The Sun. — London, England, 1836-08-16 00:00:00

Resolved, that this House (loth agree to a Free Conference, as is desired by their Lordships :—Messengers called in and acquainted. Ordered, That the Managers who managed the last Free Conference do manage this. Then the names of the managers were called over ; and some of them not appearing, Mr. Hume. Mr. Ewart, Mr. Warbur ton, Mr. Cutler Fergusson, and Mr. Loch were added in lieu of those who did not appear. Then the Managers went to the Conference; and being re turned, Lord John Russell reported, that the Managers had met the Lords at the Free Conference, which was managed on the part tethe L or d s by the Rarl of Ripon, who acquainted them that e Lords adhere to their Amendment in Press 5, line 25 ; because the Municipal Corporations Act not having provided that a f resh election should take place in the event of an equa lity of votes, the Lords consider that it would be in accord ance with the principle of that Act which this Bill is intended to amend, to meet the difficulty arising from an equality of of votes in the manner in which it is met under the provisions of that Act, namely, by the casting vote of the person presid ing at the election. That the Lords likewise adhere to the insertion of Clause (L) ; because they are of opinion that the inconvenience aris ing from the placing of the Charitable Trusts under the ma nagement of the Lord Chancellor would be much greater than that of allowing them to remain until the end of the next Ses sion, or until Parliament shall otherwise provide, in the hands of the persons in whom both Houses of Parliament concurred in continuing them by the Act of last year. • That the Lords observe that it has not appeared that any practical injury has arisen from the disposition with respect to these Trusts made with the concurrence of both Houses in the course of the last Session, but thy Lords arc nevertheless anxiously desirous that the management of these Charitable Funds should be placed upon a permanent and satisfactory footing, whereby the administration of Charities intended for the benefit of the poor, might, as far as possible, be divested of all party influence. That thereupon a discussion arose between the Managers on the part of the Commons, and the Managers on the part of the Lords ; and that the Managers on the part of the Lords thereupon delivered back the Bill and Amendments to the Managers of the Commons. Ordered, That the said Amendments be taken into further co nsideration upon this day three months. SECOND CONFERENCE. Earl of RIPON—The Lords adhere to their Amendments iii press 5, line 25, because the Municipal Corporations Act not having provided that a fresh election should take place in the event of an equality of votes, the Lords consider that it W ould, be in accor d ance w i t h t h e pr i nc i p l e o f that Act, wh i ch ,the Bill i s i n t en d e d t o amen d, to meet t h e d i f fi culty arising 'roman equality of votes in the manner in which it is met under the provisions of that Act, nam e ly, by th e cas ti ng vo t e of th e person presiding at the election. The Lords likewise adhere to the insertion of clause (L,) hecause th e y are o f op i n i on t h at t h e i nconvenience arising, from the placing of the Charitable Trusts under the manage- Inent of the Lord Chancellor, would be much greater than that of allowing them to remain until the end of the next Session, or until Parliament shall otherwise provide, in the hands of the persons in whom both Houses of Parliament have c oncurred in continuing them by the Act of last year. The Lords observe, that it has not appeared that any practical in jury has arisen from the disposition, with respect to those trusts, made with the concurrence of both Houses in the course of last Session ; but the Lords are nevertheless anxi ously desirous that the management of these charitable funds should be placed upon a permanent and satisfactory footing, Whereby the administration of charities intended for the benefit of the poor might be put, as far as possible be divested of all Party influence. • Lord JOHN RUSSELL—The Commons have not in structed their Managers to yield on the point of disagreement from these Clauses. With respect to the Amendment that has been made in press 5 , line 25, the Commons are of opinion that a provision for s ome method of election would be more conformable to the spirit of the Municipal Corporations Act than the provision Which is introduced by the House of Lords. Upon that point, however, the Managers would have been willing to refer again to the House of Commons, in the anxious hope that by yielding some of their opinions the Commons might come to a satisfactory adjustment ; and enable Parliament to carry • into effect a Bill which provides for the amend. Ment of many defects in the Municipal Corporations Act, and which was intended to prevent serious inconveniences, arising fr om the failure of some of the provisions in the Municipal Corporations Act with respect to particular places. But, with respect to the insertion of clause ( L), the Com mons undoubtedly hoped that the clause would not be thought necessary by the Lords in a Bill for the Amendment of the • Corporation Act. It does not scorn that the Clause in the Corporation Act on this subject absolutely required amend ment, and the provision of the Lords is not to amend or supply any defect in that clause, but for its continuance to another Year• Such a prov i s i on, w h et h er expe di ent or i nexpe di ent, does not seem to be necessary or essential in a Bill for the Amendment of the Municipal Corporations Act, and at the of the clause which now stands in the Act of Parliament, d;▪ : isi °n is made for the direction by orders of the Lord 4ncellor, with respect to the administration of charitable . 3 11 4 8 t5, the re b y implying that Parliament had satisfied itself 1t sufficient provision was made even if the Ist of August 83 6 sh ou ld arr i ve w i thout any further measure being adopted Y Parliament for the permanent administration of those trusts. that there is anything at all convenient, or indeed harmless in the continu ance o f t h ose trusts i n t h e present ho l ders for ano tuer year, the Commons comm un i ca ti ng as th e y d o w ith th e i r co nstitue n t s in various parts of the country, are made daily aware of th e ser i ous i nconven i ences w hi c h fl ow f rom the per- Sion of of T rus t s i nten d e d f or t h e re li e f o f t h e poor, i ntended ' or the edu ca ti on o f t h e poor , i nten d e d f or t h e promotion of char ity, and the encouragement of learning, to the purposes of aiding and abetting the objects of political party, without re ference to the desires of those individuals who were their ori ginal founders, or the application which ought to be made of t hem at the present time. These serious ev il s, a ff ect i ng as t h ey d o t h e app li cation of t hose trusts, affecting as they do the morals and condition of the i nhabitants of the towns in which their trusts exist, the perman ent had hoped to re medy, by a Bill p rov idi ng f or t h e Pernlanent administration of those trusts. That Bill unfortu nately did no t meet w i t h t h e concurrence o f your L ordsh i ps, ' l 'd your Lordships did not enable the Commons to consider Ittt Y Amendments to that Bill, by which that permanent admi nistration might be provided for in a ma n n er diff eren t f rom tha t Propos e d b y t h e C ommons, an d yet secur i ng that adminis tration from the profligate and base purposes to which it has ucen often perverted. With this view therefore to clause (L), of the effects of • li tP hich the Commons are persuaded that your Lordships were c 't se well aware from, not being in such constant intercourse With the inhabitants of those towns as their representatives I t tr n4 e, ,the Commons cannot agree. They are of opinion, cer- CY, that much inconvenience may flow from the applica sto the Lord Chancellor, causing sometimes delay and toMetimes difficulty and dispute with respect to their future ad litistration. They are aware likewise that it may be that the t u nicipal Councils now elected by the Act of Parliament, hethem, after the cessation of the present trustees those trusts thentirely devolve ; and the Commons therefore feel that e re will be greater difficulty by deferring legislation to alio kusr year, in providing that those trusts shall be permanently _ept out of the hands of persons who, being busily engaged in tntical contests either on the one side or the other, would w ish to make a political engine of those trusts. ss T he Com mons were anx i ous to provide for them in such a :gannes that they should not be liable to such abuse. Accord soing to the clause which is now under consideration they think me he y would be liable to misapplication for another year, in the places to a very injurious and extensive degree. Under (1 ` e direction of the Lord Chancellor they hope that, whatever ss el aYS may occur, there is at least a better chance that orders t 7 . l l _Y be given for their due administration than could have t "'en place if had agreed to the clause now under considera -111". The Commons therefore will be deeply disappointed at Clause from the Bill, and I cannot but still express, in the name or.the Managers of the Commons, their hope, that your Lord sniPs may be instructed with respect to that part of the Bill, at l east to conic to some accommodation on a point ou which the k'orrinrions are very earnestly bent. It is the anxious wish of the Commons to continue on a good tgilerstanding, with the Lords, and I should hope that this HO l may not he the cause either of throwino• blame on the one House of Parliament or on the other, but that the end may be "arliament may be enabled to enact this useful law, pro aanisrfor the remedy of many injurious . de . fects Aithout the mission of a clause which, in their opinion, was originally insert si it e es. without necessity, and which they think would - be, in people nsequences, most hurtful to the community and to the L whom they represent. desir ous LYND HUR ST.