished all business could be settled in so short a time, it would materially expedite the discussions in that House.—( A laugh.) Such was the difference in the conduct of the two Companies respecting their mode of transacting business of this nature, and yet, forsooth, that highly respect able body, the Loudon and York, was accused of pursuing the same disreputable practices as the Dublin and Galway ! As to the charge of his having suppressed evidence which would have disproved the case he wished to establish, this was not only not true, but the very reverse of the truth. Why, May gave damning evidence against the Company, and the more his statements could be suppressed the better it would have been for their ease. With regard to the statement that he had put the calumniating question to a witness, whether " he had ever been a candidate for a lucrative employment in a rival company," why, where was the calumny in asserting, or where tke dis grace in having so solicited employment? But it so happened that the accusation—if accusation it was—was a fact, and as serted in the identical handwriting of the petitioner ? And as to General Hawkins, he cut a very bad figure in the Commit tee, though he left it most perfectly satisfied with their conduct, both towards himself and the Bill. Those were the facts, and he only wished to add a few words respecting its publication in the papers of the day. It was a very singular account, and ren dered mere so by the extraordinary accuracy which it affected in detailing every single particular connected with the case. Indeed he doubted if the report, as given, was heard at all. Sone accounts stated that the party spoke in so low a tone as to be perfectly inaudible in the gallery, yet another professed to give to a nicety every syllable uttered. One word to those thus connected with the press—he would warn them that they had no protection if they outstripped the bounds already con ceded them only by courtesy. There was the case of George Woodfall on record, who was committed to prison for printing the report of a speech delivered within the walls of Parliament, and Mr. Percy was also punished for the same offence. He would venture to give a solitary warning to the newspapers. It was no defence for any newspaper that printed a libel against a man, to state that it was spoken in either House of Parliament.—(Hear, hear.) No, it was no defence whatever. God forbid that it should be. Now, the question of what was to be done in this case he should leave to their Lordships. Their Lordships had lately held the doctrine that no Select Committee, appointed to inquire into the Law of Gaming could possibly discharge the duties delegated to them by the House, unless their witnesses were protected. Possibly their Lordships might think it was just as necessary to protect the Members of the Committee. His principle was, the courts of law before the common press. But one word more as to whether this paragraph was likely to be true. He had a great respect for the Commons' House of Parliament. He held high its privileges when not exceeded. He held high its power and its just rights, and looked upon the House as a popular branch of our free Constitution. He knew, tee, that the Commons held it to be the corner-stone of their privileges that they were not confined to one House, but were common to loth ; and if such language as this were tolerated in the Commons, his veneration and respect for the present House, as at present composed, would cease, but would still continue for the ideal abstract House, as it ought to be composed. His veneration and respect must cease so long as such ribaldry as he had just read to their Lordships was suffered to be spoken in that House against a Peer of Parliament acting en a Select Committee, and not one word be said in return, either of reprobation or censure. Did the House of Com mons approve of such conduct ?—( Hear, hear.) No, he would not believe that it did, for he believed that the words were not spoken, but were fabri cated, or even if spoken, that they were not heard by the House, as the other papers say. With these observations, in which he trusted he had evinced no want of feeling for any party, or said anything offensive to any party, he should leave this question for their Lordships' disposal. The Earl of BESBOROUGH remarked that as he had acted as Chairman of the Committee to which so much allusion had been made, perhaps it would not be out of place for him to say a word or two on the subject. Their Lordships, no doubt, were aware that no persons were admitted into the Committee except those who were under examination. On the first day of meeting the agent of the petitioner put into his hand the names of certain witnesses whom they wished to have examined before the Committee, and on the second day they put a second paper into his hand, containing ebservations as to the mode in which these witnesses were to be examined. His Noble and Learned Friend examined the witnesses from that document. With respect to the main charge of suppres sing evidence, his Noble and Learned Friend had stated cor rectly how that occurrel. A witness stated to the Committee a number of facts, and as he said he did not know them of his own knowledge, but had heard them, the short-hand writer was ordered to scratch that part of his evidence out of his notes. Lord BROUGHAM said that the reason why Mr. Fitz stephen French was not examined was, because they had no charge against him. The question was, whether he canvassed for a lucrative employment in any other railway. which was negatived, and they thought that answer sufficient. If a charge was made against him, and satisfactorily answered, why should they have allowed him to be examined? He asked to be examined, but they could not examine him without leave from the House of Commons. The Earl of WICKLOW was of opinion that there never was a more gross breach of privilege, and it appeared to him that their Lordships could not abstain from taking further notice of it. What that should be, he would leave more im portant persons than himself to suggest. After what had been brought forward by his Noble and Learned Friend, and the strong manner in which he had succeeded in vindicating himself from a gross and outrageous attack he thought it was necessary, that their Lordship% should determine whether they would take any further course on this subject. It depended very much upon his Noble and Learned Friend's own opinion cn the subject. He left it entirely in the hands of the House to see the necessity of examining the reporters and printers of the Times at the bar of the House, to know whether it was or was not a correct report of the proceedings. Some newspapers stated this gentleman expressed him-elf in so low a tone of voice that his words could not be taken." It appeared to him, then, necessary to ascertain whether such was the fare or not. A gross breach of privilege had been made, and he thought that their Lordships should investigate further into the matter. Lord BROUGHAM begged to move that no further pro ceedings be taken about the matter. The Duke of WELLINGTON thought that the House should consider what course was to be adopted. The sugges tion of his Noble Friend was that the reporters of the news papers should be examined at the bar of the House. He thought that whether the reporter or printer who should be examined had published what was or what was not said in the other House of Commons, he was equally guilty of a breach of pri vilege.