The Sun. — London, England, 1839-03-01 00:00:00

frrn:hise and if the Hon. and Gallant Gentleman had his vote, it ought to have been struck off his poll.—(Laughter.) He (the Attorney-General) should rejoice to see those persons who had for a number of years loyally and fa;thfully served her Majesty eni rusted with the franchise. —( Hear. ) But he certainly for one w )uA not go the length of the Hon. and Gallant Mem ber, in proposing that a residence of six months on landing upon these shores should entitle them to the franchise. Such a proceeding would be found to be highly prejudicial, and would lead to the discussions of national questions of great intricacy and inconvenience, and on these grounds he should certainly op pose it.---( Hear, hear. ) Mr. PRYME rose, and was met with loud cries of " Oh ! ' 01, !" The Speaker repeatedly called " Order, " but the nose continued for two or three minutes uninterruptedly, Mr. Pryme re r aining all the time immovable with his hand raised. The gra . vitv of his countenance and demeanour while the House was in an uproar, created general laughter. Silence having been at length restored, the Hon. Member observed that he hoped the Hon. and Learned Gentleman would extend the rights of citizenship to those foreigners who, after residing a certain time in that country had taken the oaths of allegiance. PECHELL replied. He denied that he had pro posed or wished to introduce so sweeping a measure as had been asserted by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. The object he had in view was to lessen the expense of denization, but he certainly had no intention of submitting such a proposition as the Hon and Learned Gentleman alluded to to the House. The motion was then agreed to. LAW OF COSTS. Sir F. POLLOCK then rose to move for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law relating to double and treble costs, and to pleading the general issue only in certain cases. The Learned Gentleman, who was most imperfectly heard, was understood to say tl.at he proposed to abolish double and treble costs under all local and public Acts. Surely, parties who sought redress and failed, should not be punished with double and treble costs, merely because they wece unsuccessful. He remembered a a c ase in which a man brought an action for an infringement of the Building Act. The question was referred to arbitration The tward was that the defendant had intended to comply with the Act, and that therefore his intention should protect him from ' the liability of his conduct. In this case the plaintiff suffered from the defendant in the first instance—he got no redress— ard because he did not he was called upon to pay treble costs. He also proposed that that clause in the Poor-law Amendment Act, which enabled Guardians of Unions to inflict parties with more than double and quadruple costs, and upon parties by whom ; they naight suppose themselves aggrieved. As for pleading the general issue, he would take away all such privilege from private speculators and all under Government protection—such as Ma ' gistratel Constables, Excise-officers, and the like. Ho also proposed to repeal those enactments which now obliged parties give notice of action. There were not less than 700 or 800 Act, of Parliament relating to this subject. He would take away the obligation of giving notice of action except for public officers entitled to public protection, and he did not see why the advantage of having notice of action should not be taken away from Dock and Railway Companies, and from mere private in dividuals. Great hardships were sometimes suffered under this provision of giving notice of action. A short time since a man broug!it a case of injury against a Railroad Company (we mi . derstood) and proved his case, but he was turned out because • lie had not given notice of action. The several limitations of actions he would reduce from six to three years. After some further remarks the Hon. and Learned Gentleman moved for leave to bring in his Bill. Leave was WESTMINSTER THEATRES. Me. T. DUNCOMBE, amidst great applause, rose to move that it is the opinion of the House that during Lent no greater restrictions should be placed upon theatrical entertainm - nts within the city of Westminster than are placed upon the like amusements at floe same period in every other part of the metro polis." In bringing forward this motion he was actuated by loyal as well as patriotic and humane and just considerations. tie did not wish to see her Majesty blockaded from going to the theatres of Westminster during Lent.—(Lat_ighter and licar, hear.) He would not have troubled the House with this motion if he did not feel that it was based upon principles of equal justice as well as of common sense.—( Hear, hear.) lk felt that the fault of bringing forward this motion did not rcst with him, but with the Right Hon. the Secretary of State for the Home Department, who, when this subject was intro duced the other night, would not condescend to give the House the slightest reason for refusing the motion. If there were any apologies to be made on this ground, he (Mr. D.) mini l not occupy the time of the House in making it, but ould leave it to the Noble Lord to apologise.—(Laughter.) 'Filen the Noble Lord was upon that occasion supported by a large majority, but many of those who then supported him did so thinking that his (Mr. D.'s) motion was irregular in point of time, and in point of form—irregular in point of time, be use. it was supposed inconvenient that upon a petition being pr,snuted a motion should be made without previous notice; mid in point of form, because it was deemed that as the Noble Lord had advised the Lord Chamberlain, who issued the re strictive order, and who was connected with the Court of West:. minster, it might seem discourteous, as making her Majesty a party in the dispute. However these reasons were no arguments why they should not support the present mot ion which was brought forward hi an entirely different manner. Would the Noble Lord tell him why the inhabitants and players of Westminster should lyl placed under a severe periediCal - restriction, merely because I it was an old custom, which said," it shall be so." He trusted J that Hon. Members would relieve a large body of respectable j and meritorious individuals from those restrictions. Whatever I might he their political and religious feelings out of the House, ijusth e ought to induce them to do so here. It was really most 1 cruel and absurd that while in every other part of the metropolis I the inhabitants were amusing themselves on Wednesdays and 1 Fr idays in Lent, en the north side of Oxford-street, and the other side of the water, and while Court dinners, snd parties, and balls, and levees, at which her Majesty receved her loyal sub jects, were taking place in Westminster—( Hear, hear, l hear)—it was most absurd and cruel that an interdict should be issued, forbidding the most harmless entertain ! ments, not only to the inhabitants of Westminster at large, but what was still worse, to that unhappy class of men, called ..... players and operatives at the theatres.:—(Hear, hear). This i restriction stoppad those men of one-third of their incomes. li Honourable Gentlemen stated on a former occasion, that \when those individuals made their engagements, they did so with a full knowledge of what await e d th e m. The performers did not complainof this, they only complain e d , that they had no engagements upon those nights.