—The Lords are, and ever must be, zolrous of maintaining a good understanding with the Com sidS:' They would, upon a point which they did not con be s_ol essential importance to the interests of the country, they aisposed to accede to the wishes of the Commons; but n h ave maturely considered this question, and find it im po4ibie to • into the vvay with respect to it. s Th^ clause introduced , bill, in the last Session of Parliament, was so intro . :Irelliaenac;enle tu w r i e th a desire of affording an opportunity to both Houses a Bill for the purpose of the final and permanent fortu nt of this most delicate and difficult subject. lin the in at ely, however the two Houses have not agreed as to fore, e . asur e to be adopted. The Lords have thought, there ulen. of they were acting in accordance with the arranges ftthe last Session, 'in introducing this clause, and pro fs '_J r ng hat th e time should be extended for another Session, •4 o (ler to afford •an opportunity for maturing a measure so itantidpotrbstaitit to th e i nterests of the public. It is with this view. i nsert view only, that they have thought it their duty to to be he strinctelonfo the clause for extending the time; they consider this rmity with the principle already adopted, and to stallees y !in have rendered necessary by the circum which have since occurred. It hascharacterbeen suggested that the parties now invested with the part of :)f trustees have misconducted themselves. On the eppoilit d th e Lords, I beg to sate, that those persons were • both ir e by the Act, and must be considered as selected by e I--oaseso of Parliament —both Houses of Parliament as d.t their nomination. The Lords arc not aware, from duals"▪ o evidence which has been laid before them, nor has the re f the in qu i r i es which they have made, that those ti the in the slighte s t d egree misconducted themselves L uc their appointment. If their sppointmen t was sanctioned Y the Lords arid Commons, it s ' is . ems necessary, before any 31 UNICIPAL CORPORATIONS ACT . reasonable objection can be urged against them, that the Lords AMENDMENT BILL. should be satisfied that since their appointment they have abused their trust. The Lords have no evidence of that description—they have inquired into the subject, and the re. cult has been, that no abuse has, since the passing of the Act of last Session, taken place. Indeed, it seems almost impos sible that any abuse should have occurred since that period. Those individuals were conscious that their conduct would be watched and be criticised by persons who had ample opportuni ties for that purpose, and who were not disposed to look upon them with a favourable eye. Under these circumstances, it is not at all probable that they should, even if so disposed, have at all misconducted themselves, as has been suggested. Arid the Lords beg further to observe, that no complaint has been made to the proper tribunals, calling in question any part of their conduct. This being so, and taking this as the basis of the reasoning, the question is to whether it would be better that these trus tees should be continued for another year better with refe rence to the interests of the charities, and with reference to the public interest that they should be continued another year, or that the Lord Chancellor should, in the manner pro vided by the Act, administer these trusts. On the part of the Lords, - I would suggest, with all deference to the Commons, that if the Chancellor is called upon to administer these trusts, it will produce great injury to the objects of the charity. The proceeding must be by a petition presented on behalf of these charities ; these petitions must be considered by the Chancellor; and if the object be to appoint new trustees, the matter must be referred to a Master, who will be required to report as to the persons proper to be appointed. After the Master has made his report, which may be the result of a long and perhaps an expensive inquiry, it must be submitted to the consideration of the Chancellor, the report may be ex cepted to, various inquiries may arise, and it may pos sibly be referred back ;gain for the re-consideration of the Master. The expense of all these proceedings must of course be paid out of the charity funds. Many of these charities are very small in amount, and the whole fund may be swallowed up in the expense of the proceedings. Under these circumstances it would be most injurious, first of all with reference to the time consumed and the delay which may take place ; and secondly, with reference to the expense which must be thrown upon the Charity funds, that this course of proceedings should be adopted. Considering these inconveniences, and that on the other band there is no ground for imputing misconduct to the pre sent trustees: the Lords consider that it will be far better to continue them for another year in the discharge of their duties, than to adopt the alternative insisted on by the Commons, and in the hope that both Houses of Parliament, by directing their attention anxiously to this difficult subject, may early in the next Session agree upon a measure permanent in its nature and beneficial in its character, calculated to obviate all objec tions, and to establish such a system as may provide for the satisfactory discharge of the duties incident to these important trusts. Mr. CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—My Lords, as one of the M a n agers f or t h e C ommons , I h ave listened with the respect due to any recommendation coming from your Lordships, to the observations which have been made by the Noble Lord who has just spoken ; but at the same time I cannot help thinking that many of those observa tions are inapplicable as applied in support of the determina tion expressed by your Lordships, and are inapplicable also as opposed to the reasons stated by the Commons. I cannot help thinking, my Lords, that if all these inconveniences sug gested by that Noble Lord are to result from the adjudication of the Court of Chancery upon these charities, that in that event the determination of both the Lords and Commons in the course of the last year in admitting that, as a possible al ternative, which now appears to the Noble Lord to be preg nant with evil, was a determination indefeasible in itself. We may admit the necessity of having last year continued the ex isting trustees as a temporary provision, but then the Legisla ture adopted as an alternative, in the event that a Parliamentary interference should take place, that the order of the Lord Chan cellor should be applicable to these trusts. By the Act of last Session it therefore appeared to your Lordships no less than to the House of Commons, that the controul of Chancery was an alternative that might be defended ; it therefore aepears to the Commons now that we cannot consent at once to connect with that alternative so adopted by your Lordships, all the evils and all the inconveniences which have been so strongly enforced upon our consideration. But another and a still stronger objection appears to apply to the argument of the noble Manager ; there is scarcely an argument which has been urged in defence of the course which the Managers for the Lords have defended which does not appear to us likely to be repeated, and capable of being repeated with equal force on all future occasions ; and if we were to acquiesce in these arguments, we should sanction a principle that might justify the Legislature in leaving perma nently, in the hands of the existing trustees, those funds which we contend they have abused ; because, my