—( Hear, hear.) He would merely suggest that their Lordships should adjourn the further consideration of the sub ject till Thursday, in order that they should see what was the best course to be adopted in a case which appeared to him to be very grave. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that they might put the question to the reporter horn what source he hati received the inform at.on. The matter was then adigenrrel till Thursday. IRISH COLLEGES BILL. Lord STANLEY moved that the House should go into Committee on the It ish Collages Bill. After it was carried, Lord STANLEY said that he had a trifling amendment to Move. There was a provision introduced in the 14th clause of the Bill in the other House of Parliament, which was at vari ance with the other provisions of the clause. It was with re ference to th power which was to be given to the governing Jody to make rules with regard to lectures. That was the only amendment he had to propose. The Noble Marquis opposite asked a question with respect to their granting university pri vileges. The power of granting degrees would a natural consequence of the measure now before them. That was the v i ew w ith w hi c h they were ti be supposed to consider the question. It would be an imperfect measure if it were not to be accompanied by the power of conferring degrees It required, however, much more consideration than they had now an opportunity of bestowing on that matter. Consolidation of these colleges with Trinity College, Dublin, was also spoken about. That, he thought, would be a very satisfactory arrangement, but they would find very many serious difficulties now in trying to arrive at it. The question arose as to whether university privileges were to be given to each college separately, or as he thought more advantageous, whether they should be affiliated together in one university. Should the power of an university be held alternately, or at intervals, in each of these colleges to which privileges would be given by this Bill ? He mentioned this to show that there were various matters which deserved consideration. It would be desirable that after these colleges were constituted they should have an opportunity of considering what might be the cuurse which would be likely to meet with general assent.—(Hear, hear.) Another question was, whether the colleges which may here• after be instituted may not be af f iliated with them. He wished to state that it was the opinion of her Majesty's Government this measure would be imperfect without the power of granting degrees being afforded to these universities ultimately. Lord LANSDOWNE said that he was perfectly satisfied with the explanation which had been given by the Noble Lord. There were several matters for consideration with respect to this Bill which could not be disposed of during the present ses sion. Tho only thing he wished to impress upon them was that those intentions were not to be lost sight of. Lord CAMPBELL said that he understood the Noble Lord on a previous occasion to say that there would be four colleges to be established. cwoolLLiretooghrreddims,hcSiiTAtlewAltioNpulLEY stated that what he said was that after these colleges were esta bli s h e d t h ere wou l d b e one co ll ege i n each province, of course i nc l u di ng T r i n i ty C o ll ege , D u bli n . Bd considerEn L o t L b e w l vbh i e s e h ttt e he d re rt, t o o i nh sa s tv u ee g a g do e n s l of t y four w o one. e e . t h o efTr There w es . e a w s on n ue o rd t be great difficulty in establishing three new colleges at once. None of them could be of that importance which was desirable, and which was necessary to enable them to confer upon the public the benefits which were expected from them. Lord CLANRICARDE differed from his Noble Friend as to the advantage of having only one college. He was glad to hear that these colleges were to be connected, and to have the powers of an university. Lord MONTEAGLE thought that the public could lose nothing by postponing the further consideration of the measure, while the Bill itself would be materially benefited by delay. They should try and bring the scheme within scope of central examination, and connect it either directly or remotely with Trinity College, Dublin. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH concurred in the senti ments of the Noble Marquis (Clanricarde), and thought the greatest difficulty would be to find out proper persons to execute the office of professor, who would gradually form the minds of young men, and meuld the middling classes of Ireland into a more congenial spirit. They could not suddenly, by an Aet of Parliament, form an Eton, or such a university as an Oxford. Suites of apartments did not constitute a college, but time alone could prove the efficacy of the measure. Lord BROUGHAM explained that he did not mean last night that colleges for the residence of the pupils should be founded on the system of excluding religion; he only meant his observations to apply to such institutions as the External in France. With reference to Trinity College, Dublin, no one could entertain a higher opinion of its unbounded talent than himself, and nothing was more true than that the fame of that ancient university was unrivalled. The ablest editions o f the classics, and the deepest researches of modern science were to be found amid the transcendant productions of her members. All the cultivators of science, but especially of astronomy, at tributed much of the success of late experiments to the re searches of one of the Members of the Dublin University. Lord Bosse (for it was to that Noble Lord he alluded) had, by his construction of the gigantic telescope on his estate, achieved an undertaking whose results had not been equalled in any age. Lord STANLEY said that as to the difficulty of finding pro fessors competent to teach, it would be remembered that in Belfast there was already an institution, whose pro fessors could be transferred to the new erection there, with which it would be incorporated. And, as to the two col leges for the south, he had no fears of providing them with competent professors. The Bill then went through Committee with amendments. 