The Sun. — London, England, 1845-04-02 00:00:00

troops with hostile views against the country from which he had been exiled.—(Hear, hear.) Now, I contend for it that this was the case of Mr. Joseph Mazzini, and that the case of Mr. Joseph Mazzini was therefore entirely apart from that of he Hon. Member for Finsbury.— (Hear, hear.) Now, what is the case of Mr. Mazzinir He is an exile in this country, having been compelled to quit his own, for reasons already well known. But now let me call attention to a peculiar period of the history of Italy. In the year 1814, England called upon Italy to rise and defend herself. The Geneveve, the Vene• tian, the Tuscan, the Roman, the Calabrian, were all called upon by England to arise and combine for the defence of the liberty of Italy. A proclamation was then issued, calling upon these people to do what? That proclamation contains sentiments similar to those for which Mazzini had been exiled, and the Bandieri died. —(Hear, hear.)—And even Bota himself then unfurled a banner on which language calling for men to rise in defence of Italy was plainly inscribed—(Hear, hear.) — and that banner was raised in the very cause in which England then encouraged the people of Italy ; and for espousing which, at a later period, England had caused occurrences which now involved her very seriously.—(Hear, hear.) Yes, the Italians were called upon, encouraged by England to raise the cry of justice and of patriotism, to defend their country, and to snatch from the brow of Napoleon the Crown of Rome, in order that it should be transferred to Austria.— (Hear, hear.) That cause was long dormant, but it was not dead; and after the revolution in France of. 1830, and the reformation in England of 1831 ; that spirit again arose—ltaly demanded the restoration of that freedom from England, that England in 1814 called on her to defend, and it was refused, and the consequence was, that Mazzini was obliged to quit his country, carrying with him that load of misery the cause of his exile had forced upon his heart.—(Rear, hear.) A very vivid and succinct account of this may be found in Louis Blanc's "History of the Ten Years." The Right Hon. Gentleman then read at some length the documents to which he referred ; and also the cor respondence of Sir Hamilton Seymour, for the purpose of showing that the course pursued by the Government was inconsistent with true policy. Now, I.e thought that document reflected the highest credit on the sa gacity of his Noble Friend ; and it showed to the Mouse, in the clearest point of view, the causes of discontent of the Roman population, and it suggested the true and real remedy to be applied. The antici pations of Sir Hamilton Seymour were fulfilled, from that time to the present. The Committee which had been appointed by that House had made its report containing much information.—(Hear, hear.) The Committee does not state whence that information came ; the Committee states that it came from a high quarter. Why is everything connected with this tran saction thus enveloped in mystery ? Why are we not informed from what high quarter that intelligence came? Did it come from the Papal Government ? For every body knows that we have a kind of a body at Rome— everybody knows that Mr. Peter acts in a capacity under this Government. Was it from the Austrian Go vernment ? Why are all these things hidden from the public ? This information conveyed to the English Go vernment is thus made a most remarkable circumstance. If I thought that the Right Hon. Secretary for the Home Department had issued the warrant on this occa sion merely as a matter of form, I would not have no ticed it, or thought it remarkable ; but I rind that such is not the case, and this is a circumstance in the issuing of the warrants which requires peculiar notice, it having been declared in the most emphatic manner by Lord Aberdeen, that he had not issued the warrant ; and he was not content with that information, but he also says that he never wished the war rant to be issued. (Here the Hon. and Learned Gentleman quoted part of Lord Aberdeen's speech to that effect.) It is a most remarkable fact, that the war rant related ostensibly at least to the foreign depart ment, and to nothing else—mark, to nothing else—the matter fell within the exclusive cognizance of Lord Aber deen, and why is it that he did not issue the warrant ? Ho is a Secretary of State, the power is vested in him by Act of Parliament. But perhaps the document had not come before him, and that by accident he did not put his name to it, but Lord Aberdeen takes care to inform the public on the subject, a subject in which the public were intensely interested, and where he felt that his character was involved—on that occasion he makes the most solemn adjuration that it was not issued at his de sire. The House is not to understand that I am cen suring the issuing of the warrant. lam quite prepared to divide the responsibility with the other Members of the Government. Let each of us have his share. But Lord Aberdeen took care not to appropriate to himself the responsibility of a matter relating to kis own particular department.—(Hear, hear.) He says— " I nm quite prepared as well as other members of the Government to share the responsibility of the proceeding ;" but he went on to say " I only wish this fact to be accurately stated "—and that is the car dinal and essential fact—" that it was not issued by me;" and still more, "it was not issued at my desire."— (Hear, hear.) Might I venture to suggest that though the temporal dominions of the Pope are within the ex • elusive cognisance of Lord Aberdeen, there is an exceed ingly interesting portioe of his power—his spiritual dominion—with which the Home-office is not entirely unconnected.—(Hear, hear.) I cannot help indulging in a conjecture of that kind, especially as the Committee left so much to the imagination. I have a curiosity— the Noble Lord opposite, the Chairman of the Committee, may call it a " prurient " one—(Laughter)—there is a cunosa felicitas about the expression of the Noble Lord hear)—but I certainly have a " prurient curi osity " to know at whose desire the warrant was issued. We know by whom it was issued—we know it was issued by the Minister of the interior— by the domestic Minister of the country, but we do not know at whose desire it was issued. Sir, the Committee was composed of men of great worth, high honour, and great intelligence; but there were no cross examiners amongst them.—(Laughter.) It was not a Committee of Inquisitors—there was not a single gentleman upon that Committee who was fit to be a Commissioner under the income-tax—(Laughter) —and it was strange that all lawyers were excluded from a Committee who were appointed to inquire into the law upon the subject.—(Hear, hear.) But so much has been already said on that point that I will content myself with briefly alluding to it. The Committee being com posed of men of high worth and honour, but not of lawyers, they did not institute a very severe scrutiny, and their report was to a certain extent favourable to the Government upon a matter which is deserving of their consideration and the reflection of the House. The Committee having stated that information from high quarters had been given to them, proceeded to state that the letters of Mr. Mazzini had been opened, and that the information deduced from them was communicated to a foreign Power, not specifying what Power, and they added that the information so communicated was not of a nature calculated to implicate any individual within the reach of that foreign Power. It had been stated that information was communicated to no foreign Power which referred to any individual within its reach. Bet the information might be conveyed to a foreign Power within whose grasp the individual was not ; yet that Power might transmit it to another, and so the individual might suffer. He might ask, why was the information com municated at all ?—(Hear, hear.) It might have been to a certain extent of a very explicit kind, though the names were net given. Austria and Rome were aware of the existence of a plot. They wanted details. Was nothing said on the subject ? The Committee said in formation had not been given which would implicate in dividuals. How could the Committee say so ?—(Hear, hear.) Were not the place and time mentioned ; no name was given, but there was a local habitation. The inference was obvious. If the slightest hint was given to a Bow-street officer he would follow up the vestiges to the malefactors; if they put the blood-hound upon the right track, did they not think but, with sanguinary sa gacity, he would scent out his victim to the death.— (Hear.) The Committee, for the purpose of shielding the Government, had told them what bad not been communicated. They said the Government bad com promised no man, but what they really did communicate nobody knew. Of two extraordinary facts he was, how ' ever, aware. It was most remarkable that in the Milan Gazette of the 20th of April these words appeared:— " The English Cabinet has addressed a letter to the Austrian Government, not only protesting against all suspicion of sympathy with seditious movements, but going still further, expressing its anxiety to put an end to the agitation and excitement." Contrast this with the proclamation of Sir 11. Seymour. But the Gazette goes on to say, after some other observer ions :—" Mazzini is a person not unknown to the London police."— (Hear, hear.) This appeared on the 20th of April— the warrant was issued on the first of the same month. —(Hear, hear.) There was a statement made by the organ of the Austrian Government, with a specification of the very individual.—(Hear, hear.) If a member of the Government stood up in his place in Parliament and declared that the name of Mazzini had never been com municated, he was bound to believe him, and ha would believe him; but when he said that. he must likewise protest that he was at a loss to account f the ap pearance of that article. Though British Ministers might have given the information they had done from di ff erent moti ves f rom those assigned, iad with a view of such results t a ki ng place as occurred; still the effects, as regard e d th e unfortuna te su fferers, was the same. The Secretary o f S tate for For eign Af fairs declared gilt as he hoped f or mercy himself. short, in language as solemn as ever f ell from the li ps of man, that he was innocent of their bl oo d. But their blood has been shed. On the 6th of M a y, six personse were put to death for political offences ; and on the 15th of June further executions took place.