Lords, will it not be again contended, or may it not be contended, in a future session, and every future occasion, that the alternative of re- ' sorting to the orders of the Court of Chancery is in itself so open to objection, so pregnant with inconvenience, that we shall be again and again induced as a lesser evil, to continue in the hands of the existing trustees those funds which they have abused. My Lords, with all due respect, and all submission to the arguments which have been urged, and by those who have preceded me, I take the liberty of urging upon your Lord ships' consideration, that it w ou ld no t be just to confine the argument within the limits that have been stated by the Noble Lord. It might have been expedient in 1835, notwithstand ing it was proved that previous abuse existed, to continue the existing trusts unaltered for one year, in the earnest expecta tion that your Lordships might have been induced to unite with the Commons in providing, during the present Session, an improved system of management for those charitable trusts. It might have been expedient to continue it, avowedly as a temporary arrangement fer one year, passing by the previous misconduct of some of those trustees; it might have been jus tifiable to continue it under these circumstances. It may pos sibly be admitted that there is not evidence before your Lord ships of misconduct within the present year; but if there was evidence of previous misconduct, and if the argument now advanced not only goes to the continuance for a year, but admits a principle that would go the extent of the permanent continuance of those trustees, then we appeal not to their conduct during the last year, but to the whole of their conduct, as exhibited to Parliament • and we further stat e , that we are disposed to believe, that there is inherent in the Courts of Justice of this land, a sufficient remedy for the ob ject; that the:first equity tribunal is not so deficient of power, that it is not so devoid of authority, but that in the adminis tration of its functions, under the Act of Parliament which commits these trusts to its care, we shall still see, through the medium of that Court of Equity, a remedy for some of the abuses which have been pointed out ; and, my Lords, we had rather taken even our chance of that remedy being inade quate, than put the solemn seal of the Legislature of this country to the continuance, if not the perpetuation of a system which we know, by evidence upon which we rely, the evidence on which the Bill, of which this is an amendment, was itself founded, the evidence taken before the Royal Com mission to be a system open to just animadversion; we prefer running the chance that the remedy afforded by the Court of Chancery may not perhaps be cheap enough, possibly not being expeditious enough, we prefer even the inadequacy of that remedy, to giving the authority of the Legislature to the revival of a system which we believe to have been corrupt, to have been partial, and to have led to the grossest misapplica tion of charity funds. Lord L YNDHUR ST.—Allow me to say, with reference to what has fallen from the Hon. Manager, that, as far as re lates to those individuals who are now trustees, I do not recol lect that there is any evidence, and none such has been pointed out of their having been guilty of misconduct at any former period. Mr. HUME.—My Lords, on behalf of the Commons I beg leave to call your Lordships' attention to what the Noble Lord has not adverted to, and bearing exactly on the speech of the Noble Lord. We, as representatives of the Commons, presume we arc better acquainted with the feelings and the opinions of our constituents, than your Lordships are. We have, as the Noble Lord has stated, frequent communication with them, and in agreeing to the Bill of last year, changed and altered as it was, we had perfect confidence that, as re garded the charities, the clause in the Bill held out fairly and confidently the hope, that in the course of this year measures would be taken by Parliament to place the trusts in other and more trustworthy hands. We contemplated that the Bill of last Session would give confidence to the Municipal Commu nities, and encourage a perfect reliance on the part of the various communities, in the future improved administration of those trusts ; and when your Lordships are aware that, by the elections which have since taken place in these Corporations, a complete change has been made in the greater portion of those magistrates and councillors who were in office at that time. I think that the Noble and Learned Lord is not borne out in stating that the appointment of those charitable trustees was sanctioned by the House of Commons—sanctioned they undoubtedly were, as far as the Bill went ; but, I believe, the House of Commons, in concurring in that temporary provi sion, had a perfect confidence that, in the course of this year, provision would be made by Parliament to alter the adminis tration of these trusts, and place them on a permanent footing. The enactment of that temporary provision we presumed to think would give confidence and satisfaction to the people. But I can state to your Lordships, that the allowing the trusts to remain in the hands in which they have been even for one year, has given any thing but satisfaction to a large portion of the community. I should say, with scarcely an exception, that the new Municipal Corporations are not satisfied or con tented with the hands in which the trusts have been left ; and if the Noble Lord has not heard any complaints made against the administration of those trusts during the past year, lie will allow me to say that those complaints, in many cases, have not been made, only because the people saw, by the provisions of the Bill of last Session, a termination to those trusts, and they thought, in many i ns t ances , i n some o f w hi c h I h ave myself been consulted, that it was much better to put up for that limited time with the existing evils which they felt, and the removal of which they had a right to urge, rather than come forward and make complaints. On these grounds, therefore, my Lords, we contend that the argument of the Noble Lord, as regards no complaints being made, will not hold good; the communities depended on the pledge given, and had perfect confidence that these matters would be pro perly considered and decided on in this Session. Your Lordships have thought proper to reject the provi sions for that settlement which were made by the Commons in a Bill sent up to your Lordships, and the alternative now is, whether it is better too allow the trusts to remain in hands the of the commun iti es i n whichwhich do tley n o r t esi e d r e jo , Y o . r t c h o e n t fi r d u e s n t s e eshould pass, as determined by the Bill of last Session, to the management of the Lord Chancellor. I undoubtedly am not aware of the various diffi culties which may arise in the administration of these trusts by the Lord Chancellor, such as the Noble Lord has pointed out; but to my intelligence in reading the Bill, I do not, at any THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 1536. porations. are exactly in the same situation as the corporations would have been in if a new charter had been granted to them by the • Crown. All that the corporations were seised and possessed of before, they still continue t o b e se i se d an d pos sessed of, where there is no Legislative enact ment t o t h e contrary. Then, w h en - th e I st of ugust arrived, this 71st section ceased to have any operation, and all those estates which were before in individuals who were the members of the old corporations, I humbly submit to your Lordships, were vested in the new corporations, and the town councils all over England Wales would become charity trustees. Your object, therefore, would be entirely defeated; you would thus thus mix up what your Lordships have been so anxious to keep separate—namely, the municipal funds, with the funds belonging to the charities. But, my Lords, there is another difficulty in the clause as it now stands, because your Lordships would not only continue this power in the persons seized and possessed of them, as trustees, at the time when the Act passes, but, along with them, your Lordships would point out that those trustees who have been approved by the Lord Chancellor, or who may be approved by the Lord Chancellor, should be co-trustees, and should have co-ordinate power. I humbly suggest to your Lordships' consideration whether this would not lead to very great confusion and litigation. The clause would admit of various constructions ; no one would be able to tell in whom the legal estate was, who were the trustees who would have the power, who would be responsible, and who must be con sidered the ad m i n i s t ra t ors of thes e charities. I must likewise point