4 Pr& SCOTTISH MIDLAND RAIL W4Y BILL, i t . Lord PQLWERTII moved tbi insertion 0 a clause into this Bill, for giving compensation to the proprietcrs of turnpike trusts. Lord DEVON opposed it, considering it interrered with the laws already existing to govern railways, and which rendered it unnecessary. Lord WHARNCLIFFE supported its insertion, on the ground of affording protection to the rights of property. Lord HADDIN GTON said, that all Railway Bills should be treated in the same way. It had been said, that a Bill without this clause had been passed that night, but that was no reason why it should not be inserted in the present Bill. Lord CAMPBELL said it was on a fernier ()cession the almost unanimous opinion of the House that the clause should be inserted. Lord CHARLEVILLE, as a Member of the Committee which had the Bill referred to them, protested against the in troduction of a particular clause in the Bill. Lord WHARNCLIFFE contended that the clause ought to be introduced, as otherwise a considerable loss might be en tailed on those gentlemen who had lent their money to the trustees of the turnpike road going from Perth to Forfar. Lord CAMPBELL wished to ask the Noble Lord whether he held any shares in the Railway Company? Lord WHARNCLIFFE had no hesitation in saying that he did hold ehares in it, and many other Noble Lords did the same, with respect to other railways. He, however, never sold any of his shares. He regretted that the Ncble Lord should have allowed himself to put such a question. Lord CAMOYS would vote for the admission of the clause, as the introduction of the clause seemed very desirable. The Marquis of NORTHAMPTON said that it would be only just that the clause should be inserted, and it would be an act of injustice if it were withheld. The clause ought to be introduced, not only in the present Bill, but in every Scotch Railway Bill. Lord POLWORTH observed that he moved the adoption of the clause on public grounds only; and was satisfied it would fully operate in protecting the interests of all the parties concerned. Lord WHARNCLIFFE again insisted on the insertion of the clause. The Marquis of BREADALBANE opposed the clause. Were compensation given to every man that might be inter fered with by the making of a railway, there would be no end to the claims of this kind that would be preferred. The clause was then put and agreed to without a division. Several Bills were then advanced a stage, and their Lord ships immediately afterwards adjourned till Thursday next. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. HOME ClRCUlT.—Maidstone, July 22. The commission for the county of Kent was opened on Mon day. The business is rather lighter than is usual at the sum mer assizes, there being only thirty-one causes entered, and only two special jury cases. On the Crown side there are forty-four prisoners for trial. Both Courts proceeded to business this morning, Lord Chief Justice Tindal presiding on the Civil side, and Mr. Justice Coleridge in the Crown Court. CROWN COURT. _ _ Mr. Justice COLERIDGE, in his charge to the grand jury, took occasion to allude to the Parliamentary statistics of crime, in a similar manner that he did at Hertford, and congratulated the county upon the fact that in Kent there appeared to be a diminution in th• number of criminals during the last five years. He then observed that in Kent, as in most other counties,_ there appeared to be a very great disproportion be tween the number of persons committed for trial and those who were eventually acquitted of the offences imputed to them ; and he said that without wishing to cast any blame upon the gentlemen who filled the office of magistrates, yet he did think that this afforded matter for serious consideration, and that too much care could not be taken that persons should not be com mitted for trial but upon strong evidence. Fumes Austin, 25, a mariner, was indicted for feloniously cutting and wounding Edward Cartwright Middleton, with in tent to maim and disable his ; and in another count of the in dictment his intent was laid to be to prevent his lawful appre prehension for the offence of burglary. Mr. Deeder prosecuted. It appeared from the evidence, that on the morning of the 30th of May, between one and two o'clock, a person named Staples, who keeps an oil shop in the High-greet, Chatham, was alarmed by a noise in the street, and he awoke his shop man, tho prosecutor Middleton, and told him to go down and see what was the matter. He did so, and on opening the street-door carefully, he observed the prisoner standing outside the shop of Mr. Hayler, a watchmaker opposite, and apparently working with some tool at the shutter. Having watched him long enough to be perfectly satisfied of hi s o bj ec t, h e went over and laid hold of the prisoner, who mad* a violent resist• ante, and finding he could not get away he at length struck Middleton several severe blows on the head with a chisel, and wounded him severely in several places. He however, kept him until a constable came up, and the pri soner was then lodged in the station-house. Upon the pre mises of Mr. Hayler being afterwards examined, it was found that a piece of wood had been completely cut out of one of the shutters, making a hole large enougn to admit a hand, near that part of the shop-front where a tray of gold watches was generally kept, and a chisel, which no doubt was the tool that had been made use of, and with which the prosecutor had also been wounded, was found lying upon the pavement, close to the spot. A surgeon, who examined the prosecutor, described the in juries he received as being very severe, and said that he con sidered one cut behind the ear, at first, of a dangerous cha racter. The jury found the prisoner guilty of wounding the prose cutor, with intent to prevent his lawful apprehension. An officer was then called, who proved that he had been before convicted of felony. Mr. Justice COLERIDGE having commented in app•opriate terms upon the aggravated character of the offence, sentenced the prisoner to be transported for fifteen years. OXFORD cirecurr.