—(hear, hear.) They were innocent of the blood shed in Calabria, bat were they innocent of the blood spilled at Bologna ? (The latter part of this sentence was inaudible). In the course of this discussion it had been said that the present Government had only done what their predecessors had done ; and the First Lord of the Treasury said, " We have only done what has been done before us." He (Mr. Sheil) denied that. It was a mistake. He denied that such information was ever communicated by the late Govern ment to foreign Powers.—(lronical cries of " Hear," from the Tory benches.) He repeated the denial. He positively denied that information had ever been commu nicated to foreign Powers obtained from the opening of letters. If he were wrong let them show him his error. —(Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend did interfere with respect to Rome, and with respect to other foreign States. He did interfere against Don Miguel and against Don Carlos ; but the letters of Den Miguel and of Don Carlos were never opened by him ; at all events their contents were never forwarded to Madrid and Lisbon. —(Hear, hear.) The present Government had at least the merit oforiginality. The Act of Parliament conferring the power of opening letters was, it was said, passed in the reign of Anne, but its principle was founded at the time of the Commonwealth. Could they find nothing in the history of the Commonwealth more worthy of imitation?—(Hear, hear.) At the time of the Common wealth, alth, their Republican predecessors did interpose in the affairs of the Italian States, and at the hazard of pro yoking a European war, They found Sardinia in a state THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, APRIL 2, 1845. • of disquietude and tumult, and they rescued a portion of her subjects from the merciless persecution of which they were the objects.—(Hear, hear.) And if Eng'and—all England—was then animated by that noble feeling which the greatest writer in our language had given immortal expression to, in phrases too familiar to need quotation —if their democratic forefathers thus glowed with dig nified passion—if they were so forward in the defence of civil liberty, would their descendants not only be insen sible to these feelings, but become auxiliary to oppres sion—the abettors of those who aspired to be the instru ments of foreign States ; and would they endea vour to rivet the chains of oppression on a country for whose liberty no man who was himself in the pos session of freedom ought to be unconcerned?—(Hear, hear.) What was their language ? It was to be found in the answer given by the First Lord of the Treasury , to a question put to him by the Hon. Member for Ponte fract. He said that insurrectionary movements had taken place in the Papal States, that the Austrian army might have marched there—that the French army, too, might have gone there—and that, at Ancona or elsewhere, a collision might have taken place, which collision might involve a war between these two Powers, and that this war might cause a European war, and in a European war England might be involved—and this was the rea son why they opened Mr. Mazzini's latters.—( Laughter.) That was their case. And for fear of a European war they established a system of espionage—yes, espionage —the word was hard, but appropriate. If they had sent an officer to Mazzini in the disguise of a servant, who would report every word that fell from him, that would be espionage ; but what professor of dialectics, in any Italian university, could distinguish between this hypo thetical debasement and what had actually occurred ? Hitherto we would not avoid the certainty of war for the hazard of dishonour. When an Englishman had been affronted in a remote island in the Pacific, the Go vernment of England boldly demanded satisfaction ; and the Right Hon. Baronet declared that he was ready to go to war rather than submit to the dishonour.— (Hear, hear.) He applauded that resolution, but now the Government preferred avoiding the hazard of war, and submit to that which certainly was a most discredit. able proceeding. If they had sent for Mazzini, and told him that he was suspected, and that they intended to open his letters, it would not have been half so bad ; but these letters had been privately opened, read, and, with an ignominious dexterity, resealed—every drop of that wax being stained in falsehood.—(Hear, hear.) He had beard an argument attempting to show that a separate warrant should have been issued for the open ing of every letter ; but whatever the law might be in that case, there was certainly no law authorising leger demain.— Hear, hear," and laughter.) He would not enter into the legal discussion—his resolution had re spect to the line of policy adopted and pursued in this proceeding. The Committee had reported in favour of the Government it was said, and that Commit- . tee, it was further alleged, was composed of men of worth and honour. He admitted that the Members of the Committee were such as they were described to be, but denied that they reported in favour of the Go vernment.—(Hear, hear.) The Committee avoided the expression of any very decided opinion ; they said that a difference of opinion might exist as to the conduct of the Government, but they gave them credit for good in tentions, and they reported in favour of the Government because of their good intentions. There was an apho rism regarding " good intentions," which he would not in deference to propriety quote—(Laughter)—but what had good intentions to do with the matter? Had not the House to consider the facts? Was the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite supported because of his good in tentions. It was not whether their intentions were good or bad, but whether they had acted a part becoming a British Ministry, worthy of the Queen's servants, and as became the representatives of the great English nation. He thought they had not, and because he thought so, he bad put forward in his resolution facts which were be yond doubt or disputation, and with those facts beyond doubt or dispute, he had associated an expression not of censure, but of lamentation, in which he trusted the ma jority of the House would coincide.—(Great cheering.) Mr. T. S. DUNCOMBE seconded the motion. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that in replying to the Right Hon. Gentleman he would not attempt to imitate I the brilliant peroration of his speech. The subject had now for the sixth time been brought under the notice of the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman had attached much weight to the declarations of Lord Aberdeen. He thought the deliberate declaration of the Noble Lord, made in his place in Parliament in the most solemn manner, was well entitled to entire confidence, and was entirely satisfactory. His Noble Friend had stated that no letters dated from Corfu, from the Bandieras, were ever seen by him, or even intercepted. He thought the allusion of the Right Hon. Gentleman to the proclama tion of 1814 did not bear upon the present case, and should not, after treaties of such long duration, and which had been so religiously observed, and which were of an entirely contrary tendency, be at all entertained by that House. But the Right lion. Gentleman said that after all that had been stated the principal part of the matter yet remained in mystery. As far as in him lay he would remove every shadow of doubt which yet remained. He would now state to the House, as well as he was able, all the facts in connexion with this case. In October, 1843, he happened to be the only one of three Secretaries of State who was in London, and the duty of the three departments was, for the time, thrown upon him. During that period he had received communications from foreign Powers, and, amongst others, some to the effect that serious disturbances tad taken place at Bologna; in fact, that an insurrection of a formidable character had broken out there. This was at the end of August, 1843. He received dispatches from Lord Holland, our Minister at Florence, giving information with respect to those disturbances; and it was the opinion of that Noble Lord that they were very serious, and of a widely-spread nature. Lord Holland further stated that great appre hensions had been excited in the Austrian Government, and that they complained of certain publications of an in flammatory and exciting character, which emanated from the press at Malta. Lord Holland endeavoured to persuade the Government to suppress these publications, but he (Sir J. Graham) declined doing so, on the ground that the liberty of the press formed a part of the institutions of the island, and was a part of the British institutions. Soon after Baron Nieumann, the Austrian Minister, had an interview with him, in which he stated that he had reason to believe that a person well known in the ante cedent history of Italian revolutionary movements was then in London, and that he was the person really con nected with the Maltese publication before mentioned by Lord Holland. Baron Nieumann specified him as Mazzini, and this was the first time he (Sir J. Graham) had been aware of th e ex i s t enc e of such an individual. The newspaper s were p ro d uce d by the Baron at the time, and it was impossible not to perceive that the language in them was of a highly exciting and inflammatory cha racter, to use the very mildest terms. From the end of October until the January following, he heard no more on the subject. His Noble Friend returned and resumed his official duties. In the month of January a commu nication took place between himself and his Noble Friend (Lord Aberdeen) with respect to the progress of a revo• lutionary spirit in Italy, and the Austrian Ambassador assured the Noble Secretary for Foreign Affairs that neither Corfu, Bologna, nor Malta, were the centre from which these movements were directed, but that London was that centre—(Cries of "Hear, hear ") and that the peace of Europe was thereby endangered. He had not indeed, up to that time, known anything at all of Mr. Mazzini, and he did not then attach any very great importance to the information, nor think it wort h w hil e to ta k e any steps which would at all further the views of the Austrian ambassador. But towards the end of February he re ceived several communications which fully