—( Laughter.) / Their salaries were weekly, hut they were paid only for the 1 nights on which they played. Were the permitted the I same privileges enjoyed by performers elsewhere, they would I be paid for six nights instead of four, and would thus enjoy f that one-third of the income which was now stopped by this unjust prohibition. He would appeal to her Majesty's M nis- I tors, the great performers of political dramas of the d ty— ( Great laughter and cheers)—he would ask them how would they like to have one-third of their weekly salary sto .ped —( Shouts of laughter, hear hear, and cheers)—be, Luse there was no House ?—( Renewed laughter and che. rs.) He did not see why, if Mr. Rice, of Downing-street, was per mitted to receive his salary on the Wednesdays and Frida; ; in I Lent, Mr. Rice, of the Adelphi, should be deprived of li .. ' (Laughter.) He would refer to the Morning Rat, the organ of the fashionable world, for an account of what had taken place on a Wednesday in Lent within the City of I.:est minster, in the jurisdiction of the very Lord Chamberlain ..vho ! had decided that on that day in the City of Westminster no',ody had any right whatever to enjoy themselves. In the first pace, he foth:d that on that day there had been a great dinner at the Freemasons' Tavern—(Laughter)—of the members of the i Drury-lane Theatrical Fund. He might as well state that this dinner was in general a performance of broad force, with a mixture of musical entertainments. He found it stated in the Morning Post that his Royal Highness the 1 ' Duke of Cambridge was in chair —, hat the party was a very large one, and the whole was kept up with great conviviality. --(Laughter.) That in the course of the evening a variety of w ings were sung and that afterwards Mr. Rice—(Laughter) — ' it was not stated whether he was Chancellor of the Exchequer I _-( Increased laughter)—Mr. Rice , the real Jim Crow — ( R ars o f la ZNhter)—tang " Si' ch a gettin' up stairs"—(Renewed laueliter and " Jim Crow" with several new verses— (Great fan ~,,,,": had quitted ter) —and that after the Illustrious Chairman ' the c,: air, Mr Rice was voted into it by acelarna- I tion, and kept up Vie" erviviality_e had then looked to see if of the after part of the evening —( Roars of laugi:!er• ), H I a!,:, other . persons were enj.7i,ng themselves in the (;it y of Westminster, under the jurisdiction of the Lord Chun- Leriiin ; he had looked for the purpose Of discovering who had ~;; ~ c ii parties during this time of penance, and he found that 1 her Majesty had entertained a large party at this Royal Palace, and that the band of the Life Guards had been in attendance, 1 and performed several pieces of music—(Hear) —and who, of all personstid the House imagine stood first upon the list of the d.itinguished individuals who had been entertained by he r Ma- I i ity upon that occasion—why, the Marquis of Coningham, i ;:;e Lord Chatn'oerla.n, the " Arbiter Elegantiarum i of the City of Westminstei.—( Hear, hear.) Far be it from him to sappoe.• that the Lord Chamberlain (I'd not represent to her Majesty, while the band of Life Guards were ailaylng, that this was a time for penance, and that her Majesty must be Of course aware that it was his duty to prevent any one en joying th emse l ves i n th e c ity o f Westminster,—(Cheers and laughter.) Ile then thought he would see how the Cabinet I Minister; observed the Wednesdays in Lent, and he found ,*.`sat 1 the Marquis of Lansdowne gave a large dinner party—he went I still farther, and baying a great wish to see how the digni tleies of the Church occupied themselves on these occasions— -1 he had again referred to the Morning Post, and he th ere found I that yesterday beinga Wednesday in Lent, the Bishop of Llandeal Ihad ,c;iven an elegant dinner party—( Cheers and laughter)—at the Deanery of St. Paul's, to a large party of gentlemen con nected with his diocese.—(Laughter.) When he found that 1 these were the occupations of her Majesty, of the Ministry, and of the Church during this season, which the Lord Chamberlain said should be devoted exclusively to prayer, penitence, and piety, he must say he could not understand upon what ground his mo tion was to be opposed. The people of the City of West minster did not grudge her Maienty the use of the band of the Life Guards, for which they paid ; they only asked to be permitted to pay for their own band, and listen to it in I the boxes of Drury-lane or Covent-garden. He knew not on what grounds his motion could be opposed, and yet he under stod it was the intention ;,of her Majesty's Government to op pose it. There was no law on the subject; it was dependent upon the caprice of the Lord Chamberlain. Sir James Scar lett had said that he did not know of the existence of any law on this subject, and that this prohibition was merely an old custom. The only law that could be at all imagined to grant this authority was the 10th Geo. IL, which .enacted, that every acting drama should, before its performance, be submitted to the Lord Chamberlain, for his approval, And that no piece should be performed without his licence, and that it should be in his power to prohibit the performance of any piece even after it had been licensed, and thus the House would see that it was impossibl e that any piece could be produced of a seditious, blasphemous, or objectionable na ture, and many pieces after having passed the ordeal of the Lord Chamberlain, had been hissed off by the good sense of the audience. The Lord Chamberlain makes tkis a ground for as suming the power to prohibit these performances during Lent ; but it is clear that this prohibition is only issued to please those who like' the observance of old cus toms ; but he could not see why this ()id custom should not ha abandoned, or why many other examples of ofc. l Lenten custoi should not be revived, as they were customs quite as respectable as this which it has been thought proper to keep up. There was an old Lenten custom which existed up to the time of George 11. Up to that period there was an officer of the King's pa lace denominated the King's cock-crower . —( Laughter . )It was the duty of this officer to perambulate the palace dur ing Lent, and crow the hours of the night, which at other times were proclaimed by the watchmen. The then Prince of Wales, afterwards George 11., happening to be en tering his apartment for supper one evening, met the Kin g ' s cock-crower, who crowed the hour to him, and as he did not understand his language—(Leud laughter) —and was unable to comprehend his interpreter's interpretation, of it, he thought the King's Cock-crower intended to insult him by crowing—he accordingly seized the unfortunate crower by the throat, and nearly strangled him, in consequence of which he was so ill as to be for some time incapable of per forming the duties of his office. After this occurrence the , matter was