—.9lfford, July 21. The business of these assizes commenced this morning, Lord Denman presiding at Nisi Priu3, and Mr. Justice Patteson in the Crown Court. Andrew Walls, 23, and Alexander Hughes, 27, were indicted for assaulting Thomas Wade, at Newcastle, s n the 9th of June, and stealing a watch and chain from his person. The prosecutor was walking down the street late in the evening, when he met the two prisoners, who were soldiers quartered in the town, and one of them asked him what time it was? Wade pulled out his watch far the purpose of ascer taining and telling them, when the prisoners snatched both watch and chain out of his hand. They were found Guilty, and sentenced to be transported for ten years. Ann Fletcher, 14, was indicted fur setting fire to the dwell. ing-house of Mary Tildesley, on the 21st June, at Ellenitall, the said Mary Tiidesley being therein at the time. The prisoner in this case is the grand daughter of Mrs. Tildesley, with sshom she lived, and on the day in question was forbidden to go to Newport fair, which she wanted to do, her parents having requested the old lady not to allow her. The girl, who issaid to be somewhat idiotic, in revenge for this prohibition, set fire to her grandmother's house, and the old lady, being bed-ridden, was near falling a victim to the pre coc►ous malice of the prisoner. A convic•ion under this in dictment is still a capital felony, punishable with death, and Mr. Justice PatteTon directed a verdict of Not Guilty ; but to-mor row the prisoner will be tried under the second sectio❑ of the Act of Parliament, on which the indictment is framed, vis., for setting fire to the building only, with the omission of the graver part of the charge, that of a person being therein at the time. UlT.—Lincol u . J u l 21 . T county was opened o n S a tu r day, but D the lc business N gr C h ? this C ? y is t. Frederick Thompson, aged 28, was charged with having forged a certain receipt for money, with intent to defraud the trustees of a certain turnpike road. The prisoner was surveyor of that portion of the Great North Road which extends from Stamford to Witham, and as such surveyor was accustomed to employ a number of labourers. The charge was, - that he in certain weekly accounts had inserted the name of " Thomas Smith," and received the amount charged for work stated to have been done, and given receipts,, whereas nn ouch man had ever been engaged. When the pri soner was called before the board and questioned, he denied the truth of the alleged fraud of attaching the name and signature, or mark of any man he Lad not employed. lla was, however, suspended, and that day or the following absconded. This was in December, 1841, and he was not arrested until last May, sion, was publishe d. —The j ur y found him Guilt y. although a handbil l, offerin g a reward of 201. f or his apprehen- NORTHERN CIRCUIT.—York, July 21. CROWN COURT.—(Before Mr. Justice Clt ESS WELL. ) REGINA V. A. LOCKWOOD. The prisoner in this case was charged with having committed a robbery, accompanied with violence, on the prosecutor, at Bradford, in the West Riding of Yorkshire. The ease on the part of the prosecution having closed, Mr. OVEREND proceeded to address the jury on behalf of the prisoner. He stated that, although he was willing to admit that an assault had been made on the prosecutor by the pri soner, still he thought that he should be able to establish clearly, to the satisfaction of the jury, that no robbery had been com mitted by the prisoner. He had been desired to lay all the cir cumstances of the case before the jury, and this be should do by calling evidence. Whilst the Counsel was proceeding in his address, Mr. BOOTHBY said that it might answer all the ends of jus tice, since the prisoner admitted the assault, if he did not press the case any further. Mr. Justice CRESSIVELL inquired of the Counsel for the pro secution whether or not he entertained any doubt of the rob bery having been committed? The Learned Counsel said that he thought it very probable, looking at the evidence, that none had been committed. Mr:Justice CRESSWELL then directed the jury to find the prisoner guilty of the assault only, which they accordingly did. The prisoner was then sentenced to three months' imprison ment. WESTERN ClRCUlT.—Exeter, July 21. The commission for holding the assizes for the county of Devon was opened in this city on Saturday evening. 'the cause list has 20 cases entered, end the calendar contains the names of 158 prisoners, among whom are the 10 pirates for the murder of Midshipman Palmer of her Majesty's ship Wasp. The Learned Judges yesterday attended Divine service in the cathedral. This morning the business commenced, Mr. Baron Platt presiding in the Crown Court, and Mr. Justice Erie sitting at Nisi Prius. In charging the grand jury, Mr. Baron PLATT made the following observations with regard to the case of the pirates:— There was one matter which they would have to decide which came before them not as really belonging to their county, and forming no part of the criminality of the county over which they presided, but a crime had been committed out of the jurisdiction of the county. They must be aware of the case to which he alluded. It seemed that a num ber of persons had been brought to this country for the pur pose of taking their trial before this Court, as a Court of Admiralty. They were aware that offences could only, by the common law of the land, be inquired into where the offences had taken place within that county. So that if the offence had been committed in Dorsetshire, they would have no jurisdiction to try that offence here. With regard to those offences which were not committed within the boundary of any county, anciently the Court of Admiralty assumed a jurisdiction over them, which was recognised by every State in Europe, and in which Court the rules of the common law were not observed, but the law was the civil law administered with out the intervention of a jury. At last it was thought that where a man was to lose his life there should be the verdict of twelve independent jurors to prouounce him guilty, in con sequence of which an Aot of Parliament was passed, by which it was enacted that for the future parties charged with the commission of offences within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty should be tried before commissions appointed for that especial purpose, and sessions were to be held, denominated the Admiralty Sessions, which were to be held twice a year at the Old Bailey, in the months of October and March in every year. So: the law stood before the late Act of Parliament by which the Central Criminal Court was formed. When the Central Criminal Court was formed, the whole of the Admiralty jurisdiction was assigned to that Court; but that would give no jurisdiction to try a ease of that kind here ; and therefore, by a recent statute of the 7th and Bth years of the present reign, jurisdiction was given to the justices of oycsr and terminer and general gaol delivery, who should happen to preside in the place where the parties were in gaol, and the parties to whom he now alluded being in the gaol of this county, it became by force of this Act of Parliament, their duty to consider the evidence laid before them, with respect-to the charges made against these prisoners. It seemed that of late years the odious traffic of dealing in gives, which had disgraced the human