proved to him, that not on l y M r. M azz i n i was in London, but that he was carrying on a very extens i ve correspond ence with parties deeply engaged in insurrectionary movements in the South of Europe, and he thought that it was his duty to ascertain somewhat of the character and past proceedings of that gentleman. He did not wish to speak with any undue harshness of that individual—he was not there present to defend himself, and he (Sir J. Graham) therefore conceived, that it was only right that he s h ou ld press as li tt l e upon him as was possible. Of his talents there could be no question. In a variety . of ways, and in very trying circumstances he had evinced abilities of a very high order; but as he was not there pr esen t t o answer the allegations agai nst him, and to reply to th e assert i ons which - must be mad e respecting him, he (Sir J. Graham) thought that it was just that he should put upon himself some restraint in the statements that his duty compelled him to make re specting Mr, Mazzini. Yet, at the same time, he felt that this question had now assumed such a shape that it was due to the House and the country that something should be made known by authority, with regard to the past character and proceedings of that individual. The first communication which had been made to the British Government respecting Mr. Mazzini, was addressed to the Noble Lord the Member for Tivtrton, when he (Sir James Graham) had the honour of being the col league of the Noble Lord, and the object of which was to draw the attention of Lord Grey's Government to the proceedings of certain Italian refugees, who, Sir Hamilton Seymour, the British Ambassador, asserted to be contriving in London some movements likely to be dangerous to the peace of Europe. In 1831 there had been an insurrection, which washeyvever effectually put i down, and the principal actors n it were permitted to depart from Italy, and were allowed by the French Go vernment to take up their abode at Marseilles. The character and conduct of these individuals are estimated by Sir Hamilton Seymour, in a dispatch received from him at the time. Writing in March, 1833, he says, insurrection and stating the circumstances of the Fadthe f ut il ity o f t h e e ff or t, " there are certain individuals wh o were eonneeted with this movement who are now res idi ng at Marseilles ; and I am cred ibl y in in- formedd th a t t h ere are still plots in agitation among these individu a l s , conducte d by a party who was deeply engaged i n t h e late revolt Italy,. named Mazzini, and who, with the others is now m residing at Marseilles." He then goes on to describel th ature . of a certain .publica tiondrawiitn'hgichtohgeethsteartetshtehemtonhtive States, and whose proceedings, he l i rnceived,.ought to issued with a view . of disaffected the several Italian be attended to by Government. Graham) did not pretend to say Now he (Sir James hat now to state with respect to Mr. Mazzini whe had that precise kind, or f oun d e d on such. ind't a w l" of denco as that w hi c h h o h ad already adtru Pl c t e;l 4 , - b' e u ei s v . l - s would serve to explain, in a very satisfactory manner the whole of the p r o cee di ngs o f M r. Mazzini and hi, associates, and in statin g thi s ev id ence he did not desires to press more hardly on Mr. Mazzini than was necessary. Ile (Sir James Graham) h e ld i n hi s h an d a copy of the . Mon tour, of the 17th June, 1833, which related a cir cumstance which had lately occurred at Rodez, a small town in the south of France. It is said in the Moniteur that the town of Rodez had just been alarmed by a threefold assassination committed on the persons of setae of the Italian refugees by others who had been engaged in the same political movement. The paper makes no comments on the atrocity of the deed, but con tents itself with a simple statement of the facts which, it afterwards came out, were ascertained on the judicial inquiry which was instituted under the direction of the French Government. It appeared, that about nine o'clock on the evening of the 20th of October, that two of the Italian refugees were found dead in the streets, evidently just assassinated. A third was also found lying beside or sear them, not dead, but who had received two severe wounds, and was only rescued from complete destruction by the inhabitants. Though suf fering severely, he survived the wounds. A prosecution was instituted at the instance of the procureur du Roi in January, and the necessary authority having been re ceived at Rodez, the whole of the evidence was transmitted to Paris, and the sentence of ex pulsion against the Italian refugees was issued from the superior tribunal. It appeared that these assassinations had been committed at the instigation of a society of which Mr. Mazzini was the president, and which delegated a tribunal for the secret trial of individuals whom the society supposed to be hostile to their political interests. It was not to be sup posed that the French Government would permit a tribunal of this nature to exist within its precincts, and an order consequently came down to expel the refugees from the country. Measures were consequently taken to carry this order into effect. This information did not rest solely on the declarations in the Monitmr, for it was evident from the proceedings of the prosecution, and it was in consequence of that prosecution that the expul sion was persisted in. Ile would give to the House the sentence which had been decided on, which had issued from the secret tribunal. By that sentence it was decided that four individuals should be punished for cer tain defaults of good faith committed against the in. terests of this society. The sentence required that on the 15th of December, at ten o'clock at night, four indi viduals of the society should be punished for their con nivance Ns ith the Court of Rome. It accused the indi viduals named Emiliani, Schuyrotti, Landiana, and Lazzoruchi, in the first place, of disseminating opinions hostile to their principles ; and, in the second, of being partizans of the Papal States. It goes on to condemn Schuyrotti and Emiliani to death, as being unworthy any longer to live. Landiana and Lazzoruchi were conceived to be less guilty, and they were only condemned to be severely flogged. It goes on further to require that all persons should concur in the execution of the sentence, at the risk of being them elves subject to the same sentence—namely, that of death ; and it required that the parties commis sioned to carry the sentence into execution within ten days, and concludes in these terms :—" Given at mid night, the President and twenty members of the Council of the said tribunal being present, according to the rules of the present society," and is signed " Mazzini, President." As soon as information was received by the French Government of those transactions, the re fugees were ordered immediately to be expelled the country. Information of those proceedings at Rodez was received in London in February following, and it would be his (Sir J. Graham's) duty to show that this was no isolated case, but that the conduct which had been pursued at Marseilles by Mr. Mazzini and his associates was followed also in the next asylum which they obtained after quitting France. He held in his hand a dispatch of Mr. Morier, the British Minister in Switzerland, in which, after describing these modern transactions, he goes on to say that the suspicions of the French Government had been greatly excited with respect to the proceed ings of the Italian refugees ; and that they had refused to Mazzini the continuance of that asylum which he had so grossly abused ; and that not content with the breach of hospitality which he committed in France, he had re peated the same offence at Geneva. At Marseilles his endeavour had been to disturb the States of the Church. His object at Geneva was to interfere with the Government of Savoy. The date of his dispatch from the British Ambassador at Berne was the 28th of January, 1834. He states that a body of Poles who had been en gaged in the insurrection against the Government of Russia, and who when they laid down their arms were permitted to retire from the country, had joined with a number of Italian refugees who were settled at Geneva, and' under the command of General Romarino were prepared to make an insurrectionary movement in the territory of Savoy. He describes the character of Mr. Mazzini, refers to the transactions at Rodez, and speaks of Mr. Mazzini, one of the leading men in these transactions, as being at that time residing in Geneva. It is now twelve years ago since the British Minister in Switzerland made this known, so that the character of Mr. Mazzini was not by any means a novelty. In two or three days this incursion came to an end, and thse Ambassador states that the exhibition of courage, talent, and good faith, :amongst each other, in carrying out this enterprise, was as lamentably deficient as the result of it was to them disastrous. They had re peatedly broken their solemnly-pledged engagements to refrain from any political movement whatever, that was likely to jeopardise the peace of the country in which they resided, and the mutual good understanding of the different countries of Europe which might be endan gered by their proceedings. These engagements had been broken, and had been again renewed, till at length, after this attempt to disturb the kingdom of Savoy, they were driven from the asylum which they had so grossly abused. This dispatch refers to circumstances which took place in the year 1834. The attention of the British Government had first been drawn to Mr. Mazzini by Sir H. Seymour in his dispatch to the Noble Lord the Member for Tiverton; and he (sir J. Graham) must now beg the attention of the House to a singular coincidence in the strange combination of c i rcums t ances w hi c h h a d subjected Mr. Mazzini to the surveillance of the British Government. The first time Mr. Mazzini was made known to him was on the first of March, 1841; and now he held in his hand a letter from Sir H. Seymour, now residing, on behalf of the British Government, at Brussels, addressed to his Noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs (Lord Aberdeen) on the Ist of March, 1844. In that letter Sir H. Seymour states that an individual who had been residing for some time in the Ardennes had wished to take up his abode at Brussels. The Belgian Government had no objection, in the first *nstance, to grant his request, but when they learned let this individual, whose name was Desterre Buona- parte, was in communication with Mr. Alazzini, they were induced, by the representations of the French Am bassador, to withdraw the permission which they had al ready all but granted. They found that this Desterre Buonaparte had, along with Mr. Mazzini, been engaged in conducting the Jovian Ituliano at Marseilles, and that the object of his coming to reside at Brussels was simply to get into communication with Mr. Mazzini; and Sir H. Seymour thought it necessary to draw the attention of his own Government to Mr. Mazzini, for he con ceived that the results of such communication must be some adventures dangerous to the peace of Europe. The Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Sheil) bad asked to whom the contents of these letters had been communicated ? His Noble Friend, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, had sufficiently answered that question in another place. He had seid that he was ready to take his share of the responsibility for these transactions, but he (Sir J. Graham) must say that he himself, and himself alone, was responsible for the issuing of the warrant by which Mr. Mazzini's letters were opened. The communica tion of the Austrian Ambassador with respect to Mr. Mazzini had, in consequence of the absence of his Noble Friend from the Foreign-office, in the first place been made to him, but as soon as he (Sir J. Graham) learned that his Noble Friend was again able to attend to the duties of the office, he immediately forwarded all the letters he received unopened, and of course unread. But when he had informed himself of the character and proceedings of the previous life of Mr. Mazzini, he felt that it was necessary for the preservation of the interests of this country, and for the peace of Europe, that some check should be put on the conduct of men who made London the theatre of their intrigues for revolutionary movements, and he did not think it was consistent with his duty to re frain from exercising that power, which had always been used by those who filled the office he had the honour to hold, and he did not shrink from issuing the warrant by which those letters were opened and copied. He alone was responsible ; whatever blame might be imputed for the act was imputable to him alone, and to no one else in existence. The Right Hon. Gentleman asked at whose desire this warrant was issued. Ile (Sir J. Graham) would give his solemn assurance that it was at the de sire of no living being that that warrant had been issued. It was a sense of the deep importance of the proceedings of these men to British interests, and the probability that the peace of the world would be en dangered. that he was induced to exercise the power with which, from his office, he was invested, and to fulfil the duty, the odious duty, of issuing the warrant upon which this debate had arisen. After he had informed himself of the nature of the proceedings of Mr. Mazzini and his correspondents, his whole conduct had been purely ministerial. He had issued the warrant, and he had received 'the letters, but he had forwarded them unread to the Secre tary for Foreign Affairs, for the service of the coun try. Did the Right Hon. Gentleman mean to say that the peace of Europe was not likely to be endangered ? He would reply in the language of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. He was aware that it was not accord ing to the rules of the House to cite the observations made by a Minister in the other House, but he might give them as a part of his own speech. His Noble Friend had stated to the House of which he was a mem ber, that he did most solemnly declare that he had never communicated the contents of those letters to any person whatsoever, but in order to show his own sense of the effect which the proceedings of Mr. Mazzini, and his correspondence, was likely to have on the peace of Europe. He stated the fact, that the Austrian general at Mi!an had positive orders, in the event of any insur rectionary or hostile movements in the Italian States bor dering on the Austrian dominions, to march at once, with out any reference to Vienna, into the States of the Church. His Noble Friend said that " the centre of this con spiracy was in London," and what was the mode adopted by Lord Aberdeen with reference to this con spiracy ? He said that he adopted such regulations as were consistent with the liberty of the subject and with his duty. The Right Hon. Gentleman had, he thought, with great fairness, kept out of the present discussion the great question as to the legality or illegality of the warrants issued by him, The Hon. Member for Fins bury had a motion on this subject, to bring under the consideration of the House their legality, and when the proper time came he should also be prepared fur the dis cussion. But the Right Hon. Gentleman had, toward the close of his speech, said that the honour of England had been tarnished by the Ministry keeping copies of the cor respondence, and intercepting letters, in order to forward their contents to those parties who were inimically interested in them. In a matter of this kind, he would not deny the conclusion at which the Right Hon. Gen tleman bad arrived ; but he was bound to state, that ere this power was put in execution, his warrant was granted ; and in this course he had had precedent from the very earliest period. That warrant was not neces sary to be issued in every case, for it must have been self-evident, that a single letter could not give any in formation as to the movements of these parties unless as connected with other letters. The Eight Hon. Ba ronet then read several warrants, and among others, one issued by Charies James Fox, in April, 1798, " authorising from time to time, until ^ountermanding orders, the inspection of letters directed to or sent to any Foreign Minister of what rank soever residing at this Court," and he ordered that copies of those letters should be sent to " this office." That was the warrant of Charles James Fox, and he found that during the whole time that he was at the Home-office he used this power. His successor, the Mar quis of Carmarthen, also issued similar warrants, and the last be would read to the House was one signed by the Marquis of Carmarthen, and issued for a similar purpose with the former ones. The Right Hon. Baronet then read the warrant. He would not weary the House by entering at length upon topics on which he would re quire to address them on a future day ; but considering all the circumstances of the times in which his (Sir J. Graham's) warrants had been issued, the important exigencies they were intended to meet, h e th oug h t t h at the House must be satisfied, as he himself was, that these warrants had not been issued illegally. It was a h ar d matter to judge of the circumstances under which these warrants wt re issued, by comparing them with other circumstances entirely different ; and he would be dis charging his public duty in a manner unsatisfactory to himself and to his country, if he had hesitated to issue those warrants in the peculiar circumstances which had called them forth. He must say that, as far as circum stances had gone, he was perfectly satisfied up to this time, and he felt that, as the question stood before the country, he would rather be the person accused than the man who brought the accusation. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said that having been the person who had presented, on two different occasions, the peti tions which had given rise to the discussions on this question, he thought it was but right that he should rise in his place to say that a more foul, unmerited, and undeserved calumny was never cast by any Memher of any Government than that sought to be cast by the Right Hon. Baronet on the character of the gentleman from whom those petitions had emanated. He would say, and say it with confidence, that he had it in his power to crush the foul calumny sought to be thrown on that gentleman's character ; and he would ask what was the effect of this accusation ? It appeared to him that every step they took —every time they stirred in this painful subject, the aspersions were darker—the calumny was deeper, and the worse the Government came out of the struggle. When he moved for a Committee, he was told that the truth, and the whole truth, would be submitted to it. But they had got more that day than they had got in the whole proceedings. It was a proof positive of the necessity for further in quiry —it was a proof that the report which had ema nated from that Committee ought not to make the mat ter stop here—it was a proof that his demand for an open Committee was a just and fair one. The subject demanded a full, a fair, and open investigation, and he would leave it to the judgment of the House, whether it had ever seen a more unsatisfactory report than that which had been given by the Secret Committee. One of his principal reasons for asking that inquiry was, that Mr. Mazzini understood that gross calumnies had been advanced against him in that Committee, and that he had had no opportunity of replying. In reference to the point which had been argued by the Right Hon. Baronet—that of assassination—he (Mr. Duncombe) did not know whether that, point came be fore the. Secret Committee or not but if it did, they surely were bound in honour and in fairness to have Mr. Mazzini or some of his friends before them. What was the charge before them ? Why this ; it was said that while Mr. Mazzini was living at Marseilles, he, as presi dent of a secret society, had ordered the assassination of two of his countrymen. The Right Hon. Baronet had read an extract from a newspaper to support this state • ment. But without looking to the Moniteur, he might have found the facts of the case in the Westminster Re view, and before going further he should wish to ask him if he had seen that publication ?—(The Hon. Mem ber seemed to wait for an answer, but received none.) There was an article in that Review, upon the Report of the Secret Committee, and he should quote from it. The Hon. Member then read the extract in question, which stated th a t t h e S ecre t C omm itt ee h a d investi gated the all ege d mur d er o f two of Mr. Mazzini's coun trymen in the y ear 18 32; an d, though that might not have been believed by the members of the Committee, still they ought to have given an opportunity to Mr. Mazzini or his friends to rebut that report. So he said— they ought to have given him or his friends the oppor tunity of doing away with that report. On the 31st of May, 1833, there had appeared in the Moniteur a forged document, which the Right lion. Baronet hail read. He repeated it—it was a forged document.