submitted t o th e grav e c o n sideration of the Court, 1 and it w as d e t erm i ne d t h at the office should be abolished. Now I if this old Lenten custom of shutting up the theatres were to be 1 eentinned, he td not see why the other old Lenten custom of Kings Cock- crower should not be revived. In other countries the National Drama received national support. In France the [-national theatres were supported by the national purses. In Fra nce t h e national theatres were rent free—he asked for 'nothing of this so r t in this country. r He believed that the thesitres paid 3,0001. a year '. l .ltltOrd, who mad e no deduction for " the d r " to the Duke of nnights on which the ; hous es were shut up. He only of lyased th a t th ey s h ould be put pa on in equality w ith ot h er the metropolis, and he could ~----- l N rsA - • icct, _tor not understand the ground upon which his motion could be opposed. He would therefore move " That it is the opinion of this House, that during Lent no greater restrictions should be placed upon theatrical entertainments, within the City of West minster than are placed upon the like amusements at the same period in every other part of the metropolis.—( Loud cheers, in the midst of which the Hon. and Learned Member set down. ) Mr. HUME seconded the motion. He thought it most un just that those in power should maintain such restrictions on the poor, which they _in their own persons disregarded.-- ( Hear, hear.) And lie trusted the Noble Lord would see the justice of doing away with these restrictions, while the Court and the Nobility were constantly acting in contradiction to them. ( Hear, hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL—Sir, the Hon. Member for Fins- bury finds fault with me for not having used arguments against his proposition when he last brought it forward. To my silence then, it seems, we owe that very amusing and face tious speech which he has delivered on this occasion. But, Sir, though this subject may be made as amusing, or perhaps more so, than any other, I do not think questions connected with the respect due to the Established Church.—(Oh, oh, and cries of " Hear, hear, hear")--ought to be made the topics of entertaining remarks in this House.—(" Oh, oh," and "Hear, - hear.") Since the last discussion I have had the opportunity of consulting the Bishop of London—( Laughter from the Ministerialists, " Hear, hear," from the Opposition) —in the presence of another distinguished Prelate, and he stated that he did consider this a respect due to the Established Church that these erformances should be restricted during Lent.—(" Oh, oh, " and " Hear, hear, hear.") And I do think that on subjects of this kind her Majesty's Ministers ought to look rather to the opinions of the heads of the Church —( " Hear, hear," and " No, no")—t.nd to what has been the custom from time immemorial, than to cross the river to the " Surrey," or over Oxford-street, to Marylebone.—(Hear, hear.) Let me, Sir, first advert to what is the state of the law on this question, and the case on wihch the Hen. Member rests his motion; viz., that the practice is different in the City of Westminster than in other parts of the metropolis. Sir, by the Act of 10th Geo. 11. power is given to the Lord Chamberlain, as to theatrical performances—into the limits of that power I will not now enter, and only observe that prior to that time these entertainments were not customary in the City. By another Act it is enacted that the Magistrates shall not have the power to license theatres within twenty miles of London, and therefore the theatres at present existing in Surrey and other places out of London, although they have these theatrical entertainments upon Wednesdays and Fridays ie Lent, yet during those days they are liable to information and penalties, as not being legally established and not within the power f the Act. Sir, there was an action brought as to the Victoria Theatre, when it was contended that the theatre was net licensed, and Lord Denman ruled that it was not a legal place for dramatic entertainment, as it had not been licensed by the Lord Chamberlain. Now if these theatres have been allowed to go on without interference— ( Hear, hear)—that is s defective state of the law, or the law is net properly enforced—(Hear, hear)—but I really think it is too much to say that on a question of the religious observani.e of Lent you are to pay ne regard to the opinions of the heads of the Church, or to ancient custom, but that you are to imitate the illegal practices which have sprung up.—( Hear, hear. ) With regard to the minor theatres of Westminster, the Lord Chamberlain, in order to make them conform to the rules laid down for Drury Lane and Covent Garden, inserted in their licenses a provision that there should be no performance on Wednesdays and Fridays during Lent. They therefore cannot complain of any injustice. And with regard to Drury- Lane and Covent-Garden they well knew the conditions upon which they were to continue to act—as they had acted. Now, Sir, as to the practice—the Hon. Member says it is great hypo crisy, because we find that her Majesty sometimes gives dinners upon Wednesdays, and that other persons do so.—( Hear.) Why, Sir, the same argument may be used as to Sundays.—( Hear, and No, no.) Sir, Ido think that instead of saying the prac tice of Westminster ought to be assimilated to that of the rest of the metropolis, there is more reason to say that the practice of the rest of the metropolis should conform to that of West minster.—(Loud cries of " Oh, oh," from the Ministerialists, and " Hear, hear, hear" from the Opposition.) Ido not object to Parliament passing any law upon the subject, but I do object to this House entering into a resolution as to the manner in which a power vested in the Crown should be exercised Sir, supposing this resolution was to pass, is it to be said that be cause the House of Commons has passed such a resolution that therefore the Lord Chamberlain must change the practice ?- -( Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side.) Well, but it may happen that some Noble Lord or some Right Rev. Prelate may more a counter-resolution in the other House of Parliament, and then what is the Lord Chamberlain to do? Why he must, between the two resolutions act upon his own discretion. Sir, no doubt a change is required in the law as regards thea trical entertainments ; but although the difference of practice in the Metropolis man be good ground for an amusing speech, it is no reason why the Lord Chamberlain should depart from the usual custom. I therefore move the previous question. Lord TEIGNMOUTH wished to ask one question of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. He wished to know whether tnat Hon, Gentleman would put a dinner, given by a Bishop of a religion whose ordinances imposed upon him the rites of hospi tality—( Loud laughter)—Hon. Members might laugh, but would the Hon. Member answer the question, would he put such a duty, for it was a duty—(Laughter)—on the same foot ing as a theatrical entertainment ?