out another consideration for your Lordships before I conclude, namely, that even if this clause were adopted, by the proviso at the conclusion of the 71st sec tion, which is not repealed, the Lord Chancellor would still have the power of making any orders with regard to the re gulation of the Charities. I very respectfully submit to your Lordships, therefore, that even your own object would be defeated if the Commons were to agree to this clause, and that from its vagueness and uncertai n ty it wou ld l eap to the most serious mischiefs. Upon the whole, we trust that your Lordships will not insist upon this clause, so that a Bill, which was anxiously framed to raise no point on which there was a difference of opinion between the two Houses—a Bill admitted on all hands to contain provisions of the greatest importance— may not be lost to the public. Lord ABlNGER—Gentlemen of the House of Commons, I prop' to trouble you w ith a very f ew words, wh i ch shall be confin ntirely to the argument which has been just ad dressed by the Learned Gentleman who spoke last. It the clause would be so inoperative as that Learned Gentleman has represented, it seems to me that we are debating upon a sub ject which is not worth a debate. If the clause would have the effect of transferring the power and the property in these cha ritable funds in the municipal Corporations as they now exist, which appears to be the opinion of that Learned Gentleman, then undoubtedly that would not meet the view of the House of Lords ; but I apprehend no such consequence. lam well aware of the position in which both Houses are placed by the Bill having been detained in the House of Commons until after the Ist of August expired. This Bill was the subject of consideration in the House of Lords in the month of May, and, if I am not mistaken, in the early part of June it went down to the House of Commons ; certainly the House of Lords did not contemplate at that time that the 13111 would not have been brought back before the Ist of August. But, nevertheless, the observations made by the Learned Gentleman have not escaped the attention of the Lords. I cannot concur with him in the opinion that the trust estates would be transferred either in law or actually to the new Cor porations. The words of the clause he will find are, " those who are possessed of the moneys, and were seised of the estates at the time of the passing of the Act." Now who possessed the moneys, and were seised of the estates ? If the money is in their hands they are possessed of it. They can be pos sessed or.seised in no other capacity but that of trustees, for though their power of administration may have expired on the Ist of August, yet the possession or seisin which they retain, could not be on their own account, but must be on account of the objects of the charity. And the result of the clause which has been commented upon would only be that when this clause passed those powers would be confided to those persons. The clause would act upon their possession and upon their seisin in the same manner as if they had been possessed or seised in ;rust after the expiration of the Ist of August. With respect to the observations on the first amendment, I understand the argument of the Learned Gentleman, it is this :—That there has been an apprehension entertained that by allowing a lot to be drawn for the presiding officer, and giving the presiding officer so drawn by lot the casting vote, you expose the Corp@ration to the risk of being either in the power of one party or the other. That is the supposition, that is the evil apprehended as the result of this clause, if it be an evil. If there be a contest between two parties equally divided, at least there is fair chance between the two. But how is the evil avoided, by referring the election to the bur gesses ? In the case put of Rochester, by way of example, the number of persons elected being equal, it is fair to suppose that the burgesses will be nearly equally divided. But sup pose they are not; if the electors preponderate on the one side or the other, the effect will be to throw the whole Cor poration into one party, which is the very result that the Learned Gentleman proposes in his argument as an objection to the clause as it stands. Therefore I do not see that there is anything gained in that respect, by its being transferred to the burgesses at large. But he has not adverted to that which was the substantial principle of the first Bill, which was to throw the election of the Town Council into the burgesses at large, by distributing them into wards, but not to permit the election of the alder men or the election of the mayor to be popular. It has hap pened, unfortunately, by the cases not being provided for, that in a few cases, in consequence of the equality of the Town Councillors, the election of the mayor has not been accomplished. Then is not it more consistent with the Mu nicipal Corporations Bill that the election should be conducted by the Town Councillors, es that Bill intended it to be, than to transfer it to the burgesses, which was opp ose d, an d suc cessfully opposed, by the House of Lords on the former occa sion ? We, therefore, think that it would be contrary to the burgesses principle ofthe l to interfere i Bill, as as i n the p h t eealses election ed bo th f Houses, the mayorto allow the ref the aldermen. And the only other expedient was that which has been adopted by this clause, to allow the election to be con. ducted as the original Bill intended it to be conducted, but to provide for the case of an equality of votes, and, adopting a provision from a part of the same Bill, the Chairman was allowed to have a casting vote, as lie is to have in all future elections. One other remark I wish to add, and it is this :—Upon the subject of the trusts, the Learned Gentleman who has just spoken appears to think that some compact existed be tween the two Houses upon the subject of the 71st clause. I cannot see myself that there is any force in that argument, because every clause is as much the subject of compact as that particular clause, and the argument, therefore, that the com pact should not be violated by making the matter of the clause the subject or legislation again, in the sense in which he takes it, would be an argument equally against all the amendments which are not under consideration, and against the whole Bill. Lord Viscount HO WICK—I would take the liberty of re marking that what has just been said by the Noble and Learned Lord with respect to the legdl construction of the clause (L), inserted by your Lordships' House, appears rather to confirm than to answer the argument urged on the part of the Commons ; that argument being that there would be so much doubt and difficulty as to the real meaning and con. struction of the clause that its adoption would not diminish, but, on the contrary, tend to increase, that litigation and con sequent expense which your Lordships hold would be one of the principal inconveniences resulting from the emission of that clause. But, my Lords, there is one point connected with this ques tion which does not appear to me to have been adverted to in the observations which have been made on the part of your • Lordships. Many reasous have been stated, showing the • grounds upon which your Lordships have formed the opinion that it would be highly inexpedient to leave the administration of the charitable trusts in corporate towns in the state in which they would be left if this clause should not be inserted in the Bill. Your Lordships hold that this inconvenience would be greater than that which the Commons, on their part, think would result from allowing the management of the charities to continue in the hands of those whose administration has for a series of years given such universal and such just dissatis faction. But your Lordships have not adverted to this fact, that the-consequence of this clause being insisted upon by your Lordships while the Commons have felt that, in the dis charge of their duty, they cannot concur in it, will be to leave the administration of these trusts precisely in that state in which it would be in the Bill, with the oalission of that clause were to pass into a law. The Bill for the amendment of the Municipal Act of last year contains many other very important provisions —provisions for obviating very great difficulty, litigation, and expense— which must, without, be occasioned in many of those towns : and also some valuable clauses with respect to the administra tion of justice, and the management of prisons, and the dis cipline to be observed in them, which your Lordships' House introduced into the Bill. With respect to all these provisions both Houses are agreed that they would be highly useful and advantageous to the inhabitants of the corporate towns in England. But then your