—(Hear, hear.) That document purported to be signed by Mr. Mazzini, as president, and by the secretary, dooming their country men to death. But that document bore internal evidence of its fictitious character. It was full of grammatical errors, such as a man of Mr. Mazzini's education could not possibly have committed. But Mr. Mazzini after wards denounced theforgery in the Gazette de Tribunal, The Right Hon. Baronet had said that Mazzini had often threatened to prosecute the Monifeur, but he had never attempted to put his threat in force. Now, so far from this being the case, Mr. Mazzini did bring his action, and was tried before the Tribunal Correctional at Paris. Sir JAMES GRAHAM—Not against the Moniker. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE—No , but against a paper that copied the paragraph from theMonialcitr. Well, the action was tried in April, 1841, and what was the character of the defence? "Why, that there was more than one Mr. Mazzini in the world, and as Mr. Mazzini, the com- plainant, was a man whom all admitted to be p )ssessecl of high moral integrity, he could not possibly be the Mazzini mentioned in the paragraph quoted from the Monikur. Where, then, was the pretence of the Government for opening hie letters? The defence, however, set up now was quite different to that which they heard the other day. It was now declared that Lord Aberdeen had never seen any letter or letters which came from Corfu, nor was any letter or letters coming from Corfu ever received at the Foreign-office. thelV H ell,n ou o s w e , if it was necessary, he could prove that the Government did open letters coming from Corfu. Let give him an ':opportunity, and he would bring the matter home to the Government.—(Hear, hear.) Did the Government shrink from that?—(Hear, hear.) Hehad got the letters of Mr. Mazaini which they opened, and could at any moment produce them. He did not know whether the man who copied these letters, forged the seals, and went through all the other dirty work, gave the address correctly or not ; but he had ex tracts from letters corning, certainly not from Corfu, but from Bologna, which was in the neighbourhood, which had been opened and detained at the Post-office. —(Hear, hear.) Yet, on the former occasion when this matter was before the House, it was stated that the Go vernment never knew that the Bandieri were at Corfu until after they had sailed. The Bandieri sailed from Corfu on the 12th of June,: and landed at Calabra on the 19th. but, according to the statement of the Right Hon. Ba ronet, it was totally impossible the Government could have been aware of the existence of their plot. Now one of the Bandieras arrived at Corfu on the 28th of March, and the other on the 21st of April, and from that period up to the time of their sailing, on the 12th of June, they never moved from Corfu, so that the Government must have been aware of their presence there.—(Hear, hear.) Another reason given by the Government was that they could not by any means know where the Bandieri were going to, or they could perhaps have prevented their massacre. Could this be so ? Information was certainly given to Lord Seymour that a party had gone out with arms, ammunition, and 22 men, and he was asked by the foreign Powers to send a steamer after them. But what did Lord Seymour do ? Why, he said the accounts were dreadfully exaggerated; and twenty-four hours after he received the information he sent a sailing vessel after them. Lord Seymour, however, in his opinion, ought to have sent to Madrid ; but if he had sent even a steam-boat after these people, who, he still said, had been murdered by a foreign Power, aided by the British Government, the honour of this country would have been saved. Then they were told that there were no troops to put them down, and the peasantry rose against them. Now was that so? No, it was not; for these people were met by the regular troops. They were met by the 11th Chasseurs, by whom they were charged, and they proved that it was not the peasantry who put these unfortunate people down, and af:erwards took them prisoners. The King of Naples, a short time subsequently, thanked no less than 170 individuals, who were chiefly connected with the army, for services they had performed in suppressing this insurrectionary movement, and conferred an order upon the Neapolitan consul at Corfu, for services he had performed in this most horrible transaction. Then the Right Hon. Baronet said, if they had not taken the course they did, Austria would have marched 70,000 men into the Papal States. Now, with this declaration before them, he thought the House was much indebted to the Hon. Member for Waterford, for bringing the question of the foreign relations of the country before them. In his opinion, they had completely lost sight of this part of the subject. Their pet s ona l altercations had made them overlook what was going forward on the continent. They were told that if there were to be an insurrection in the Papal States, Austria would immediately march 70,000 men into those States, a n d u pon this ground the Government were justified in opening the letters of a foreign exile residing in thi s country. 6 Now he should like to know upon what principle they interfered with the internal commotions of a forei g n c ountry ? He thought this was a subject we ll 'worthy t h e consideration of the House. Now, by wh a t be knew of the Constitution, he did not think they had any right to interfere with the internal commotions of other countries ; indeed he had always understood that England repudiated any such steps. It was resisted in mere than one instance by Mr. Canning. It was resisted by him in the case of Spain, when France tried to dictate to Spain on the subject of its civil institutions. But now England was to be told that Austria had threatened to march 70,000 men into the Papal States, and to prevent this, it was necessary that the British Government should supply a foreign Power with certain information.—(Hear, hear.) He must repeat, then, that this was a subject well worth the at tention of the H ouse . Why should they favour these little despotic States ? They were, in his opinion, a dis grace to civilised Europe, and he hoped one day to see swept away. them totally But not so the British Go vernment. They aid e d Austria who held out a threat to these States that they would send down upon them 70,000 men, in the event of an insurrection, and openly declared that England would assist them in every possible way, and thus the British Government involved themselves in every petty dispute in Europe.— (Hear , hear.) Th at , in his opinion, was what the conduct of the Government savoured with, through out the whole of this transaction, than which anything could hardly be more disgraceful.—(Hear, hear.) He thanked his Right Hon. Friend for having introduced that motion, and he could only say that, so far as the exertions of an individual Member of that House went, he would do all he could to wipe away the stain that remained upon this country, in consequence of the part taken in this transaction by the Government. He should give the motion his most cordial support. Mr. WARBURTON informed the House that no attack was made upon Mr. Mazzini in the recent Com mittee, in so far as the Rodez transaction was con cerned.--(Bear, hear.) The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion Against it Majority against it EXCISE ACTS. On the order of the day being put for going into Com mittee on these Acts. Mr. F. BARING wished to call the attention of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer to a point of some importance connected with these laws. At present a wine merchant could not sell more than two gallo:s of spirits at a titre, and this restriction was attended with great inconvenience to the public. Now he wished to know whether some change could not be made in the present system. He believed a change was advocated by the Commissioners of Excise. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was afraid the quesdon which the Hon. Gentleman had put to him, was one which it was not in his power to answer satisfactorily. He had been assailed in strong langusge by parties who entertained different views on the subject—by those who wished to obtain the privilege of selling spirits in small quantities without a special licence, and those who opposed such a step. He had, therefore, had some difficulty to encounter in the matter ; but however forcible some of the arguments might be in favour of the Hon. Gentleman's proposal, he could not conceal from himself that the change would not only result in a loss to the revenue, but tend to give great dissatisfaction to a large number of parties who had provided themselves with special licences for selling wine or liquors in less quantities than two gallons. He thought it would be only fair to consider the interest of those who paid the high duty for permission to sell in small quantities. At the same time, it was his disposi tion to reconcile both interests as well as he could; and if he should determine to propose any measure on the subject, he would give all parties sufficient notice. In answer to a question from Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, which was not clearly heard in the gallery, Sir J. GRAHAM said that he would not object to lay before the House the dispatches of Sir Hamilton Seymour, referred to in the course of the evening. EXCISE —THE GLASS DUTIES. The House then went into Committee upon the Excise duties. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved a resolution for the remission of the Excise duties upon glass. _ _ -14 - Mr. HAWES said that, in the absence of his lion. Friend (Mr. Pattison), it had been his intention to move " that drawbacks be allowed on the stocks of the London bottle merchants, the same being certified to be new bot tles only, and also on all new bottles in transit from the manufactories, the same being shipped previous to the sth day of April, and being provided with certificates from the manufacturers of their having paid duty ; and drawbacks to be made, on the same principle, as to the other manufacturers and dealers in glass." But he was disposed to leave the matter in the hands of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, in the hope that the Govern ment would be as liberal as it could. The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER said that it would be impossible to comply with the demands made for drawbacks upon bottles without opening the way for great frauds, several parties having already made large purchases of old bottles in the hope that they would be able to cheat the Government out of the drawback. Mr. BOUVERIE thought there could be no fraud connived at by the Government paying back the duty which had already been received. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ~aid that all parties had had sufficient notice, and that the duty upon glass manufactured since the announcement of the Government's intention, would not be demanded if the bottles were packed before the sth of April. Mr. SPOONER would propose that the time should be extended to the sth of April, 1846. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the remission of the Excise duty, and the continu ance of the protection, was a sufficient compensation to the manufacturers. Sir R. PEEL hoped the House would not press the Government to go further in meeting the demands of the glass manufacturers than they had done. The extension of the protection of 100 per cent, for eighteen months was required, to enable the manufacturers, who had been long oppressed by the Excise duties, to compete with foreign countries. Lord J. RUSSELL thought that there were no fair grounds of public feeling for acceding to the present demand. After some observations from Mr. HAWES and the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, the resolution was agreed to. The House then resumed, the CHAIRMAN reported progress, and leave was given to bring in a Bill to repeal the glass duty. The other orders of the day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at a quarter past Nine o'Clock. MONEY MARKET and CITY NEWS FROX THE MORNING PAPERS OF THIS DAY. CITY, TUESDAY EVENING. TIMES.—The premium on gold at Paris is 19 per mille, which, at the English Mint price of 3/. 17s. 100. per ounce for standard gold, gives an exchange of 2:5 63 ; and the exchange at Paris on London at short being 25 85, it follows that gold is 0.85 per cent. dearer in London than in Paris. By advices from Hamburgh, the price of gold is 4361 per mark, which, at the English ➢tint price of 3/. 17s. 10Ad. per ounce for standard gold, gives an exchange of 13 104 ; and the exchange at Hamburgh on London at short being 13 12i, it follows that gold is 0.91 per cent. dearer in London than in Hamburgh. The half-yearly general meeting of the Patent Galvanised Iron Company was held at their offices yesterday, when a dividend of eight per cent. (free of income-tax) was declared for the half-year ending the 31st of December. An addition of 50,0001. was :made to the capital (now 200,0000, for the erection of four more blast furnaces in Wales, and adding to the Company's works in Staffordshire. The additional capital was raised in the room at once. To show how the mania for railway speculation has ex tended in France, it may be stated that share markets have boen established at Marseilles and Lyons, and that it is in tended to give lists of prices at those towns, independently of the Paris Bourse. A correspondent writes to warn the public that the plate glass companies are taking measures to deprive them of the advantage they would otherwise derive from the removal of duty. A meeting of these companies, it seems, was lately held, which resulted in a tariff of prices, according to which squares containing more than ten superficial feet would be as expensive, or more so, than under the old system. They pro posed, indeed, to lower the price, but the discount they intend to allow from the tariff is, according to this authority, so much less than the former discount, that glass of large size will be as dear as ever. HERALD.—We understand that the Directors of the Bank of England have carried out an intention, to which we alluded some time ago, of placing the rate of discount at the branches on the same footing as in town. The minimum rate is 2} per cent. for what the manager may class as un doubted bills, and, of course, with the discretion of charging higher for inferior paper. Another fact has been communi cated to us on authority which there is no reason to dispute, which will appear to many persons not a little singular. It appears that the managers of the branch banks have re ceived instructions not to take the notes issued by the head office in London in payment, in order to force a more extended circulation of the notes issued by the branches in the various localities. It is pre sumed further that the object is to throw an impediment in the way of remitting money from one part of the country to another in the form of notes, by which the commissions charged by bankers are evaded. All these mea sures may be considered fair and justifiable means of com petition, but as different opinions may be formed upon that point, it is proper that the facts should be properly under stood. It must be borne in mind that the notes issued at the branches of the Bank of England are made payable there only, and that the paper of the Bank is only a legal tender at the place where it is issued. If the rule thus laid down, how ever, be rigidly carried out, a person leaving London with batik notes in his pocket may find himself in the country no better provided thau with as much waste paper, when it is tabooed by the branches of the establishment. SUN.—The Funds close rather heavily. Consols 99% 1 / 2 for Money, and % 1 / for Time. Exchequer-bills, however, were 61s. to 635. premium. Spanish Three per Cents. were 40 3 / 4 % ; Mexican were 35 1 / 2 ; and Chilian, ex. Div., 99 ; Portuguese Converted were 66; and Belgian Four-and-a-Half per Cents. 100 3 / 4 . The additional transactions in Railway Shares have been these :—The Birmingham and Gloucester, Half, 1 ; Bristol and Gloucester, 31 ; Caledonian, 5% ; Cambridge and Lin coln, 6% to 3 / 4 ; Chester and Holyhead, 3 1 / 2 ; Churnet Val ley, 5 1 / 2 ; Dublin and Belfast, 6 1 ,4 ; Eastern Union Exten sion, 24 ; Great North of England, New, 19 3 / 4 ; Guildford, Fareham, and Portsmouth, 2 1 / 2 N ; Harwich, 1%; Lancas ter and Carlisle, 23; London and Birmingham, 134; Ditto, Thirds, 42 3 / 4 ; Ditto, Quarter, 29 3 / 4 ; Brighton, 14% ; South- Western, Sew, ; T Manchester and Birmingham, Quarter, ; Midland, 55 ; ewcastle New Brandling, 21 1 / 2 ; New castle and Berwick, 13 3 / 4 ; North British, New, 3 ; 'Norwich and Brandon, 6% ; Coventry and Nuneaton, 1 3 / 4 ; Great. Grimsby and Sheffield, 1; Kentish Coast, ; Scottish Mid land, 1 1 / 2 ; South Eastern, ex Div., 9 1 / 2 ; Ditto, New, No. 1, 8 ; Ditto, No. 2, 94 ; Waterford and Kilkenny, 2 1 A ; Yar mouth and Norwich, 7 ; York and North Midland, 52 53 ; Selby, Extension, 15 ; Boulogne and Amiens, 8; Great Northern of France, 2; Lyons and Avignon, 14 %; Paris and Orleans, 30 1 / 2 ; Aberdeen, 7 to 14 ; and Direct North ern, 2 premium ; Direct Norwich, 1 / 2 ; Greenwich, 1 3 / 4 ; Lin coln, York, and Leeds, %; and Preston and Wyre, 15 dis. The Foreign Exchanges, except as regards Paris, were steady this afternoon. EUGENE SUE'S HISTORICAL ROMANCE " DE RO HAN, OR, THE COURT CONSPIRATOR."—The Court Journal pronounces this work " to be, perhaps, the best of Eugene Sue's productions. It is an historical romance in the strictest sense of that phrase, yet rife with every one of those characteristics which make that species of composition so palatable to the merely popular taste of the day. There is no class of readers, even the highest and most cultivated, who may not derive both amusement and instruction from it as an ill ustrat i on o f historical its wild ; while, on the other h an d, i ts v i v id pa i n ti n g, wild and exciting incidents, the vigour and verisimilitud e of its delineations of h uman c h aracter , an d th e rapid movement and bold simplicity of its style, give it a peculiar charm for thos e w h o see k , i n wor k s o f this nature, the mere excitement of the moment."—Cour t Journal. CONFLICT BETWEEN THE POLICE AND THE PEA SANTRY IN IRELAND.—The following melancholy intel ligence is communicated by a correspondent, upon whom we can rely:—" Boyle, March 27,1845.—Late last night, or very early this morning, a vast number of men pro ceeded, or rather assembled, in the neighbourhood of Strokestown, and were in the act of digging up land, when it became necessary for the police to fire. One of the country people was shot dead, and eleven wounded. The coroner (Mr. Peyton) has been sent for, to hold an inquest, the result of which is not yet known.—There is no doubt of one man having been shot, and several in jured. This occurred within a mile of Strokestown. If I can obtain any further particulars before the post goes out I shall send them." —Dublin Evening Mail. ' Mr. Dean, Chairman of the Customs, and Mr. John Wood, Chairman of the Excise, had interviews yesterday with the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Mr. Higham, Secretary and Comptroller-General to the Commissioners for the Reduction of the National Debt, had also an interview with the Right Hon. Gentleman. LATEST PRICES OF SHARES :N RAILWAYS, BANKS, ASSURANCE, AND OTHER COMPANIES' STOCK. From the Official List, 'UIILISHED EVERY TUESDAY AND FRIDAY EVENING. LONDON, TUESDAY, APRIL 1. RAILWAYS. Dividend Amount ' Name of Company. per of Paid. Price. Annum. Stare. £ s. d. £ s. d. Aberdeen........... - - 2 10 0 3% Birmingham & Gloster 31. bs. persh. 100 0 0 100 0 0 138 Ditto, New, iss. li die. 15s. 25 0 0 17 10 0 34% Flrighton,Lews,& Mist., - 50 0 0 10 0 0 10 Bristol and Exeter •• • • 2/.l6s.per sh. 100 0 0 70 0 0 83 Ditto and Gloucester - 50 0 0 30 0 0 60 Caledonian • ... ••• • • • - 50 0 0 5 0 0 10% 'isimbridge and Lincoln - - 25 0 0 110 0 8 1 ,4 Chatham & Prtsmouth - 20 0 0 1 0 0 Chester and Holyhead - 50 0 0 50 0 8U Chichester & Brighton - - 10 0 0 11N Churnet Valley .• ••• • • - 20 0 0 2 0 0 7% Cornwall .... •••• • • -•- - 3 0 0 4% Direct Northern• ••• • • - 50 0 0 210 0 4% Direct Norwich ••• • • • - 20 0 0 1 0 0 I A Diss,Beecles, & Yrmth - 25 0 0 110 0 DA Dublin & Belfast June. - 50 0 0 210 0 ii% Ditto and Galway • • - - 2 10 0 3% Eastern Counties ... • . 4s. per sh. 25 0 0 14 16 0 21% Do.,Perpetual, No.l 51. per ct. 613 4 313 4 1% p. Ditto, ditto, No. 2. • • - - 0 13 4 % pm. Eastern Union ••.