—( Laughter. ) He did not deny that such entertainments might be rendered quite rational, but from the manner in which they were now conducted they were rendered sinks of iniquity. In them were con.ained not respectable persons only, but persons of every description. Prostitutes and all other classes.—(Laughter.) He was sure that if the Hon. Member had had tne good fortune to partake —(Laughter)--as he had often done of the hospitalities of one of the Rev. Bench—(Laughter) —he would have seen that if all dinners had been conducted in a similar manner, that as many as possible might be allowed.—(Laughter.) He hoped the Hon. Gentleman would answer the question. Mr. LEADER—The Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Home Department, had treated the motion of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Duncombe) as if it related merely to the question of amusement, and had treated the speech of the Hon. Gentleman as if it were only an entertaining one. But he entreated the House to recollect that it was net a question of mere amuse ment—he entreated them to recollect that it was a question seriously affecting the subsistence of a hundred families. They were to recollect that the stars could, during the nights the theat-es were closed, go to the other theatres, as they might go to the country staring, where the people were not so puritanical, or considered it was not wicked to go to the theatre on a Wednesday or Friday in Lent. He was astonished to hear the Noble Lord declare that the motion of his Hon. Friend could possibly do harm to the Established Church. He (Mr. Leader) would not accuse the Noble Lord of hypocrisy, but most certainly the country would think it appeared very like it. It was so absurd to talk of the theatres being opened on the Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent in Westminster hurting the Established Church, when the people know how those day's were spent in other places--when they knew that the Protestant Church did not now look upon these days with any peculiar reverence.—( Cheers). It was not at all a fair comparison to put them into competition with the Sunday, which was the acknowledged day of rest as well as the day for the observances of religion. The Noble Lord opposite (Lord Teignmouth) had taken part with the Noble Lord on this occasion. —(Ironical cheers and laughter.) After the sen timents delivered lsy the Noble Lord—as he thought it so essen tial that the theatres should be closed in Westminster, let him be consistent, and bring in a Bill to close the theatres in Marylebone on the same occasions. —(Immense cheering.) The people in former times attached to theatres were considered disrespectable, and they might be s•, but now they were not only a respectable but a very agreeable and highly useful class of society.—(Considerable cheering.) Let them not then have a law for the people of Westminster and another for the people out of it. He had no doubt the dinners of the Bishop of Llandaff were very good ones, and he (Mr. L.) did not see any reason why he should not give as many of them as he pleased on either Wednesdays or Fridays during Lent, but nei ther could he see any reason for the people attached to thea tres in Westminster being kept out •f a dinner on those days altogether.—(Cheers.) He trusted that the majority of the House would take the common sense view of the matter, and not be led away by the overstrained religious zeal of some in that House. Lord DUNGANNON had heard with some degree of satis faction the extraordinary expressions of attachment made by the Noble Lord to the Church.—(lronical cheers.) He trusted that attachment might be shown in the measures produced by the Noble Lord in future. He had expressed himself in strong terms that evening, and he (Lord D.) was not sorry to hear it. Although he said this, and although he was one who adhered as strictly as any one in the House to the Church Establishment —( Hear, hear, hear)—still he could not support any thing which he considered unjast.—(Loud cheers.) He rould not consent to sash a quibble, because he considered that it was unjust to have one law for the rich and another for the poor..—(Cheers.) He had never joined in suppoiting any of the Sabbath Bills upon the same ground ; he felt that the people of this country were disposed to be reli gious, and he felt perfectly sensible that they could not be rendered more so by any oppressive legislation whatever. Although he was not often found voting along with the Hon. Gentleman oppcsite, and thqugh it was still Tess often that he was fortunate enough to go out with the Hon. Member for Finsbury, still on the present occasion, as he felt that the Hon. Member was trying to get rid of an absolute and gross absur dity, he would on this occasion vote with him. He could call it nothing but an absurdity to oblige the theatres to be closed in Westminster, while those in other places were open and free tn the entrance of all classes.—(Loud cheers.) It was obvious and clear that if an evil did exist, if the theatres being open were an evil, get rid of the evil in toto, and he joined in the call made by the Hon. Member for Westminster, to intro duce a Hill for that purpose. It was absurd and unjust to sup pose that the Establishment could suffer in any way because a theatre must be closed in one place while it is open throughout the country. If the evil were as great and obvious as some Hon. Gentlemen had stated it to be, then bring in a Bill to close all places of public amusement throughout the country on those days : but do net make invidious—he would go further, and call them absurd—restrictions upon one place and upon one people alone, He would support the motion of the Hon. Member upon principles of common justice.—( Cheers. ) Sir J. GRAHAM said that nothing had been further from his intention than to have trespassed a single moment on the attention of the House, until he heard the speech of the Noble Lord who had just bat down. He feared the time had come when any humble support he could give to the Noble Lord the Secretary of State would be an impedi men t ra th er th an other wise. —ralear, hear, and a laugh )—but on the present occasion, when he had seen him in the bold discharge of his duty, assume grounds that were unpopular, and when he had seen him man- I fully stand up in support of those grounds, considering it his duty to do so, he (Sir J. Graham) would be base indeed, having taken counsel with him on this subject, if he shrunk from asserting now what he had done on a former occasion. He therefore must say that he entirely agreed with him in the course he had pursued. He did not pretend to say that he really believed it was necessary for the mainte. nance of the Established Church that there should not in West minster be performances of this description • but he contended that as long as by the ritual of the Established Church Wed nesdays and Fridays were set apart for sacred observances—as long as the law continued what it was, it was the duty of her thicftes servants to uphold it. The Theatres Royal in West minster we":"°' only Theatres which were un d er th e con troul of her Maje-.7tv's Chamberlain, and if it we re e x p e di en t and the law that the We . .it.7.1 4,1 ays and Fridays in Lent should ‘tsi,servances, it was the be held as days appropriated for sacreZ: duty of her Majesty's Government to enforce the :17- aa far go, a s it would to compel those observances. He con t en d eo that when the heads of the Church represented to her Majesty's Government those days should be observed, it was the duty of the servants of the Crown to enforce it. He did not wish to put it on higher grounds. He certainly had had occasion to oonsi der this subject, when he was one of the servants of the late King, and he had then expressed the same opinion as he had given now. Nothing had been further from his intention than to have addressed the House at all, but seeing the Noble Lord pressed as he had been, and being an old colleague of his, he felt bound to support him.