Lordships are of opinion that this clause (L) should be introduced. The Commons, in their duty, feel that they are not at liberty to assent to it ; and the consequence of the disagreement upon that point is, according to the view hitherto taken by your Lordships, to be, that the improvements which would be effected by the other clauses of the Bill are to be abandoned and thrown away, because the Commons cannot, as they think, properly consent to what your Lordships require upon this point. It appears to me that your Lordships cannot have given full consideration to the question viewed in this light; for it is certainly impossible that your Lordships can wish to take a course which will bu open to misrepresentation, and which will be liable to be misunderstood by the inhabitants of the towns interested in the passing of this Bill, as intended to visit and mulct them vindictively, because their representatives hare not been able to agree to the propriety of clause (L.) It may be understood by the inhabitants of these towns as a refusal on the part of your Lordships to agree to admit im provements an d regulat i ons of acknowledged utility and ad vantage to all parties, because upon another point the House of Commons does not feel at liberty to concur with the Lords, although this refusal will not prevent the a dministration of charitabl e trusts from remaining precisely in the same state as it otherwise would. The question being, whether this Bill shall pass without that clause, or whether the Bill shall fail altogether, your Lordships h ave thought proper to insist that t h e Bill shall fail altogether; and upon this point I would take the liberty of observing, that if you would concur with the House of Commons in adopting these improvements, on which both Houses are agreed, it would be perfectly open to your Lo r d s hi ps to introduce any measure in your discretion for making such temporary provision for the administration of charitable trusts as in your Lordships' judgment might appear best calculated to attain that object. This one consideration appeared to me not to have been adverted to by your Lordships; and I therefore thought it right to mention it; for whichever opi nion may prevail as to the propriety or the impropriety of the introduction of this . clause, it appears to me that all must at least concur in this, that it would be much to be lamented that on account of this unfortunate disagreement the other provisions of the Bill should be lost. Lord J. RUSSELL—There is one suggestion which fell from one of your Lordships, which ought perhaps to be no ticed by the managers for the Commons. It is, whether the Commons could make an amendment of clause (L), by pro ' posing that an audit and superintendence should take place with respect to these trusts, leaving them in the hands of the present trustees, It seems to me that it would not be respect ful to your Lordships that I should not endeavour to inform you what, in the judgment of the managers, would be the opinion of the House of Commons upon sueh an amendment. As far as the managers for the Commons are enabl e d to state the opinions of th e House of Commons, they believe that it would not be acceptable or satisfactory to those whom they represent to leave, on any terms or conditions whatever, those charitable trusts in the hands of those who were the trustees till the Ist of August for another year. With respect to any future arrangement of those trusts, an inspection, audit, and general superintendence, such as was suggested by the Noble Lord, may be a very fit provision to make in respect of all charitable trusts in general, and one to which the Commons would be well disposed to agree ; but it appears to me, that it would be a matter rather for a general regulation in a Bill with respect to charitable trusts. The Commons cannot but regret the more, from what has now passed, that the Lords did not introduce some clauses in the Bill which they sent up with respect to charitable trusts, by which this object might have been provided for. It was in the expectation that that Bill would be returned to them, that the consideration of the Lords' amendments in this Bill was delayed from time to time. I have now only to add to what has been already stated by one of the managers for the Commons that the House of Com mons have passed a Bill, containing a great number of clauses; that they have agreed to many clauses added or altered by the Lords; and that upon the whole there are no less than fifty clauses of considerable importance agreed to by both House s of Parliam e nt. Th at t h e Commons have likewise endeavoured to provide for the subject of charitable trusts in the measure which they sent up to the other House of Parliament, and, having so done, while they lament that this Bill should not pass into a law, they feel that they have done everything in their power to provide for this matter of legislation, and they must now be contented to let the matter abide as it is, having little or no expectation that the Commons will be disposed either to accept the clause as it now stands, or to recede in any manner from their disagreement to the clause in question. sate, foresee a tenth part of the difficulties which the Noble Lord has pointed out as likely to arise. I am, however, con fident the Commons would rather encounter those difficulties, as regards the administration by the Lord Chancellor, than allow the trusts to remain one year longer in those hands in which they have not confidence, and their continuance in which would in no degree satisfy the public. Your Lordship's, I am quite confident, cannot have better opportunities of knowing the manner of the administration of the charitable trusts than we, the Commons, have. On the contrary, I am prepared to state from evidence that would be most satisfactory, I have no doubt even to your Lordships, that i❑ many cases the abuses so extensively and so forcibly stated by the Municipal Commissioners alluded to, have been con tinued to almost the latest period ; and I will further add that there appears no hope whatever of putting an end to those abuses but by removing the trustees continued by the Bill of last Session in these situations. lam therefore quite satisfied, my Lords, that although the Commons, in a desire to meet the wishes of your Lordships, might waive the first amend ment, which is a matter of less importance, yet, as regards clause (L) I am quite confident that the Commons would be deserting their duty to their constituents if they consented to allow trustees to remain one year longer in whom they have no confidence, and which would not give the satisfaction we are bound to give to those whom we represent in Parliament. I therefore trust that the Commons will continue firm in the rejection of that clause, preferring to have the alternative pointed out in the Bill of last Session. With regard to the first amendment I could not have sup posed it possible that your Lordship would have proposed the selection of a Mayor by lot, and that you should have thrown aside altogether on so important a question the principle of the Bill. The principle of the Bill, my Lords, through all its clauses, was elective, and your Lordships have thought proper, in violation of that principle, and in contradiction to the whole tenor of the Bill, to make this amendment by proposing that lots should be drawn for the Mayor; a course, my Lords, which in our opinion ought not to be adopted in any delibera tive assembly. But, however objectionable and contrary to the principle of the Municipal Bill, that amendment is, yet, as a compromise in order that the other clause may be withdrawn, and that the Bill may pass into a law, I believe there would be a disposition in the Commons to concede that, though I re peat to your Lordships it will be in contradiction to the prin ciple, and such as ought not in my opinion to be adopted in any deliberative assembly. Lord ELLE NB ORO liG H—l wish to make one observa tion, which appears to me necessary, in addition to those which have been made by other Noble Lords who appear as Ma nagers upon this occasion, and that observation has refer ence to what has been stated by the Right Honourable Gen tleman on the other side. I think I may venture to assure the Managers for the House of Commons that there is no desire whatever on the part of the House of Lords to continue permanently in the hands of the existing Trus tees the administration of the charitable funds. They see the extreme inconvenience of those charitable funds remain. ing in their hands, even for the period to which the Bill now under consideration would extend their power. They adopt that mode of administering those funds only because they think that that course will bring with it a smaller incon venience to the public, and especially to the persons interested in the