• • • • - 50 0 0 10 0 0 18 1 4 Edinburgh & Glasgow 21. ss. p. sib 50 0 0 50 0 0 60!4 Ditto, Quarter Shares 11s. 3d. p. sh. 12 10 0 12 10 0 15% Ely and Bedford .•. • • - 25 0 0 1 5 0 1% Grand Connection •• - - 50 0 0 210 0 Grand Junction .. •• • • 10/. per ct. 100 0 0 100 0 0 224 Ditto, Half Shares • • 10/. per ct. 50 0 0 50 0 0 112 Ditto, Quarter Shares 101. per ct. 25 0 0 25 0 0 Gt. Southern &Western - 50 0 0 5 0 0 16% Great North of England 31.55. 100 0 0 100 0 0 195 Ditto, Ncw.• •••• • • • - 40 0 0 5 0 0 47 Great Western Ditto, Half Shares • Ditto, Fifths..• .•. • • 71. per cent. 20 0 0 20 0 0 40% Guilford Junction. • . - 50 0 0 35 0 0 Harwich • - 20 0 0 1 0 0 2% Hull and Selby .••• • • • St. ss. pr ct. 50 0 0 50 0 0 98 Ditto, Quarter Shares - 12 10 0 12 10 0 20% Kendal & Windermere - 25 0 0 110 0 23 Lancaster and Carlisle - 50 0 0 15 0 0 39 Leeds and Bradford. • • - 50 0 0 5 0 0 21% Liverpool & Manchestr 10/. per ct. 100 0 0 100 0 0 Ditto, Half Shares.. 101. per et. 50 0 0 50 0 0 Ditto, Quarter Shares 10/. per et. 25 0 0 25 0 0 London & Birmingham 10/. per ct. -- Stock. 234 Ditto, New Thirds.. 10/. per ct. 32 0 0 2 0 0 44 3 Ditto,New 14 Shares 10/. per Gt. 25 0 0 2 0 0 31% London and Blackwall - 16 13 4 - 7 % London and Brighton.. it. Os. per sh. 50 0 0 50 0 6 65 Ditto, Loan Notes .. 51. per cent. 10 0 0 10 0 0 13% London and Greenwich - 12 15 4 - 11 Ditto, Pref. or Priv.. 5/. per cent. 18 (7 2 - 24% London and S. Western S/. ss. per sh. 41 6 10 - 80 Do., New Cons. Bths - 40 0 0 6 0 0 24% Ditto, New ........ - 50 0 0 210 0 12% london and Croydon -10 s. persh. 13 15 9 - 17% Ditto, Guarntd. sp. c. - 9 0 0 4 0 0 5 London and York... .• - 50 0 0 2 10 0 3 1 4 Lynn and Ely ...... - 25 0 0 210 0 7% anchester and Leeds 41.75, 6d. p. s. 100 0 0 70 0 0 144 Ditto, Half Shares.. 1/.175.6d.p.5. 50 0 0 32 0 0 652 Ditto, Quarter Shares 4s. 25 0 0 2 0 0 20 Ditto, Sixteenths .• • - 6 5 0 1 5 0 7 , 7 4 Manchestr & firming. 2/. per share 40 0 0 40 0 57% Ditto, Quarter Shares - 10 0 0 4 0 0 10% Midland - Stock. 145 Ditto, Fifths ....... - - 2 0 0 3% Ditto, Binn. 'l;., Derby 2/.135. persh, - Stock. 116 Newcastle & Berwick - 25 0 0 110 0 I 16 Newcstle & Darl. June. 6s. 25 0 0 9 4 0 0 48 North British - 25 0 0 10 0 0 17% Northern and Eastern . 2/. ss. ! 0 0 0 45 0 0 65 Ditto, Scrip, iss. 5/. d. 15s. 50 0 0 30 0 0 35 Ditto, Quarter Shares - 12 10 0 12 10 0 17% North Kent • . - 50 0 0 2 15 0 3 Norwich and Brandon. - 20 0 0 10 0 0 16 3 / Ditto, New - 10 0 0 1 0 0 4% Portsin uth Direct - - - 50 0 0 2100 I 2 Preston and Wyre .... - 50 0 0 50 0 0 35 Itichnuld &W. E June. - 20 0 0 1 0 0 I 4% Rugby •..• • • ...... ... - 20 0 0 1 0 0 4% Ditto, 2d Pref., 1842 - 25 0 0 25 0 0 Sheffield and Lincoln.. - 25 0 0 15 0 1% Sheffield & Manchestr 5/. per cent. 100 0 0 82 10 0 Ditto, Quarter Shares - 25 0 0 8 0 0 13 Shrws.,Wolv.,Dud.,llir - 50 0 0 210 0 4% South Devon ......... - 50 0 0 10 0 0 20% South-Eastern & Dovr It. ls. 33 2 4 - 42 14 Ditto, New iss.32l.dis - 50 0 0 8 0 0 16 South Wales .•• • • • ... - - 210 0 6% Stevenson's Prtsmouth - - 210 0 2% Thames and Medway.. - 19 5 8 - 17% Trent Valley •.• • • • ... - 20 0 0 2 0 0 17 Yarmouth & Norwich - 20 0 0 20 0 0 28 Ditto, New •••• • • • • - 20 0 0 8 0 0 15% York & North ilidland 10/. per et. 50 0 0 50 0 0 103 Ditto, Half Shares.. 101. per ct. 25 0 0 25 0 0 1 50 Do., Scarbro' Branch - 25 0 0 20 0 0 . 42 Ditto, Selby Scrip .. - 50 0 0 20 0 0 I 68 Ditto, Extension .... - 25 0 0 15 0 i 15% Boulogne and Amiens. - 20 0 0 2 0 0 12% Gt. Northern of France - 20 0 0 40 0 5% Orleans and Vierzon • . - 20 0 0 2 0 0 18% Orleans & Bourdeaux - 20 0 0 2 0 0 12 Paris &Lyons(Laffitte) - 20 0 0 2 0 0 3% p Paris and Strasbourg.. - 20 0 0 2 0 0 2% Paris and Orleans. • ... - 20 0 0 20 0 0 51 Paris and Rouen ...... 2/. 20 0 0 20 0 0 44% Rouen and Havre •• .. - 20 0 0 14 0 0 31 POINT-STOCK BANKS. Dividend Amount Name of Company. per of Paid. Price. Annum. Share. £ s. d. £ s. d. Australasia Britsh North American 41. per cent. 50 0 0 50 0 0 45% Commercia o Si. per cent. 100 0 0 20 0 0 23 Colonial ..... Si. per cent. 100 0 0 25 0 0 14 Londn and Westininstr 61. per cent. 100 0 0 20 0 0 27% London Joint-Stock ..• 61. per cent. 50 0 0 10 0 0 14% Metropolitan 25 0 0 7 10 0 Provincial of Ireland 8/. per cent. 100 0 0 25 0 0 45 Ditto, New National of Ireland .• 51. per cent. 50 0 0 17 10 0 16% Nat. Provncial of En. Si. per cent. 100 0 0 35 0 8 37% Ditto, New. Union of Australia 25 0 0 25 0 0 26X Union of London 5/. per cent. 50 0 0 10 0 0 121,E XNSURANCE COMPANIES. Dividend Amount , Name of Company. per of Paid. , Price. Annum. Share. , £ s. d. £ s. d. Albion ••.•••• • .. • • • 3l. 10s. 500 0 0 50 0 0 7214 Alliance Brit. and For 6 per cent. 100 0 0 11 0 0 19% Ditto Marine. .. Atlas .••••.-.. .. i .. British Commercial Clericl,Med.&Gen.Life 51. per cent. 100 0 0 210 1 6% County r 9s. and 1 61.55. bs.S 40 0 0 5 0 0 10 Eagle 6s. [ 58, Per 3os c b t 8 . , i 50 0 0 50 0 5% Economic Life . • . ..... WOO 0 0 250 0 0 Eng. & Scot. Law Life.. 5/. per cent. 50 0 0 20 0 2% European Life Freemasons' .......... 51. per cent. 20 0 0 3 0 0 Globe 6/. per cent. Stock. - 142 Guardian Imperial Fire ••.• • • • • 12/. per cent. 500 0 0 50 0 0 195 Imperial Life... .... 12s. 100 0 0 10 0 0 16 Indemnity Marine ... • 1/. sh. & bs. 100 0 0 513 1 30 Law Life ............ 3/, 58. 100 0 0 10 0 0 45% Legal and General Life - 50 0 0 2 0 0 5% London Fire ..••. • • • . 10s. 25 0 0 12 10 0 16 Loudon Ship Marine •••••••••••••• 5/. per cent. 100 0 0 15 0 0 Med. Invlid & Gen. Life - 50 0 0 2 0 0 3 National Loan Fund.. 51. per cent. 20 0 0 210 0 2 1 /, National Life • .... 8/. per cent. 100 0 0 50 0 914 Palladium Life • Phconix • 3/. p. et. & bs. - - Protector Life •••• • • • . 5/. per cent. 20 0 0 1 0 0 Provident Life •••• • • • • 1/. ss. 100 0 0 10 0 0 24 Rock Life Royal Exchange ••• • • 51. per cent. Stock. - 188 Sun Fire .. .... • • • • • • 6/. 10s. - - Ditto Life ... • • • • .• • 11. 6s. - - Universal Life •••• . • • 10% /. pr cnt. 100 0 615 0 16 BOWLS. .• Dividend Amount same of Company. per of Paid. Price Annum. Share. X s. d. A s. d. Commercial .•• • Last and West India s%i, pr cent. Stock. 142 East Country • 1/. per sh. 100 0 0 21 London ••• • • • ..... • • 4%1. pr cent. Stock. 116% St. Katharine •••• • • • . 5 per cent. Stock. 110% Southampton •••• • • • • 4/. per cent. 50 0 0 50 0 0 Commercial .• • • Last and West India East Country ... London • • •••• ..... .. St. Katharine • • • • • • • • Southampton • • • • .• .. 116% 11014 WATER-WORKS. Dividend Amount Paid. An p :u r m. Shoare. 01 - 4 - 0 - Name of Company. I £ s, East London •••• • • • I 8!. 100 0 Grand Junction .• . . 1 31. 46 13 Kent ••••• • • • • • ... •• • 21. 10s. 100 0 Vauxhall ...... .. .. 51. per cent. f 100 o West Middlesex .. .. . • 41.16 x. pr et. 1 63 12 LIST Or SCOTTISH COMPANIES' PRICES Dividead Amount Name of Company. per of Paid. Price. Annum. Share. £ s. d. £ s. d. Bank of Scotland Royal Bank of Scotland 6/. per cent. 100 0 0 168% British Linen Company 8P per cent. 100 0 0 2263 Commercial Bank .. • . 61. per cent. 100 0 0 1673 National Bank 6l. per cent. 10 0 0 15% Union Bank of Scotland 7%/. pr cent. 50 0 0 95 Western Bank.... • North of Scotland Bank 61. per cent. 5 0 0 7 Clydesdale Bank.. •• • • 61. per cent. 10 0 0 14% Eastern Bank... ••• • • 3/. per cent. 15 0 0 113 Caledonian Bank .•. • • 61. per cent. 210 0 3% Edinb.& Glasgow Bank 51. per cent. 50 0 7% City of Glasgow Bank . 51 . per cent. 815 0 13% Scottish Union Ins. Co. 51. per cant. 20 0 0 10 0 1% Hercules Insurance Co. 71. per cent. 100 0 0 10 0 0 14% Insur. Co. of Scotlnd.• 5/. per cent. 10 0 0 All paid. 10 North British Insur • 91. per cent. 200 0 0 10 0 0 27 Caledonian Fire Insur. 101. per cent. 100 0 0 10 0 0 24 Edinburgh Rife Insur. 61. per Gent. 100 0 0 10 0 0 18% Edin. &Glasg. Railway 430. percent. 50 0 0 50 0 0 653/ Ditto, >y Shares • • 4351. percent. 12 10 0 All paid. 164 Edin., Leith, & Grantn 20 0 0 20 0 0 15 Glasgw & Ayrshir Rail. 4%1. per cent. 50 0 0 All paid. 65% Glasgw & Greenck Rail. 2/. per cent. 25 0 0 All paid. 15 Glsgw & Garnkirk Rail. Si. per cent. 25 0 0 All paid. 28 Dundee&Arbroth Rail. Si. per cent. 25 0 0 All paid. 323 CANALS. I T; Dividend N ames o f 0 Dividend Names of Price . Companies . per Price vs i Companies. PerAmutm. Annum. T.J Z 1 Ashtn &OM 97 51.55. p c 72 Monmouthsh 100 81. 160 Ashby-d-la-Z 113 41. 70 Mntgomrysh 100 51. 98 Barnsley •. • • 160 121. 180 Maceleslleld . 100 - 16 Basingstoke 100 - 5 Neath ... •• • 100 201. 365 Brknk&Abrg 150, 51. 85 Nottingham . 150 121. 260 Cromtbrd 100 18/. 164 Peak Forest. 78 31. 40 Dudley , lOO 41. 80 Regent's • 33 11. 24 Derby lO Ol 8/. 103 Rochdale ... •85 41. 55 Ellsmre&Chs 133 41. 58 Shropshire 125 81. 120 Erewash Forth & Clyde 100 41. 105 Do.Lk Fd St 12 6/. p. c. 11 GrandJunetn 100 71. 120 Stfird &Wore 140 281. 480 Grand Union t loo H. 10s. 25 Shrewsbury.. 125 151. 230 Glamorgnsh . ' 172 13%1. 210 Stourbridge .. 145 201. 360 Glstr &Brkly 00. - 8 Strtfrd on Av 79 11. 10s. 30 Grantham • • 150 12/. 100 Severn and/ Huddersfield.' 57 - 20 Wye Rail. 26 IL Bs. 30 Kennt & Avn, 39 7s. 6d. 10 Trnt & Mr-1 50 301. 450 Lancaster 47 11. 10. 40 my, sh. Leeds& Livrp 100 341. 570 Tharns &Med 19 - 10 Leicester Leiestr & Nth 83 4/. 70 Binni ng / 78 41. 50 Loughboroght 1421 701. 1050 Willa & Bib 67 11. 45. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. NORFOLK CIRCUIT.—Bury St. Edmunds, March 31. CROWN COURT.—(Befor,e Mr. Baron PARKE.) ALLEGED Mc RDEit.— William Tottenham, _ aged' • E i; was arraigned on an indictment which charged him'' the wilful murder of Mary Anne, his wife, on the 1 5 y, of February last, by shooting her through the head so' a pistol at Wantisden, in this county. the Mr. Gurdon and Lord A. Hervey appeared for prosecution ; Mr. Prendergast defended the prisoner. In this case it will be remembered that the grand PP had expressed a desire that the prisoner should bestle' (Acted for murder, and this day being fixed for his tri the Court was very much crowded. On a former drd we stated that he occupied the position of keeper to De A , Stradbroke, but we were mistaken in that respeettr d Noble Member for East Suffolk, Lord Rendlesham, be his employer. ire, t From the evidence of a man named Mace, his ° he and two or three other witnesses, it appeared that ; I prisoner had been married some few years, and tech with one exception he had been on good terms W i th his wife, who had borne him four children, the foatw r having only been born about three weeks before i. b. e r death. About two years ago there was some w a if pute between them, for which she absented herself f his house, which was in a somewhat It; some locality, and left their children in a wood. - 6. 