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) Mr. WARD said that after the statements of the Right Hon. Baronet, in which he laid down the broad principle that two eays in the week having been appointed by tho ritual through out Lent, for sacred observances, it was the duty of the servants of the Queen to enforce their observance, after that statement by the Right Honourable Baronet, perhaps he would have no objection to allow him (Mr. Ward) to put a question to him, which was, whether he was not to-morrow (Friday) going to preside a a great public dinner ?—(Great laughter.) Sir J. GRAHAM—That is a charity dinner.__( Hear. ) Mr. WARD—Yes, but it is of a convivial character; and if entertainments of that description were to be a ll owe d t o , take place, he could not see why the people should not be allowed on the same day to participate in a far more :ational entertain ment. It was useless to disguise from themselves the fact, that whenever the present question was mooted they would be accused by the country of gross hypocrisy. The Noble Lord opposite seemed to think that there was a difference between the dinner of a Bishop and another man. How far that might be the case he would not say, but this he would assert that there was not one law for the rich and another for the poor, there was not one law for the Queen and another for her subjects.—( Hear. ) They ought to act upon some uniform principle, and if these observances were to be kept so strictly, he thought it was the duty of the Noble Lord at the head of the Home Department to bring in a bill for the strict observance of every day during Lent. The only ground that could be assigned for the vote of those who opposed the motion of his Hon. Friend, was, that it would be dangerous, not to the morals of the people of England, bat to the ritual of the Established Church. Lord J. RUSSELL said that if it was the wish of Parlia ment to change the law he had no objection to the change, but while the law remained as it was, he thought he was bound as the servant of the Queen to advise the Lord Chamberlain to act in conformity with that law.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. WARBURTON observed, that all that - the Noble Lord said in defence of the continuance of this practice was, that a Bishop and an Archbishop had stated that they were against change, and that as it was an old custom they would advise the House not to act upon that which was the great regulator of all Governments—public opinion.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord opposite had set himself up against public opinion, and he (Mr. Warburton) would venture to predict that ere long he would find public opinion too strong for him.—( Great cheer ing.) He knew that they were seconded by all out of the House, and, with the exception of the precincts of Westminster, Wednesdays and Fridays will be observed during Lent as any other day. The Bishops and the Archbishops had told them that more days ought to be observed, but publie opinion had said that they ought not, and that they would continue to observe Wednesdays and Fridays just like other days of the week ; he would, therefore, leave the Bishops and the Archbishops in the custody of the Noble Lord, venturing to predict that ere long public opinion, which had always carried the day, would obtain a complete victory. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER denied in toto the proposition of the Hon. Member for Bridport. It was very easy to say that public opinion was to be the arbiter, but had that always been the case? In proof that it had not. he would just call the attention of the Honourable Member to a subject upon which he, together with several other Mem bers, had ventured to state that they expressed the public opinion. That was upon a question much more interesting to the public than the question of openi n g the The a t res Roya— he alluded to the delivery of letters in the City of London— tbere the Hon Member ventured to assort that he spoke the voice of the public, in desiring that letters should be delivered 'on Sunday, and what was the result? Why, he found that the public were against him upon every point. If there was one subject upon which, more than another, he would trust the Hon. Member, it was upon a religious question. He wanted something stronger than the assertion of the Hon. Gentleman on the subject. He (ths Chancellor of the Ex chequer) entertained no religious scruples himself with re spect to the opening of theatres on Wednesdays and Fridays.— ( Hear, hear.) 'I hat was his own individual opinion; but if he understood any thing of public opinion, the intorpo ,ition of the Honse on a question of this sort would be misconstrued as a movement against the religious feeling of the country.— (Cries of " Hear, hear.") But if even they were to take a step of this description—he thought the mode in which it was now proposed to be taken was of all others the most incon venient. If they were disposed to take this step, they ought to take it in the shape of Legislation, and not by way of resolu tion.—( Hear, hear.) His Noble Friend had put the case of a supposed contradiction between the resolution of one House and the resolution of the other. He would ask whether the House of Commons was prepared to decide questions of this sort on resolutions ? If they did they gave precisely the same power to resolutions of the other House, and were they prepared to admit that? The Hon. Gentlemen behind him were com pletely in error in the arguments they used with respect to the transmission of letters. Mr. HUME—This is not under discussion. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Not under discussion !—( Cheers and laughter.)—Why if the Hon. Mem ber appealed to public opinion, did he mean to say that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not at liberty to refer to these facts.—( Hear, hear,) The Hon. Gentleman, according to his statement, was entitled to refer to public opinion, but he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was not entitled to draw illustra tions from public opinions in its " outward and visible signs." He did not think that any one besides the Hon. Gentleman would think that was a just or equitable doctrine.