administration of those funds, than the other alternative now presented to the two Houses, namely, that of placing those funds under the administration of the Lord Chancellor. It may be at the same time fit to suggest to the Managers for the House of Commons, that it is still competent to the House of Commons to propose any amendment upon that clause to which the House of Lords adhere ; that it is still competent to the House of Commons, by any such amendment, to establish a strict system of audit, and to place the trustees under vigilant superintendence during the period for which their power is prolonged. Speaking only as an individual, I may be permitted to add, that I do not think the House of Lords will be disposed to concur in any system that may be proposed for the future administration of these charitable funds, in which shall not be involved a strict system of audit and superintendence. They desire that the persons who are to be benefited by those funds should be fully protected against any misapplication of them on the part of those to whom the administration of the trusts may be committed. Mr. ATTORNEY-GENERAL—My Lords, I feel most strongly the great importance of a good understanding being kept up between the two Houses of Parliament, and every word that I shall utter to your Lordships will have that object in view. It seems to me on both points upon which the two Houses have differed, that upon consideration the Lords may be disposed to yield. The first certainly is of much less im portance, but I think your Lordships will hardly be surprised that the Commons attach some importance to it, because, for the first time in legislation, it is proposed by lot to determine whether one party or another shall have the preponderance in the government of Municipal Corporations. The effect of agreeing to what your Lordships propose in regard to the manner of electing the mayor and aldermen will be this, that all those who are to be elected will necessarily be of one party. Suppose, as the fact is, that in Rochester and New port the council are nine and nine, then if you are to deter mine by lot who shall have the casting vote, you must either have the chairman with a casting vote of one party or the other. The consequence will be, that you will have six al dermen of one party, or six of another, and the town is per maaently to be given up either to the Reformers or the Con. servatives. The Commons conceive that it would be more consonant with the general principles of legislation to refer the question to the constituent body : that the ratepayers, who are the electors, should meet and determine who should be the alder men, and who should be the mayor. My Lords, there is no innovation in this : this is conform able to the ancient practice which your Lordships well know prevailed under almost all the ancient charters; the King gave a liberty to the burgesses who were electors to elect from among themselves both the mayor and the aldermen. The Commons conceive there can be nothing at all objection able for one turn in resorting to that ancient custom. My Lords, it would be but for one turn ; for as soon as the com mon councils are once complete and set in motion the original Municipal Corporations Bill has provided for cases of equal votes in all times to come; but, my Lords, as this would only be for one turn, I believe that the Commons, to spew their anxiety to keep up a good understanding with the Lords, would without difficulty waive their objections to that enact.. men- With respect to the other, most serious objections occur; I must remind your Lordships, that by the Municipal Corpora tions Bill which was passed in the last session of Parliament, there was a solemn compact between the two Houses of Par liament, and between Parliament and the public, that those charitable trustees should not be continued for more than one year. A Noble and Learned Lord who has addressed the Commons upon this occasion, has said that there has been no misconduct proved against the individuals who have been con tinued as the trustees of those charities. My Lords, I must remind that Noble Lord that by the 71st section of the Muni.. cipal Corporations Bill those charities were continued in all the members of all the old Corporations, without difference or distinction. It was proved to the entire satisfaction of both Houses of Parliament, and of the community, that those trus tees had in various instances most grossly misconducted them selves, that they had applied to party purposes those funds which ought to have been devoted to the purposes of charity, education, and religion ; and it was from the extreme difficulty of the case that they were not instantly dismissed ; and it was solemnly determined by the 71st section of that Act of Par liament, that when the Ist of _August, 1836, arrived, their powers should for ever cease. I beg leave to read the words to be found in the Act of Parliament, "that upon the Ist of August, 1836, arriving, their powers shall immediately there upon utterly cease and determine." And then it was pro vided that upon that occasion their powers ceasing and deter mining, the administration of those charities should be in the Lord Chancellor. The Legislature then knew all the difficulties which the Noble and Learned Lord who has addressed the Commons has pointed out, of the petition to the Lord Chancellor, the role reach to the Master, the Master's report, the exceptions to the Master's report, and all those steps which have been re ferred to, and the various delays that might arise ; but all those difficulties were considered light as air compared with the evil of continuing one day longer than the Ist of August 1836, these charitable funds in the hands of persons who had so miaconducted themselves. My Lords, in performance of this solemn compact, the Commons perceive that unless there should be some legislation in the meantime, it is of the last importance those persons should be divested of the powers they have so much abused. Sly Lords, the Commons did their best to provide for the difficulty that had occurred ; they sent up a Bill to the House of Lords, which they thought would probably meet with your Lordships'approbation ; that Bill your Lordships have in your wisdom rejected ; and now the only alternative is that we should perform the compact entered into by the Municipal Cor porations Act, or continue those trustees in office, I must say for an indefinite time, for there is little prospect that in an other session we should be more successful than in the present session of Parliament in providing for the administration of those funds. I trust be;* b leave mo s t res p ect f u ll y to po i nt out to ye,ur Lordships that in the mode in which you have framed this clause your own object will not be effected, and that much litigation and many more evils would be experienced than those which the Noble and Learned Lord has pointed cut as likely to arise from the necessity of applying to the Court of Chancery. We have now reached the 11th of August, 1836. By the clause now under consideration your Lordships in tend to enact that these charitable trustees shall be continued. I will read the words of clause (L), " that the said here ditaments, sums of money, chattels, securities for monies, and other personal estates, shall continue in the persons who at the time of the passing of this Act, shall be seised or pos sessed thereof, as such trustees, and in the trustee or trustees appointed to supply any vacancy by the Lord High Chancel lor or Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal for the time being, in the ma nner provided by t h e sa id Act for regulat i ng corporations." . _ Your Lordships propose that those hereditaments and sums of money shall continue in the trustees who are seised of them at the time when the Act passes. My Lords, when the Act passes, who will be seised,a them ? Not the individuals in whom your Lordships propose to continue those powers. They were Audi officio when the Ist of August arrived; they have now no estate ; they hale now no power as trustees ; they are mere strangers ; they have no more interest in any of those funds than any individual who may be present in this assembly. If your Lordships, therefore, were to insist upon this Clause, the consequence would be that you would defeat, as it appears to me, the object.you have in view, because, sub ject to a Clause which I will by and by use the freedom of pointing out to your Lordships, you would rest this power in whom ? I say, in the members of the town councils of the present corporations. Your Lordships are well aware that, although we bear a great deal of old corporations and new corporations, they are one—they are identical; the new cor- DRURY-LANE THEATRE. Yesthrday a meeting of the proprietors of Drury-Lane Theatre was held in the saloon, for