1 ",:d much search she was ultimately found, and persuade to return to her home, where she lived in perfect 113 " o i mony thenceforth with the prisoner. On the nigl i t io Saturday, the 15th of February last, he was at ' to Oyster public-house at Butley, which, after drinking excess, he left with Mace at ten o'clock. On arriving his house his wife was nearly in bed, but, being teen up, she received him and his friend, who lived about ee in a mile off, very cordially. The prisoner then expre,? -l 0 a wish to have some beer, which she dissuaded him Ol e doing; bttt, seeing tnat he attempted to go down into if t cellar himself, she bade him to sit down and went I° some beer, saying, "if he went he would tumble d 0 stairs and break his neck ." Soon after this she rett hli 0 to her bed-room, and then Mace left the prisoner , °I. said he was going to bed. As Mace went out, hov e l' the prisoner called after him to " come back and belt him kill his hoe." To which Mace replied, " Pooh, r e , o hog was killed long ago." The prisoner again made "' I same request to Mace, just as he got out of hearing s but nothing was seen or heard of him till about , 0 o'clock, when he came to Mace's house in great agita!' io i and rousing them up begged of them to " come ot' L e quick, for he had shot his poor dear Mary AP" e il Mace on this got up as quickly as he CO' so and while dressing himself could hear the wretched ° he stamping the ground and wringing his hands s i , i walked to and fro, exclaiming, " Dear me, what sb e „,",t. do ?" When Mace was up he said to him, " Why, tenham, you don't mean to say you have really shot YT poor wife ?" to which he replied, " As true as- Geu e ' d have shot her ; I have blown her head off." As they walked hastily to his miserable home, Mace ma de fi e similar remark to him, and he then said, " Oh, ° ° " ii t hurt me ; it was all accident ;" and to Mrs. Mace, another time he said, " It was done by a pistol, si c e went off accidentally ." On arriving at the lodges " t ee party found the poor woman lying on her back on t i. floor, not far from a chest of drawers, in which the phi soner used to keep his pistols, her forehead and r'.g d o cheek being all blown off, while the walls on two si . „,l of the room behind her were spattered with blood 1150 brains, and the ceiling bore the mark of a shot. '' e the surgeon was sent for it appeared that the dischl must have taken place, in his opinion, close to the 010 temple of the poor woman, for there was there s e ll e about two inches large, while the skin near it was jag 0 and blackened with powder. Assistance was obtain to soon as possible, boti by Mace and the prisoner ; el when asked to give an account of the dreadful event , t o that " he was thinking of going out again, as eve s s et duty at times, and that his wife dissuaded him ; * - 0 0 he went to the drawer to get his pistols, which W - 0 loaded, and while he was doing so his wife came him with a candle and put her arm on his shoulder. sb , baby then began to cry, and she called out to it, ' o° 4 I'm a coming,' and just then, whether she touellot the pistol or he pulled the trigger he could bd tell, hut it went off, and its contents lodged le Os temple." Such is the outline of this most lament s event. At the close of the case for the prosecution , , 01 . Mr. PRENDERGAST addressed the jury in a most e l t he pressive speech, and, going through the whole 0 ' be evidence, contended that his client ought not even t ° found guilty of manslaughter, as his whole conduc t " n o demeanour throughout the transaction plainl7 indite t o that the death of his wife was entirely attributable accident. Lord Rendlesham having given the prisoner a e l character, t ee Mr. Baron PARKE proceeded to sum up the case to tbeefi jury, leaving it to them to say whether the woull, which the d ecease d came to her d ea th h a d been inut c , e k • by the prisoner at the bar by design, negligence, or °"" i0 1 dent. If by the first, he was then guilty of the es tit _ charge in this indictment ; but if by the second, t er would be their duty to find him guilty of manslaugt t e only ; while if the death ensued from a mere ege, ju t . o o without any neglect on his part, he was entitled full acquittal. Guilty of Manslaughter.—Sentence deferred. me ARSON.—Samuel Stow, aged 22, was indicted for t lr t o niously setting fire to a barn, the property of Tabor, at Polstead, in this county. Mr. O'Malley appeared for the prosecution. A pt This ease was only remarkable for two facts, the jot being that the offence was charged to have take°,?: e t. so far back a s D ecem b er 26, 1842, w hil e t h e stwkl i e matter of the inquiry was no less a barn than the c e brated " Red Barn," at Polstead, the scene of 0010 der of Maria Martin by a man named Corder, who io _ long after that event tried, convicted, and execute' this town for that diabolical offence. relf _ The charge in the present case was almost en tl , e o supported by declarations of the prisoner made to 01 see in custody with himself, and the jury, after a eller' liberation, found him Not Guilty. The same prisoner was afterwards arraigned , o . charge of sending a threatening letter to one Vit"' Bowtell, at Polstead. ero' Mr. O'Malley and Mr. Last were counsel for the,e t be secution, and the case being very clearly establisheo , , prisoner was found Guilty, and forthwith sentence" 15 years' transportation. VAN DIE MEN ' S L AND COMPANY.--Yesterda gn ice' n a twentieth annual m ee ti ng o f th e P ropr i e t ors o f thi s Co was held at the offices, Old Bond-street, Mr. John - in the chair. The report, which was read by the secti.3 stated that the ass e t s o f th e C om p an y amoun t e d t o 394,u': of this 234,0001. had been called up, leaving a balauc t u p g stock and buildings of 160,0001. At the last annual Me e ,at the Directors announced the completion of the aur ve) o 6 lands in the larger di str i c t s , and they had now the P I , e3 SKI of stating th a t i n a di s p a t c h from Circular Head, date. u p 13,1844, thei r agen t repor t e d th a t th e en ti re sur vey l a ter probably b e comp l e t e d w ithi n th ree mon th s o f that th e and also that he had entered into an arrangement with t he colonial Government for the formation of a road Of o il settled districts on the Company's lands, by a more luY e i '•, re ct far preferable ro u t e recen tly dis c overed, which led in s line to Emu Bay, i ns t ea d of the difficult and circuitous ' - r red hitherto employed. Two-thirds of the expense loc i ' re would be defrayed by the local Government, and Ol d be mainder by the Company. All future expenses w°, ll _,i o a, borne by the Gove rn ment. The report stated, in conun s o that the Company was more flourishing than in forineqoa although even now the Directors were unable to recua l . a dividend. A long discussion ensued, after which t h e t be port was adopted. Mr. Catley was elected G o vernor it Company, vice Mr. Birnie, resigned ; and Mr. Marsh al ' ( or appointed to the Deputy-Governorship, vacant by tbejok motion of Mr. Cattley. The retiring Directors were re - el% 4 0 The Ferret, 6, Commander Oake, was at Ascensi n the sth ult. MRRIED. ll' e 5. to On the 27th ult., at Skir A penbeck, near York, C. Pr Esq., solicitor, Hull, to J u li a . e ld est d aug h ter o f the g e Britton, late Vicar of Great Bardfield, Essex. QUARTERLY NAVAL OBITUARY ; 034 Flag Officers—Vice-Admiral Sir Thomas Baker, I C „, 'OO l Vice Admiral Charles W o ll as t o n, Rear-Admiral P s Jackson. .. 11 0 01 Captains—Joh n B a k er , Thomas Huskisson, Vere Dury, J o h n Gascoyne, Henry Probyn. tife uw Commanders—Henry Smith Wilson, William Us -e vesr Balehen F. West, Joseph Batt, Richard Clark, John D i nh har, Bennett Fellows, William Symons, Joseph 13 .rgs James Brockman, Hans S. Elsmere, Thomas Hughes,‘)— Brearley, Adam Grieve. -11 Lieutenants —David T. Nightingale, Edward James W. L. Shiels, Henry M. Short, Orlando N. ru pp° , William Hewett, Rob er t R. A uc h mu ty, James Edward N. Kendall, Th omas St e ph ens , George j' o ber - Charles F. W a d e , M art i n S. E.irkes , Aug. P. Green e / J. D. Waldilove. Aine* MastersWilliarn Oliver, James Doidge. Chaplain—Charles 11. Lethbridge. Mates—Ludo Wells, Gerald Kingsley. Second Master —George S. HalL 14' . K l 3, ; t Da vid Medical Officers—Phy s i c i an Si r I saac Wilson, n.; Surgeons—Thomas Marchant, Stephen Lanigan , A les' Watson, Charles APArthur, M.D., David P. Williams, ander Sanderson, William D. Wilkes; Assistant-Surgnot, William Cowling, Patrick 11. Long, Hamilto n St " Coryndon C. Easton. Tb°ll,, Paymasters and P ursers —Ri c h ar d B oo th, Win; , c en son, James C. C umm i ng, John B . C o tman, L' e— Lellyett, William Harris. t '" ROYAL MARlNEs.—Captain Thomas Gilbert; tenant Henry Howa r d ; S econ d Li eu t ena nts--IreseY 3 ° Bedinfield Pogson. London : Printed and Published by MURDO No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, C oot. a Strand. in the Preci nc t o f th e S a voy, in the Middlesex, Wednesday, April 2, 1845. BIRTHS. A r hf 1' On the 28th ult., Mrs. Charles B. Bingley, of Great borough-street, of a daughter. O S° On the 28th ult., at Yately, Hants, the lady of G. Esq., of a daughter. a - ro' Oa the 28th ult., the wife of Mr. W. T. Clarke, of James-street, Bedford-row, of a son. P eer On the 29th ult., at Plymouth, the lady of Adana Smith, Esq., of Calcutta, of a son. I f ' On the 29th ult., at Camden-road-villas, the wife of Speed, Esq., barrister-at-law, of a son. FL Ooe' On the 29th ult., at Cheltenham, th e l a d y o f J a mes Esq., of a son. On the 29th ult., at Montague-street, Russell-square' S. Haines, of a daughter. Op i On the 30th ult., at Streatham-hill, Brixton, the of James Parkinson, Esq., of a daughter. Doir ir On the 30th ult., at Little Hampton, Mrs. Hail daile, of a son. ---. DIED. nar s• On the 22d ult., at P or t s d own L o d ge , M rs . Cassa Austen, of Chawton, aged 72. c t ittr On the 23d ult., at Carewswood, Cork, Miss Juliana bertson, aged 82. On the 28th ult., in Portman-square, Colonel T utlie% Grant, late of the Grenadier Guards. g lld On the 28th u lt., a t F en t on H ouse , Hampstead , Anne, widow of the late Rev. C. B. Charlewood. vat* On the 29th ult., a t B roo k- s t ree t, H ano ver-squaret "- the widow of Henry Hunt, Esq., M.D. Price.