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. D'ISRAELI said the Chancellor of the Exchequer had endeavoured to throw the question over, or rather put it in the twopenny post-office. He was anxious to justify the vote he gave the other night, which was almost a solitary one on his aide of the House, because he had as great respect for the Established religion of the country as the Bishop of Lon don.—( Hear, hear, and cheers.) Nay, more so, for ho did not think that he would have agreed to that measure of spoiliation which the Bishop of London had advised with regard to the Canons of Cathedrals.—(A laugh.) But it appeared to him that when they were met on a question of this nature with an expression of vague sentiment on the part of a dignitary of the Church, that the established religion of the country was endangered by a proposition of this kind.—( Cries of "No, no," met by loud cries of "Hear, Lear, hear.") Well, then, that a Resolution of this character was not res p ec tf u l to the established religion of the country, and when a Noble Secre tary of State appealed to time immemorial, which appeared to him (Mr. D'lsraeli), by the quotations of the Noble Lord to be the reign of George 11., when they came forward in such a high spirit, and animated by so lofty a tone, to carry the House away, it might have become them to have made some researches upon this question, and to come forth will something better than a vague expression of feeling in favour of the esta blishment, and with some antiquarian knowlegge, a little more recondite, though it might be time immemorial, than the reign of George the Second. He should like to know at what time during a Protestant sway in this country Lent had been rigidly and properly respected.—( Hear, hear.) He was not prepared to say that he approved of any violation of the rigid observance of Lent, as far asWednesdays and Fridays were concerned. He was not prepared to say it might not be expedient, just, and profoundly religious to observe even the 40 days, but give him the 40 days of Lent as they h ad ever been observed, when perfectly observed. Give him the 40 days of Lent with those mysteries and moralities acted by monks. —( Heai, hear, hear.) That was the only mode in which hu manity had tolerated the rigid observance of Lent, and those were the amusements to which recourse was made.—( Hear, hear.) In deciding on this question, they ought not to forget that the birth of Protestantism and of the Drama in England was almost simultaneous.—(Cheers.) The moment that Pro testantism had any sway in England there was a great relax ation of the observance of Lent. Why in the reign of James 11., a strictly Protestant monarch—(Cries of " Oh !")—apetition was presented, recommending a company of players to the patronage of the King during Lent, and the answer of one of our first Protestant monarchs, a Defender of the Faith, was, " They may act, but only on Wednesdays and Fridays, that they may not interfere with our prayers.—(Cheers and laugh ter.) That was a fair specimen of the tone in which Lent was regarded in an early and very Protestant period. Lent had never been observed rigidly, and completely in Protestant England. The mere observance of two days a week had been a matter rather of convention of law than of strict religious custom.—(Hear, hear.) He must say that the observance of Lent on Wednesdays and Fridays in respect of the theatres, without an equal observance in regard to our morals, was but the shadow of a custom, and the shade of a faith. He was sorry that the Secretary for the Home Department should have urged as an objection to the motion of the Hon. Mem ber for Finsbury, a fear of collision with the House of Lords. But he congratulated those friends who sat on his side of the House upon the advance of those principles.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) A few years back it was whispered that the House of Lords refrained from coming to resolutions which they deemed expedient, lest they should fall into collision with the House of Cemmons, but now what a change a few years had produced. He was glad this discussion had called from the Noble Lord an expression of such devotion to the Church Establishment, and such a fear of collusion with the other House of Parliament.—( Hear, hear, and laughter. ) With these feelings he should support the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. —(Cheers. ) Mr. DUNCOMBE then replied. The Noble Lord the Member for Marylebone had put what he considered to be rather an unfair question. He had asked him whether he would place a Bishop's table on the same footing as a theatre. He ( Mr. D.) never dined at a Bishop's table—(A laugh)—bul there went were to m a t n h y e a t r r e e s s p , e a c n t a d b h l e n t m h n e u mb gh e t r s th o e f he a t t res Church m imight of tb e placed England on quite as good a footing as the elegant entertainments of a Bishop's table.—( Hear and laughter.) The Noble Lord would find that last Friday the illustrious consort of the Duke of Cam bridge attended the Queen's theatre.—( Hear, hear.) The Hon. Bart. the Member for Pembroke had said that it was only within the City of Westminster the Lord Chamberlain had this jurisdiction. The Hon. Bart. was wrong, for the Lord Chamberlain's jurisdiction extended to all theatres Royal. There were theatres Royal, as York, Brighton, and all the large towns, and the Lord Chamberlain had the same jurisdiction over those theatres if he thought proper to exercise it, that he had over those within the City of Westminster.— ( Hear.) It was well known that within a stone's throw of the Pavillion at Brighton, during the time the Court was there, and when the Lord Chamberlain himself was in attendance on Ash the public to such heavy expense. lie had never undertaken individually to direct or alter the i n t er i or arrangemen t s of the House. lie was also resolved that no new experiment should be tried, the expense of which would exceed a given sum. A proposition bad been made to him to try an ingenious lamp during the recess, to which he made no objection, provided he was guaranteed against danger, for he did not wish to under take the dangerous responsibility of lighting the House.— (Laughter. ) Sir F. TRENCH said that the trial o f a new experiment involved the failure of the last. He thought the present mode satisfactory, but if it were considered a fair line, it ought to at any rate to have fair play. The Chancellor of the Exchequer seemed to think that changes in political or domestic arrange ments—(Laughter)—was a dangerous doctrine. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at a Quarter to One. HIS Majesty the EMPEROR of AUSTRIA, His Majesty the EMPEROR of RUSSIA, And His Majesty the KING of PRUSSIA. having AUTHORISED and GUARANTEED several Dis ributions of Money, which (though they are NO LOT TERIES, offer a great many possibilities of obtaining LARGE FORTUNES, HEINE BROTHERS at HAMBURGH, and HEINE BROTHERS at LUBECK, are NOW SELLING SHARES for any of the said DIS TRIBUTIONS of MONEY, at various prices. The Dis tributions contain various portions, from NINE POUNDS. TO TWENTY THOUSAND POUNDS and upwards. Orders for less than 101. cannot be attended to. Persons desirous to purchase may receive PREVIOUS to giving any order, the Prospectus and Particulars, upon ad dressing, WITHOUT DELAY, a line to HEINE BROTHERS at HAMBURGH. P. S e THE NEXT AUSTRIAN DISTRIBUTION CONTAINS PORTIONS OF 4,0001., 7,5001., and 30,000/. MR. SERGEANT TALFOURD'S SPEECH ON THE COPYRIGHT QUESTION. This day is published in a 16mo Demy Pamphlet, MR. SERGEANT TALFOURD'S SPEECH in the HOUSE of COMMONS on WED NESDAY, the 27th February, to which is appended Mr. TEGG'S LETTER to the " TIMES," on the COPY RIGHT MONOPOLY. Foster and Hextall, 268, Strand. pHE MODEL OF THE BATTLE ot WATERLOO is NOW EXHIBITED at the EGYP TIAN HALL, PICCADILLY, by brilliant Artificial Light. Constantly illuminated from Two o'clock in the Afternoon, and throughout the Day in Dark or unfavourable Weather. Open from Ten in the Morning until Nine 'n the Evening, without intermission. Admission One Shilling each. G ENERAL CONVENTION of the IN DUSTRIOUS CLASSES. The DELEGATES of the CONVENTION l-avirg as certained the Legality of Sending out Persons from their own Body to explain the Principles of the PEOPLE'S CHARTER and to procure Signatures to the NATIONAL PETITION, have officially appointed the following persons in furtherance of these objects, and to extend by every legal and constitutional means political information among the people : Messrs. R. Lowery and A. Duncan—to Cornwall and Somer setshire. Mr. P. Hussey—to the North and East Riding of Yorkshire. Mr. H. Craig—to the Western Counties of Scotland. Messrs. J. Moir and W. Cardo—to Devonshire and Dorse shire. Mr. J. Pierce—to North Wales. Mr. J. Collins—to Bedfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Berkshire, and Oxfordshire. Messrs. T. C. Salt and B. Hadley—to Warwickshire, Staf fordshire, and Worcestershire. Messrs. W. G. Burns and Vincent—to Somersetshiro, Here fordshire, Gloucestershire, and South Wales. Mr. J. B. O'Be ien—to Kent, Sussex, Hampshire. and Surrey. Messrs. W. Gill and J. Deegan—to Essex, Suffolk, Cam bridgishire, Norfolk, and Lincolnshire. Persons in the above Counties are respectfully requested to co-operate in getting up Fublic Meetings, in procuring Signa tures to the National Petition, and Funds to the National Rent. By Order of the Convention, W. LO VET T, Secretary. Wednesday, the following pieces were performed.—(Much laughter.) " Charles the Twelfth"—" The Maid of Switzer land"—and " The Vampire."—( Hear, and a laugh,) Now he denied there was any impropriety in that. The petitioners wished to have the theatres closed (luring Passion Week, Christmas Eve, and Christmas Day. He would like to know if the Lord Chamberlain was aware that at the Crown and Anchor Tavern THEATRE ROYAL, COVENT GARDEN. TO-MORROW EVENING, MAucir 2, Will be repeated THE TEMPEST. Alonzo, Mr. Warde; Prospers, Mr. Maereaiy ; Miranda, Miss Helen Fault ; Ariel, Miss P. Horton. To conclude with FRA DIAVOLO. Marquis San Carlos, Mr. Frazer; Lorenzo, Mr. Burnett; Zerlina, Miss Rainforth. Monday, King Lear, with The Kin.- and the Duke. Tuesday, The Lady of Lyons, with Katherine and Petruchio, and High Life Below Stairs. tg. - „ V . ' 4 4 Y ) , a „ _ ' "„ Zile ann. LONDON FRIDAY, MARCH 1, H 39 EVENING EDITION. In the House of Lords last night Lord CHARLE VILLE entered into some explanation of the various re ports concerning the death of Lord NotomaY, and gave a distinct and positive denial to the assertion that the foot-mark left by the assassin was that of a gentle man's shoe. This part of the Noble Lord's statement was confirmed by the Marquis of NOYMANBY. We cannot venture on any further abridgement of the Noble Lord's statements, which should be read at length, but we think the Noble Earl is too sensitive to common re• ports; and we doubt the propriety of the Peers con• tradicting newspaper paragraphs. If they make a prac tice of doing that, every thing which appears in any newspaper relating to themselves, and which they might contradict, and do not, will be assumed as true. Lord LYNDHURST very abruptly asked Lord MEI: BOUNE whether he was aware of Lord EBRINGTON having made a speech against the Irish Church when he appointed him Lord-Lieutenant. If he were, Lord LYNDHURST contended he was a party, contrary to his oath, to a measure destructive to the Church of Ire land. Lord MELBOURNE replied that he did not know whether he was acquainted with it or not, and expressed a doubt of the propriety of making him responsible for the sentiments of every person serving under the Government. Lord WHARNCLIFFE charac terised the Noble Viscount's reply as unsatisfactory. The Marquis of WESTMEATH followed in the same strain. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE retorted on Lord LYNDHURST, and told him that he ought to have been ashamed of some of his own language. Lord LYND HURST, who had spoken in the first instance with more than his usual warmth, replied loudly and angrily. Lord HOLLAND supported the Marquis of LANSDOWNE, and expressed his surprise that Lord LYNDHURST should have questioned in that House the speeches of a Noble Lord made-in another. Lord Wictmow rose to take part in the fray. Lord HOLLAND called him to order, saying there was no question before the House. Lord BROUGHAM, amidst much confusion, and several Lords starting on their -feet, moved that _the House do ad journ; and, having made that motion, he attacked Lord HOLLAND'S observations. On that motion both the Earls of WicaLow and RODEN spoke vehe mently against Lord EBRINGTON'S appointment. After much confusion the subject was dropped, and Lord BROUGHAM wilhdrew his motion for an adjournment. this h sbringTheday, h ßishop o Marriage L f Ln o rdA o gaveNcßtßouoNnudGeHr BROUGHAM gave ei e thatc notice f notice t l, eh that is t I Rouseiteo will proceed with his Sale of Beer Bill. The Poor-laws (Ireland) Amendment Bill was read a third time ; and then the House adjourned. Their Lordships sat but a short time, but in that time they worked hard. In the Commons many petitions were presented for the maintenance of the Corn-laws, some for their abol tion, and some for the extension of religious instruction in Scotland. Mr. HARVEY gave notice of a motion for copies of appointments made by the Earl of DURHAM, by which he seams to think the Members for Liskeard and St. Andrew's have vacated their seats. in the Strand, last night and Friday night last, there were Mr. GOULBURN adverted to the late rumours from "Promenade Concerts ala Valentino—one shilling ?"—(Much the Cape of Good Hope, of the troops of the Colonial laughter.) He believed 800 persons attended these concerts, while the National Theatres were closed —(Hear.) All they Government Keying had an encounter with the emigrant asked was that there should be musical entertainment of that Boors, and been defeated. Mr. LABOUCHERE threw 'description which could be given at a moderate price --he be- discredit on this rumour, and read an extract from a lieved it was a very innocent amusement—(Hear, hear)— an d he would prove to them, if necessary, that the very same en tertainmentfromletter Governor, had taken place the previous evening at improbable. her Majesty's Palace. The Right Hon. Baronet had corn- Mr.PouLETT TfloinsoN moved the resolutionsrelative plimented the Noble Lord in his straightforward and to private business, which will be found in another part of manly speech, but he (Mr. Duneombe) must say that it our paper. Mr. HUMS moved his a mendment, and drew was the most unfair and unmanly speech he had ever heard. What did the Noble Lord ? He had shifted the blame from himself to the Bishop of London, and he stated that drew of Election Corn .