the purpose of receiving the report of the General Committee as to the affairs of the Theatre, &c. Earl GLENGALL in the Chair. The report was read by Mr. DuNN, the secretary. It stated that, at the close of another year, the Committee had the satisfaction to state that, amid so many rival es tablishments as were annually permitted to spring up in the metropolis, and when all theatrical property was on the decline, in consequence of the extraordinary efforts of the lessee and the attractive nature of his performances, Drury-Lane had maintained its character, station, and re spectability as one of the patent houses up to the close of one of the longest seasons on record ; but the annual charges and outgoings bad rendered it difficult in dispos ing of the theatre to make any satisfactory arrange ment with a new lessee, and they feared that those out goings would counterbalance to a considerable extent any annual rent the theatre might at a future time command in the market, unless some definite plan were carried into effect for the immediate reduction of those outgoings ; otherwise further debts would be thrown upon the proprietors before they were able to discharge the old ones. The Duke of Bedford had, in addition to 3001. last year, this year remit ted 2001. of the ground rent ; and a majority of the bond holders had relinquished half of the amount of the annual interest due on their respective debts, and it was hoped that the others would soon follow their example. The lease of the theatre expired on the 25th of July last, and it had been in the usual way submitted to competition, and the Committee had for the ensuing three years confided it to Mr. Bunn. The new renters' annuity of is. 3d. for each night of performance had been duly paid for 238 nights that the theatre was open, amounting to 4,4621. 10s., and the rent to the Duke of Bedford and other outgoings, amounting to 4,0581. 18s. 9d., had been also duly paid. The expenditure last season exceeded the receipts by 5931. 3s. 9d., and the balance now in the bankers' hands, was 4191. 1 ls. sd.\ The Report concluded by stating that the Committee had done everything in their power to re duce the dead weight, and called upon the Proprietors to support them in their endeavours to effect so desirable an object. The CHAIRMAN then said that they had, under allj the circumstances, a fair prospect of future success. Although the receipts of the last season had been unprecedented, yet the expenses were so enormous that no profits had been realised. He hoped next meeting to be able to report a further reduction of the nightly rent--the new renters having already relinquished threepence out of the fifteen pence due to them. An erroneous opinion had prevailed, which he wished to contradict, that the Committee had shown a preference towards Mr. Bunn. They opened the market to all, and the other offers they received bore no comparison to that of Mr. Bunn, and consequently his was accepted. Unless the new renters consented to make a reduction in the amount of their claims, it would become necessary to make an application to Parliament upon the subject, the expense ... of which, he believed, would be about 3001. On the motion of Mr. WALLIS, the report was then ordered to be received. Captain SPENCER said lie hoped the Committee would abandon the timid line of policy they had hitherto adopted with reference to the charges of the renters, and take the affairs of the theatre into their own hands. Although the renters said they had given up fifty per cent., they had not in fact given up anything, as their rent was not charged on the property but on the proceeds. Their claim depended on the success of the enterprise, and had no claim beyond it. There was no remedy, however, but an application to Par liament, which he hoped would immediately be made. Mr. GREGORY hoped that the statement made by the last speaker would not go forth as that of the Committee. Mr. G. ROBINS expressed a similar wish, and differed altogether from the opinions expressed by Captain Spencer as to the new renters. They were entitled to 2s. 6d. a night, which was the sum originally paid. They had since reduced it to one shilling, and they were as much entitled to receive that, as he was entitled to receive his dividends at the Bank of England. The Committee, Auditor, &c., for the ensuing year were then appointed. Thanks were then voted to the Chairman, after which :he meeting adjourned. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT. (Continued from The Sun of yesterday.) Charles Pistor, Walter Martin, Joseph Carmichael, Robert Kendall, Elliott, and Whitehead, were indicted for a conspiracy, with intent to defraud Charles Templar. In this case, which was not concluded yesterday when we went to press, the RECORDER summed up the evidence, and the Jury, after a short consultation, acquitted all the prisoners. The RECORDER obrer:od that, the conduct of Martin was not free from suspicion. The trial lasted from half -past twelve until near nine o'clock. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. AJAR YLEB ONE. Charles Lewen, a tall, fashionably-dressed young man, was placed at the bar charged with stealing s everal yards of linen and other articles, the property of the Countess Con stantia Clifford, residing at No. 3, Lower Seymour-street, Portman-square. Mr. RAWLINSON, after some severe but well-timed re marks as to the practice of allowing servants' visitors to have the run of the house, whereby families were frequently robbed, ordered the prisoner, who denied the charge, to be remanded till that day week. John Hayter, a young man who has undergone several examinations on a charge of embezzling in v ar i ous sums the amount o f 401. belonging to his master, M r. R oss, chi naman,re x N a m e z a s t t i r o e n e ,whDeon t Dorset-square, se i t i - e s q u evidence are being comp l ete d the, was pl ace d at t h e b ar for prisoner was fully committed to Newgate for trial. MARLBORO U GH-STREET. A DOG-DAY RUMPUS.—Mrs. Phcebe Mackintosh, fat, fi er y-faced, and fifty, brought her lodger, Mrs. Jane allason, before Mr. DYER, for having, in the first place, threatened do her job," secondly ', callinm her " a squinting old door mat. fazzot," and, last.ly, persisted in ,placing her patters on the The parties were all at the office a few days since, but their situations were then reversed, the complainant appear ing as defendant, and vice versa. Mrs. Mackintosh, her visage inflamed partly with wrath, and partly with something that (lid not smell like pump water, proceeded to state at length her fears of her lodger, and then dwelt with great warmth on the ground of corn- Plaint she had against her with respect to leaving her patters on the mat. If she walked into the passage—whether in the morning, noon, or night—she was sure to find the patter's on the mat, placed there by her lodger for no other purpose, she verily believed, than that she might tumble over them. She bad remonstrated, threatened, and prayed the defend ant to find another place for them. She had pitched them into the yard, the cellar, and occasionally the gutter, but all to no purpose, the patters, like the slippers iu a well• known " Arabian Nights'" tale, being invariably discovered the next moment in the same anal apropos situation. On Sa turday night last, intending to have a private pick, she went to a cook-shop for some hot pickled pork and pease pudding. On her return, while groping about in the passage in the dark, she stumbled over the omnipresent pattens, and down she came on the broadest part of her perso n with all the eeleiity and effect of twenty stone, capsized her savory supper, and breaking the basin into the bargain. The first impulSe of her passion was to seize the, tormenting pattens, and, sending them with a bang against the defendant's door, to wish, in an audible voice, that the owner was in a warmer situation than she then occupied. Mrs. Mason ran out of her• room, seized the pattens, and, brandishing them over complainant, swore that on the first convenient oppor tunity she would make " two" of her skull. This was the threat complained of. • Mr..DYER—WeII, if any one is present who heard the threat used, I will hear the corroboration. A straight-haired personage, with a capacious mouth stepped forward and said, " Perhaps your Lordship will allow me to state all I know. Your Worship couldn't se lect any one who can give more evidence than myself." Mr. DYER—Very well. bear what you have to say. Witness—About half an hour before the rumpus, Mrs. Mason sent her little boy for half-a-pound of moist. sugar, and when he came back she sent him out again fur a ha'porth of milk —no, I'm wrong. I beg pardon, your Worship, she sent him out for the milk first and for the sugar afterwards. Mr. DYER —Don't tell me such stuff as that, man. Did you hear any