kind, had, by the interference of this country, been attempted to bp pet down. Among other nations, that et Portugal had entered info a treaty for the purpose of assisting to put down that traffic—he tuderstood that the parties now charged were subjects ,of that Pete?, By the treaty between the two countries, all officers having the command of any Government ships have the power of sein ing and taking any vessel engaged in the slave trade. It would seem in the present instance that a vessel called the Felicidade had been taken by one of her Majesty's ships. After that capture had taken place, and some of the officers had been pet on board, a brigantine called the Echo was discovered, and was captured and manned by the British, and some of the men were taken from the Felicidade, and while the remainder of the men were in the Feli cidade the act complained of took place. If they should be of opinion that it was necessary, for the purpose of securing the capture, that part of the crew should be taken to another vessel, that division of the force was incidental to the Cipttfre of the vessel, and, therefore, as long as those parties remained in the other vessel they were in legal custody. He need not tell them that if any man took away the life of one of her ISI4- jesty's subjects, that party was guilty of murder, except under particular circumstances. By the law of England the taking away human life was murder, and it was almost im possible to qualify the °fence. Undoubtedly if this custody was illegal—if a man had been seised from the shore, and taken on board a vessel for the purpose of being removed from the place—by the law of nations he would be justified in committing any act to furtker his escape, but that was not this case. An enemy, if taken in war, would be justified in recapturing a vessel which had been taken from him; but he who was a pirate, thoagh undoubtedly an enemy, was not an enemy of war. By the law, a pirate had nes jus belli at all. The definition of an enemy was clearly described. Ille hostis est qui habet rem puplicam curiam cerarium est. The governor of any country, and those who acted under him, might be deemed enemies, but it would be too much to allow the subject of any particular country to set himself up in any such manner, and if he did that on the seas he became a pirate, and therefore he could have no rights of war. If he had the jus belli he might have done this act. A piratis et latronibus captus liber permanet. It seemed the question for their con sideration was whether, in this case, they thought there was reasonable ground for inferring that the.parties who committed this atrocity in the destruction of human life were acting under the law of nations. If they thought there was ground for in vestigation they would return a bill ; because, looking at the evidence, there was little doubt that the parties charged had destroyed the lives of several of Her Majesty's subjects. NORTH WALES ClRCUlT.—Dolgelly, July 19. The assises for the county of Merioneth commenced in the Court-house of this town to-day before Mr. Baron Parke. The Learned Judge arrived last evening, when, after opening the commission, he attended Divine service. Jonathan Jones, alias Lewis Woods, an elderly man, of no torious character, was indicted for burglariously breaking into the shop and dwelling-house of Mr. Griffith Davies, a watch maker and jeweller, of Dolgelly, on the night of the 3d of January last, and stealing therefrom 147 watches, 40 gold rings, 40 gold seals, a large number of gold seals, watch keys, silver thimbles, pencil-cases, and other articles of jewellery to a great amount. Mr. Welsby appeared for the prosecution, and the pri soner was undefended. From the evidence adduced, it ap peared that on the evening before the robbery the prose cutor, on going to bed, saw the whole of his property safe in the shop, but on getting up the next morning he .found that a hole had been cut in his shop door with some sharp instru ment, by which means an entrance had beers forced, and on examining the premises it was discovered that the valuable articles named in the indictment had been carried away. So extensive a robbery had not been committed in North Wales fur a length of time, and notwithstanding the activity of the Dolgelly police the thieves managed to get clear off. Nothing was heard of the robbers or property until last month, when, from information received by Mr. Hill, the high constable of Chester, he was induced to question a man of the name of Phillip Dixon, a prisoner confined in Chester gaol, and the re suit of his inquiries led him to search a lodging-house in Chester, where the prisoner resided, and he there found, in a deal box, four watches, some gold keys, watch-guards, &c. which were identified as a part of the property stolen from the prosecutor. The prisoner was apprehended at the time, when he told Mr. Hill that Phillip Dixon was the man who com mitted the robbery. Mr. Baron PARKE, at the latter portion of the evidence, asked ➢ir. Hill where Phillip Dixon was, when the latter stated that he had brought him in custody from Chester, in the hope of getting him identified on the road, or in Dolgelly, but he had been unable to accomplish that object, and there fore he had no charge against him ; they had, however, a case against him at Chester, and he would be taken back there. Several witnesses were called, who spoke to having seen the prisoner in Dolgelly on the night before the robbery, and on the road to Chester the morning after, and the prosecutor hav ing sworn to the property found in the prisoner's possession, he was found Guilty, and sentenced to fifteen years' trans portation, the Learned Judge stating that if any violence had been used he should have sent him out of the country for life. At the conclusion of this case Mr. Price, the High Sheriff, oat behalf of himself and the rest of the Welsh magistrates of Merioneth, objected to the payment of Mr. Hill's expenses out of the county rate. Mr. Baron P&staz inquired upon what grounds? The High Sheriff thought that Air. Hill's expenses should be borne by the city of Chester, u the prisoner might have been tried at Chester. Mr. Baron PARKE said that it was quite out of the ques tion for for the city of Chester to bear the expense of pro secutibg a prisoner for a robbery committed in Merionethshire, besides he could not have been legally tried in Chester. The High Sheriff appeared disposed to argue the question with the Learned Baron, who, however, cut the matter short by ordering all the expenses incurred by Air. Hill in bringing the prisoner to justice to be paid by the county of Alerioneth. Hugh Grzffiths, a man upwards of fifty years old, stood in dicted for having, on the 27th of June last, violated the person of Jane Hughes, a child of