threat used ? Witness—No, the row was over before I came home. Mr. DYER—You may go away then. Now, Mrs. Mason, what have you to say ? Defendant—She won't let my pattens remain on the mat. Complainant—Ph die first. You shan't put your pat tens on my mat. Defendant—Then why do you hang your mop against my parlour door ? Mr. DYER—This silly case had no business to come before me. You must be very fond of spending your money to lay it out in warrants for such silly affairs. Go home and live peaceably ; the warrant is dismissed. Th e complainant went out of the °flie d in a fume, de claring that no lodger should leave her patten s on the mat. Q UEEN-SQUARE. Richard Clark and Sarah Ryden were yesterday placed at the bar, charged with stealing a gold watch and appen dages from the dwelling-huuse of Mr. Charlotte Edwards, of Prospect-place, Newington. The prisoners were remanded. George Carpenter was charged by Miles, an officer at the Surrey Theatre, with having thrown one of the seats from the gallery into the pit on Saturday night. The case could not be made out, as the defendant had only been seen with it in his hand. He was discharged. George Goff, the man who has been in custody some days on suspicion of having robbed James Cunningham, Esq., of 600/. at Covent-garden theatre, yesterday received 188/. found upon him, and was discharged. UNION-HALL. Yesterday John 214Vionald, a strong young man frcm Scotland, was brought before Mr. Jeremy, charged with wounding a gentleman's coachman with a reaping-hook. The prisoner was committed for three months to hard labour. THAMES OFFICE. Yesterday three foreign seamen, named Gabriel Wod :haw, Andrew Wicker:, and Carl Frederick Slialk, belong ing to the Menzikof a Norwegia n s hi p , l y i ng i n the r i ver, were brought b e f ore ° Mr. BALLANTINE and Mr. CLARK SON, charged on Custom House information with smuggling 141bs. of tobacco, by which they had incurred penalties of 1001. each. The prisoners, through the medium of an interpreter, pleaded guilty to the informations, and said they were igno rant of the English laws. Mr. CLARKSON said that the men must have been per fectly aware they were doing wrong. The law gave the Magistrates no discretionary power, and it was the duty of the Bench to s3ntence the prisoners to pay a fine of 100/. each to the King, and be imprisoned until such fines were paid. Mi Beverley, the clerk to the Solicitor of Customs, said the Board of Commissioners had reduced the fines to JJ each. Mr. BALLANTINE (to the interpreter)—Tell the men they will have to pay 11. each instead of 1001. The ship's broker and the Captain said the men's wages were very low, and no money was due to them. They could not even pay the reduced fines. Mr. BALLANTINE said the Magistrates had nothing to do with that. He thought there was a very great absurdity in mitigating the penalties so lnw. Certain statements were sent to the Board of Commissioners, and upon them they had, in his opinion, very injudiciously, though probably they had the very best of reasons for doing so, ordered the men to pay 20s. each. Tne contraband trade in tobacco was of course likely to increase so long as men had to pay no more than 20s. One successful trip would raise that sum or more. The broker of the ship again asked for a further miti gation. Mr. CLARKSON said the Magistrates had no discretion, and the men, if they did not pay the money, must go to prison, unless the Commissioners thought proper to release them. The penalties were a good deal too low. Dowton, who has not pleased the Americans, will shortly return. The late Mr. Rothschild's manner of evincing kind feelings towards Solomon Herschel, the Grand Rabbi of Duke's-place, had something in it which was both singular and whimsical. When any good speculation was afloat, Mr. Rothschild deposited on his own account a certain sum, pro portionate to his own risk, and whatever per tentage or profit accrued therefrom was carried by him to the Rabbi, to whom he gave a full and true account, even to the utmost fraction. The millionaire on such occasions invariably dined with the Levite, and the day was usually passed by the two friends in innocent hilarity and pleasing conversation. FATAL STEAM BOAT ACClDENT.—Yesterday morning, about eight o'clock, the following lamentable acci dent occurred on the river, off the Tower :—As the Enterprise Hull steam-vessel, was about to depart from off the Custom house, several persons went on board to take leave of the pas sengers, their friends, and among others Mr. Joseph Crannis, a respectabl e t ra d esman , res idi ng i n Pepper-street, Union street, Southwark, and his wife went on board for the purpose of bidding farewell to the brother of the former, Mr. John Crannis, of Hull. While they were in conversation the ves sel gut under way, and a sculler was called to take them and some other persons ashore in a wherry. Two persons had already got into the boat, and Mr. and Mrs. Crannis and a gentleman were descending the ladder, leading from the steamern, andthe gangway, and were a b ou t t o s tep into the boat, when th e theorder motion was of t ie imprudently t v es givenvessel threw for water. Mrs. Crannis was almost immediately drawn un d er the paddle ; her husband caught hold of the boat as he f e ll, an d was dragged into it ; but, missing his wife, he in s t ant l y tth t e h m e off the ladder togo into o jumped overboard after her, and, as she was sinking, caught her by the shawl, which, however, gave way, and she was drowned. Mr. Crannis narrowly escaped with hi s own life, for all this time the wheels were in full motion, and the agi tation of the water was very great. He was eventually taken ashore in the boat in a state of great exhaustion, and went home in a state of mind bordering on distraction at his sud den bereavement. The third person who was thrown into the river was also saved by some of the boatmen who rowed to his assistance. Two OCEANS WITHIN FOURTEEN HOURS' SAIL I —The Atlantic and Pacific are likely to be united by Yankee enterprise. The Congress of New Grenada has granted to Mr. Charles Biddle and ethers the exclusive pri vilege, for 50 years, under the name of Transportation Com pany of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, to navigate the river Chagres with steam. A further exclusive privilege, for the same period, is granted Mr. Biddle for the transportation of goods and passengers by the railway macadamised road, from the head of the navigation of the Chagres to the city of Pa nama, reserving; to the public a transportation road for horses and mules. Extensive concessions of land are made to Mr. Biddle in the same decree, in which colonies of natives and foreigners may be settled, and may be exempted from certain contributions for twenty years. One of the first provisions of the decree ordains that if two steam-boats, at least, are not kept in operation, and that the communications are not kept constantly in such a state (ex ce pti n7 acc id en t s ) as to . admit of ff e d the transportation in 14 thebe tueea exclusive the privilegeAilrtie a is nd to P b a e ccbeing eforfeited. • York Paper. We are happy to ann o unce that_ the petitions for a separate Lieutenancy for Lindsey are rapidly filling in vario us parts of the North Division, and some of the shins tr ansm i tte d w ho are proving by their a d opt i on of the h co o n ld t e ai r n s aand s e i l g e n e asignaturesof many buitdreds of the princip a l free impartiality and a d ue attention to local circumstances. Majestywith which the petition see the public in terests disinclination t o promote the pet i t i on sensible isanc! headed, temperate tha t Addr ess they are t anxiouso his to secured b if any has been found, it has been with those who are desirous of having it more strongly condemnatory of the past; but these dissentients ought rather to consider that prevention is far better than retaliation, and that the surest way of obtaining substantial justice is to subdue acrimonious feelings. By ab staining front party accusations, the object is supported on local considerations by all classes, instead of a part only— and why should those who hold a different opinion on politics be denied the sat i s f action of aiding in a question which stands apart from of a polities, and of un iti ng f or t h e i mpart i a l perform ancegreat office in the room of a one-sided administra tion ?---Lincomn Gazette. A RA RE T REE .--O n an app l e tree , b e l ong ing t o Mr. Bi ggs , scu l ptor, o f Lower James-street , Bath, there i s now to be seen fruit in perfection, fruit just set, and a perfect bloom. What is more singular, for the last ten years, the same tree has produced full grown fruit, and at the same time has put forth numerous blossoms, some of which have turned to fruit, which has remained till the succeeding Christmas. Bath Chronicle.