twelve years old. Mr. Jervis and Mr. Townsend were for the prosecution, and Mr. Welsby for the defence. The facts disclosed in evidence were of the most revolting description. The prisoner had been a soldier in the 4th Regi ment, and his Waterloo medal, which had been taken posses sion of by the gaoler, was handed to the counsel for the prose cution for their inspection. He is a pensioner, and had latterly been emplo)ed as the keeper of the weighing machine at Bala, in this county. Last month only he buried his wife, and although labouring under a loathsome disease, he was under contract to another woman to marry again, the bans of marriage having been published on Sunday last for the third time. In the state of health described he committed the offence, the discovery of which was mainly attributable to his having communicated the disease to his victim. On being charged with it, he called upon the child's mother, who to her disgrace, entered into a compromise, on condition that the prisoner gave her his deceased's wife's wearing apparel, which compact would have been carried into effect, had not the cir cumstance come to the ears of the magistrates, who compelled her to prosecute. The poor child, in her examination, evinced the most deplorable ignorance. She could not speak English, and through an interpreter said she had never been to school, had never been taught to read, nor to have a know ledge of the Bible. From a difficulty experienced in getting the prosecutrix to speak out sufficiently, to prove the principal charge, it was abandoned, and another bill for the misdemeanour was found by the direction of the Judge; to this the prisoner pleaded guilty, and he was sentenced to 18 months' imprison ment. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. GUILDHALL. Yesterday Thomas Ellerd, a labouring man, was brought before Mr. Alderman Challis, charged with violently assault iog William Finn and other city police-constables. • 3 Finn, policeman 276, stated that be was on duty at the bot tom of HolLorn-hill on the preceding evening, and on approach ing two men who were standing near the end of •Field-lane; one of: them, the prisoner, spat a bone -out of his mouth into wit ness's face. Witness passed on and took no notice of this, but .soon afterwards he saw the prisoner go up to Mr. Helme, who carries on the business at the wine -vault, t3B, Holborn-hill, and who was standing at his door. The prisoner offered him a piece of bone, by holding it up in his face. Mr. Helme shook his head, and the prisoner turned round and made a noise with his mouth. Almost immediately after this he saw the prisoner striking at Mr. Helme, who called witness to him. Witness went up and told the prisoner he was doing wrong, taking hold of his arm at the same moment. The prisoner ins.antly struck him in the eye. Witness laid hold of him, and the prisoner again struck him in the face and kicked his legs. It required the help of five or six constables to convey the prisoner to the station, and on the way he caught hold of witness's thigh with his teeth, and drew blood. Mr. Helme confirmed the officer's statement. The pri soner, after he offered;witness the bone, used some filthy expres sions, which excited witness to push him away. The prisoner then made a regular attack upon him. Edward Coffee, police-constable No. 246, said he went to assist Finn, and was instantly struck in the face and kicked on the lower part of the body by the prisoner. The prisoner made a violent resistance all the way to the station-house. William Smith, anet her policeman, complained of a kick upon the thigh, which the prisoner intended for a more dan gerous part. Sergeant Dunglisson found the prisoner striking at and kick ing Finn and Coffee. As soon as the prisoner was overpowered his legs were strapped together, and he was carried to the sta. tion. On the way he complained that his arm was being hurt. The policeman let go his arm and he immediately bit Finn's thigh. At the station-house he promised to walk quietly into the cell if his legs were undone. The experiment was tried, and he made use of his liberty to kick witness's legs several times, and it was necessary to resort to force to get him into the cell. The prisoner was not drunk, but he was beat on doing as much injury to the police as he could. Mr. Nerapath, the hatter on Holborn-hill, bore testimony to the excessive violence of the prisoner, and his attempts to inflict a very painful injury by kicking. Mr. Alderman CHALLIS asked if this malice was superin duced by the conduct of the police towards hien ? Mr. Hera path declared it was not. He saw the whole of it, and he never saw men behave with more forbearance. Their conduct was exemplary. He had resided on the spot twenty years, and had witnessed many violent struggles, and he never saw one equal to this. He saw the prisoner make one unsuccessful effort to kick a policeman, which must have produced death if it had taken effect. Mr. Alderman CHALLIS said as be had not power to punish with sufficient severity such brutal conduct towards the police, he should commit the prisoner for trial at the next Old Bailey sessions, and should direct the City Solicitor to conduct the prosecution. The prisoner, who seemed to have counted •n a month's im prisonment as the extent of punishment to which he could be subjected for ill-using a policeman, fell into a fit when he found he was actually to be committed to Newgate fur the offence. The depositions were taken, and he was committed for trial. BOW-STREET. Yesterday Mr. Jardine was detained a considerable time be yond the usual hours of business in hearing the multifarious details against a Mr. and Mrs. Caudle, who were brought be fore his worship for quarrelling and creating an obstruction in Brydges-street, Strand, at the unseasonable hour of two o'clock on Saturday morning last. The case had been deferred until now, at the request of Mr. Caudle, who attended on Monday with a certificate from Mrs. Caudle's medical attendant, alleging that she was suffering from a sort of mental derangement brought on by excessive irri tability. On this occasion Mr. Caudle ventured in his wife's absence, to inform his worship that his good lady " was not always an angel ;" and the proceedings of yesterday afforded a pretty conclusive demonstration of the fact. Long before the case came on Mrs. Caudle was heard haranguing her unfortunate partner in the waiting-rodm at tached to the court, it having been found impossible to keep her quiet. On entering the dock she indignantly ordered th e gaoler not to lay his hands upon her, and, before any witness had been examined, called upon the magistrate for permission to address the Court. It was quite amusing to observe the submissive but useless entreaties of Mr. Caudle to Mrs. Caudle, during the inquiry, to keep the latter calm. A constable of the F division stated that he saw Mrs. Caudle, surrounded by several others, opposite a public-house, having word's with her husband, and, on interfering, to prevent an obstruction of the way, she behaved with such violence towards him that he was compelled, with the assiAance of , another policeman, to conduct her to the Bow-street station. The charge against Mr. Caudle was for interfering on her behalf. MARRIED. 13',A On the 17th inst., at St. Saviour's, Southwark , .""' elm" Jackson, of High-street, Borough, to Elizabet h, daughter of Mr. S. B. Gaze, of Spitalfields. o be r ..r t", On the 19th inst., at St. John's, Fulham, Jamesi!„,r Esq., of Blockley, Worcestershire, to Eliza, eldes t ""- of the late D. Shuter, Esq., of Shuter's-terrace, On the 21st last., at St. James's Church, Ci erk fire, iv Oliver Byrne, Esq., of Wharton-street, PentouvlOotr. Eleanor, youngest daughter of John Rugg, Esq., ° f place, Maidstone. . ....--- DIED. hter ofg P On the 14th inst., Caroline, the youngest daug t o Cubitt, of Clapham-park. Oti es ' On G the 16th inst., Mr. James Flint, of her are' Customs. olden'sclu On the 18th inst., at Lower John-street, - leg Miss Elizabeth Parker, aged 82. M r On the 18th inst., at • Kingsfield, Southampton, o, Pilgrim, Esq., aged 80. Se a On the 18th inst., at Maidstone, Mr. Thnni as f y, surgeon, aged 29. , o' o On the 19th inst., at Upper Albany-street, De6 ,-11 I , trot ° , H. T. Greening, eldest child of H. Greening, Esq* ; , t i ~ .- d , 0. On the 20th inst., at the British and Forne`Dsfor George •street, Hanover-square, William BeslaY m Swindon, Wiltshire. 1 yOu London : and Publishod by ATURDO So. o• No. 112, Strao,', Printer, at The Sun Oflic e 'iloalw Strand. in the Preciiot of the Savor, in the Bliddlelex, Wedneaday, July 23, 1843. Noe/ AMM=.• , Mr. Caudle was here about to say a word, but was instan t stopped by Mrs. Caudle, who desired him to rema in ail! r,..; Mr. Caudle gave way, and his wife commenced , in sp ite of llt',o interference of the magistrate, who repeatedly told her that " case for the complainant was not finished. Mrs. Caudle—But I insist on speaking before Mr. Catit tle ' your Worship. The constable said that Mrs. Candle seemed tipsy. A Mrs. Caudle—Tipsy ! Gracious Heavens ! Sir, I most respectable woman, and Mr. Caudle has been a most ro• spectable man. It is true he now holds a humble situatislit but there was a time when he would have spurned it. Mr. Caudle—Never mind that now. Sirs Mrs. Caudle—Now I beg you will not interrupt me, Please your Worship, I have suffered much, very much , of 13 e ' from our reduced position, and on Friday night I went into Brydges-street, to see if Mr. Caudle wasn't coming hoti-': when I heard a woman ask him for half-a-crown that he o'6l her ; yes, Sir, half-a-crown, and is that a respectable thing' r a married man to be found out in doing? Mr. Caudle again interfered. Mrs. Caudle—Ah, you may well be ashamed of it. We ll ' your Worship, of course I was •.•xcited, and I told the woo ° that she ought to be ashamed of herself ; and as a respectsb's, married woman who had been well brought up, being nowt the present time under the doctor's hands, I told Mr. Cauo" my mind, as I have a right to, and always will, your Wersb i % And what right Nte the police to interfere between man wife ? Mr. Caudle—That's en ough, my dear. Mrs. Candle—Enough, indee,d ; of course it is, as you aIAaH say before I have spoken a word. But I never insult any 0 1 your Worship, as Mr. Caudle know.'. and, therefore, I can bear an insult. But,your Worship, kr. Caudle may speak 0; Mr. Caudle observed that, hearing a voice which be Joe to be his wife's, he merely went out to see what was the matte'. Mr. JARDINE—Are the defendants known? Mrs. COO —I should think we were, Sir, and if you will allow mQ t° speak, I Mr. JARDINE—Do be quiet, woman. 't Mrs. eau - Ile—Very well, Sir, I will be quiet. As you won let me speak, of course I wcut i t. But this I will say Mr. Boustead, the clerk—Will you listen to the magistratla Here some respectably-dressed people deposed as t peaceable disposition of Mr. Caudle and the respectability ° Mrs. Caudle, who, it was stated, suffered from sztr e l irritability, and Mrs. Caudle requested her husband to sh t ° the Court a quantity of hair which she had pulled from D e head that very day. Mr. .I.lltrarric said that, however respectable Mrs. Ca udie t might be, she was evidently an inveterate talker and a 1 11°1 violent woman. Mrs. Caudle—A violent woman I Mr. Boustead—Don't interrupt the magistrate. Mr., JARDINE, after some further remarks, fined Caudle 3/. for assaulting the police and creating a disturban'" His Worship fined the husband 11. Mrs. Caudle was then, with some difficulty, removed - 61) 0 1 the dock, declaring that she would destroy herself in g.ll, ol, „ a d i o thus terminate her wretched existence. She wished _,L' a ;b f good by, for ever, and dared him to pay the fine, and tuer frustrate her intentions, at his peril. LAMBETH. tef. Yesterday, Thomas Eaton, foreman carpenter at AS-; I i t , Theatre, was charged before Mr. Henry with violently aSsa u ing John Springett. From the evidence it appeared that the complainant e! prisoner were employed at Astley's Theatre, the latter t ; foreman, and the former as journeyman carpenter, and Pi.r in consequence of some words between them the pri son °, threatened to discharge the complainant. The latter, on priso n s threat being made, said he would leave the establishmen t honest man, and that was more than he (Eaton) could ss,; upon which some further observations were made, all of Ab p , Mr. Batty by mere accident heard, and called on the O; plainant for an explanation. The complainant disclosed tp or malpractices by the foreman, and Mr. Batty, after some inquiry into the matter, discharged both. He, hoW e li; subsequently sent for Springett, and again took him ino„ e r employment. On Monday night the brother of the prio,"o. Eaton grossly insulted Springett at the. theatre, and whil e t ; e o gaged there, it was arranged that, at the end of the act t e going on, they should have a set-to in the street to settle f or matter. Springett left the theatre at tie fall of the curtain bs the purpose, but instead of meeting his intended opponen t, was attacked in a violent manner by his brother, the g. b a soncr, who dealt him out very serious punishment. :0 prisoner get away after committing the assault, but one of , 01 , actors at the theatre, observing the violence of his attack , to lowed and gave him into the custody of a policeman. 00 tPO, (yesterday) morning the prisoner offered to give the 0 0 0 plainant '2l. 10s., observing, at the same time, that the ti t n o s the magistrate could do would be to fine him 5/., and that _, of this would go into the complainant's pocket, and that the fore he had better take the 2/. 10s. t'lp ate Mr. HENRY remarked that the prisoner seemed to es ve d pretty clearly the amount of penalty which his offence e a b il 'or. He, Mr. Henry, was glad that the amoucit offered 0 , not been accepted by the complainant, as by hi. 4 own sh° o ing he had allowed dishonest practices to be carried on in cl ic theatre a week before saying anything about it, t o e was not, in fact, until he had quarrelled with the Rir that his employer, Mr. Batty, heard anything about iw o p. then convicted the prisoner in the penalty of 2/. 103., or month's imprisonment. The Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings Ray ' 1 ,1,4 (Hastings; Rye, and Ashford Extension) Bill was read a ! yi ,t, time and passed, in the House of Commons, on Monday ° l ° The demise of Earl Grey and Viscount Canterbu ry' causes two vacancies in the governorship of the Charterhous e- M. THIERS'S HISTORY OF THE CONSULATE 1 0 0, EMPIRE or FRANCE. Translated by D. Forbes Carne Esq., with the sanction and approval of the Author. V ie Iv requested to state that Mr. Colburn, of Great Marlborotgo street, has this day published the Fourth volume of the 6t f o n work, which can now be had of all booksellers. Mr. C olb , has also just published the following interesting New Wor i libi 2. Memoirs of Lady Hester Stanhope, with Anecdotes olio Most Remarkable Persona of her Times, 3 vole.--- 3 ' Second Volume of the Histcry of Our Own Times, by 0, author of Frederick the Great-4. The English Gentleworool, or Hints to Young Ladies on their Entrance into Society' Ibex' —5. The Third Volume of the Nelson Letters and Dialo te —6. Memoirs of Sophia Dorothea, Consort of George 1 11. or eluding her Diary, 2 vols.-7. A Second Edition of SPI; O 3 the Two Nations, by B. Disraeli, Esq., M.P., 3 veig',:ithe 8. The Eighth Volume of Miss St r i c kl an d' s Lives Z'oe Queens of England, comprising Henrietta Maria and Cat. — DT - 0 of Braganca, Consorts of Charles I. and 11. 4 1/$, TIIE NEW ROMANCE OF " THE WHITE o r,. the authorship of which still continues a pro f oun d s ecrectt i ll e o f as might have been anticipated, found a very wide e ire readers; for its pages teem with amusement and inst rue l o of the most vivid and exciting description—witness the S c te t at the Opera, with which the volumes open—the encntol.e between the mysterious hero and the Russian noble--tb e personation of the Grand Duke Constantine, with his inbiejtb, ante of insane furor—the stern enthusiast of the 01 d t be Ivan Petrovitch, who dies under the knout—the lassoing °' s o Russian soldier by the Circassian chief—and the old Blot peasant telling Weirdwolf stories to his children. In I i f o is evidenced the hand of the master—the true genius, the %ill perception, which cannot but rivet the reader's attention 11 . . _ the close of the story. fie ADVERTISEMENT. Deafness. 39, Albenr o ie street, Piccadilly.—Acoustic Instruments.—lnvisible o s', Conductors, when fixed in the cavity of the ears, are no t c e, comfortable, nor more perceptible than having a small P t a ger wool in its place. They enable individuals at an advance' p ill and of extreme deafness of 40 and 50 years' standing, of* to join in general conversation, and to catch the solo t he distant low speaker at church, theatre, &c. They e ir o oll conversation into the ears to such an extent that tu e ;iev severe cases of deafness cannot be observed. Also, I r il a th Ear Cornets, French, Germ an , an d S pan i s h Artificialpsi and Improved Hearing Trumpets of every description. f tba of these instruments h ave rece i ve d t h e appro b a tion ° Ti e Royal Society and Royal Institution of Great &Rail:W l / 0 1 newly-invented Spectacles, immediately they are placed extremely imperfect vision, it is brought to its youthful, "'b i er? and original state. Also, Achromatic Telescopes , s o le Glasses, Microscopes, &c. Caution—Messrs. S. and D. pr P mocs, Opticians, are net in any way connected with a P'apt a of the same name in their immediate neighbourhood, W l ' ae part of the country. To prevent mistakes, be cantle:l;OP Observe—Only to be had at 39, Albemarle-street, PV opposite the York Hotel. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—BOTANIC WATER AN-1 4 O W U ( GREASE.—When the hair is becoming thin, and it a t io the only effectual remedy, besides shaving the head , of the two above-named articles, applied alterna'el — :„ m olite„,' tanic water to cleanse the roots from scurf and as a s " -- ;des'i and the bear's grease as a nourisher. If a-Y was required of the virtues of bear's greve for renovat. l .° 6 o A preserving the hair, Mr. Catlin's acco;mt of the quantitYe, and the length of hair obtained by itime of the North. further ee• o r O nlr rican Indians, would be a sufficiot answer. Ross an d ,0 119, and 120, Bishopsgate-streec, who first introduced p si' of bear's grease in this country, and who fat and kill the mals, recommend the public to purchase none other but ," their names and address printed on the pot, or the th an ked their obtaining a spurious article. All vegetable oils aPP the hair are worse than useless. , Tyvft' [ADVERTISEMENT.] —BAD HEALTH FOR 1 YEARS.—IMMEDIATE RELIEF BY HOLLOWAY'S t o 1/-n Extract of a Letter from the Rev. George Prior , / Mevagh, Letterkenny, Carrygart, Ireland, May 2, l',. " To Professor Holloway.—Dear Sir,—Within a shor t o o tance of my house resides a small former, who, for motet gol twenty years, had been in a bad state of health, and p ace )" but a moment's relief. Mrs. Prior procured a bo x h id Pills for him, which did him so much good, that I hear d t o say that for twenty years previously he never ate his foo d enjoyed it so much as since taking your Pills. Signed , Prior." Sold at Professor Holloway's Establishme m '':tl ie Strand, and by almost all who sell medicines throug holl " civilised world. BIRTHS. , of the DOn the 18th inst., the lady of Robert Green, K' , 1 4 Court-yard, Eltham, Kent, of a daughter. Ao . ls" On the 18th inst., at Walpole House, Chiswick, '" e, of John Wilson Allen, Esq., of a son. ,r O O , On the 19th inst., in Tilney-street, Lady Caroline ley, of a son, sti 11-born. 511fi CI On the 19th inst., at Sevenoaks, Mrs. J. Wright, of tt, IA On the 19th inst., at Huntley Hall, near Cheadl e, tu " of G. Mather, Esq., of a daughter. On the 20th inst., at Grove Cottage, Bow - r °9 ' cl ' l'ffr e . Lewis Worms, of a daughter. 4 - teg li On the 20th inst., Mrs. Samuel Fisher, of MI/ , s . place, Clapham-road, of a son. ,-. eg e t # On the 21st inst., at the Philanthropic Society, St. , J e ., ol fields, the lady of the Rev. S. Turner, resident chap 131 ' daughter. et, tV On the 21st inst., in Guildford. street, Russell - gl n " wife of John Casley, Esq , of a daughter. / I