__' _ONNELL formerly as scandalous a c :picture of Select Committees on Private havingapplied to him that Right. Rev. Pc-wage had declared mittees,and as Lord HOWICK lately drew of Committees that it would be "a heavy blow" to the Protestant Church. of the whole House. Sir G. STRICKLAND took a similar (Great laughter.) He (Mr. D.) never knew before that view to Mr. Mau, and seconded the motion. Mr. UME'S account of what oe- Popery was the Established religion, because that was an old FRESIIPIELD disputed Mr. H relic of Popery, and more particularly belonging to that of the Noble Lord's property which had been wrested from the din the Committee. Mr. curved Romish Church. The Noble Lord said, " Suppose y ou p ass BURTONproceedings this resolution"—he appeared to have s.me little intima- Committees, such as by in C • local influence Committees tion 'that there was likely to be a majority against procuring a larger price for their land than it was worth, it—(Hear, hear)—at all events t n here, e l was sure to be and such as being paid for their services in Committees both described some disgraceful p g in a majority of the couunon sense a d feel ing of the House by rail-road shares when they were at a premium. In against him—" You may pass the resolution, but what care I 35 voted that they would L e ‘rislature, by the accounts for it."—(Hear, hear.) IDnly !et him (Mr. D.) obtain hi s short, the corruption of the . resolution, an d th en h e wou ld try if he could not make th e of the Members themselves, e xceeds that of private indi- Noble Lord' a tt en d to it.—(Much l a ughter.) The Noble Lord viduals. Who is to make laws for the purpose of might set public opinion at defiance—he e might set the punishing the corrupt law-makers did not transpire resolution of that House at defiance, and p r!Ts he was and the Commons by 245 to taking time by the forelock, and was merely anticipating that event which would, if he persevered in such a course, remove adopt Mr. Tttomsom 8 plan and reject Mr. H , UME S. him, and th e res t o f t h e H on . G en tlemen from their seats o n They voted, in short, to keep the corruption on foot. "-- -Treasury Benches.—( H ea r, hear, an . d . laughter.) h He Mr. JERVIS moved the a ppointment of the Commit wanted to knol7-7!!!!re was the public . :::)p_ r in4 l on an w which would tee to inquire into Mr. WYNN'S case. Mr. W ARD place Westminster in a different' P I ) : I'C.• went f from Charing- part ri 6 - ailed on Mr. HARVEY to explain what he meant by of the country or the metropolis. of they any man, no g- saying in his address to his c onstituents, that he was eross to Temple-bar . and inquired. might be, they , matterl the victim of tand Select Committee. . what his religious or political opinions.and absurdity 401.1 d find that all denounce it as gross hypocrisy deny to the City of Westminster what the y dare not in flict planations of what he had said out of doors. M,. • upon any other part of the country.. AGLIONBY insisted on explanation. Mr. HARV EY rave to withdraw and the House Strangers were then ordered fully justified th '1 the required explanation, and divided, when the numbers were ~ I A epit ets • 92 of Secret and Select wbi . oh 11 , e had applied to the For the motion .................................. „ 72" was laughed • Mr. A.GLIONBY Against it .... , ....... , ......... .. ........ Committ ee. . that he Majority ....................... ... ... with loud quence of Mr. HARVEY saying heard pio one The announcement of the numbers was receive d talk in the Committee hilt the tioil. 14 enAer. and reiterated cheering. I After LIGHTING THE HOUSE, - FOraethinfs like Nuabb.ling w h o shou 4 and who ihould Sir FREDERICK TRENCH postponed his motion until not be ommitteQi on the Olr the former Per mn i ttee Right Hon. the re.a i to-day. He then begged leave to ask the . ._ ~ ppo mid, not in .... clii,i4,.. sx -;,.; 0 .....r. rimtvEy, as Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he had undertaken in mace was at , lust an d nd intended, and excludin new arrangements for lighting the House without first consult- A nounee a ,,,, g also the ing the "louse? zITTORNEY-GENERAL, Mr. ll tdONNELL, S i r T. Ac- The iItHADICELLI),II fib the EYCHEQU . ER as under 7 LAND, and Mr. C WELLRESS • This rath er unexpected . stood to say that he' had 'roads' no ' other ari'angeliiint resultwas attributed to, Mr...Tpiy4e haying accepted a than hose Which had already been' m a de, a nd 'which had 'put • compromise, by':ci , hich two of each side were to be ex- 1 THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY,-EVENING _EDIIION,-MARCH 1, 1889 eluded, and the Committee was left abounding i❑ Mr. WYNN'S friends. Mr. O'CONNELL moved for leave to brinc , in a Bill to assimilate the franchise in England, Ireland, and Wales, and illustrated the condition of the franchise in the several parts of the kingdom by some elaborate tables. Mr. HuME seconded the motion. Lord MORPETII, though he admitted the correctness of many of Mr. O'CoNNELL's statements, felt himself compelled to give his motion a reluctant, but decided dissent. His Lordship explained at some length the plans of the Government, which abourd in professions of good will. Mr. Sergeant JACKSON opposed the Bill, and con demned Lord .MORPETII for not opposing it more vigorously. Mr. REDINGTON said the Learned Sergeant knew nothing of the franchise in Ireland. Colonel CoNowt- took the same side as Mr. Ser g ant JACKSON. Mr. VILLIERS STUART and Mr. ROCIIE supported Mr. O'CONNELL. The House de cided by 155 to 92 that the Bill should not be brought in. The minority, however, is sufficiently large to encourage Mr. O'CONNELL to renew his attempt, which he will no doubt do. The Hon. and Learned Member obtained leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law of Libel. Capt. PECIJELL brought under the notice of the House the case of a foreigner resident 23 years at Brighton, and not allowed to vote for that borough. He wished the law to be altered. He moved for a return of the expense of naturalization, and made some curious statements of the expense of that proceeding. The AT TORNEY-GENERAL explained that the Reform Act. had made no alteration whatever in the rights of aliens, who could not vote Er Members of Parliament. The mo tion was of course agreed to. Sir F. POLLOCK obtained leave to bring in a Bil to to amend the law relating to double and treble costs. His object is to abolish such costs. Mr. T. DuNeomsc moved that it is the opinion of the House, that during Lent no greater restriction be placed on theatrical representations within the City of Westminster than elsewhere. A somewhat ani mated debate took place. The Ministers, and the staid gentlemen amongst the Tories, opposed the motion ; but the youthful Members having remained in the greatest number, the resolution, on "a division, was carried 92 to 72, and the young sparks who had dis comfited GRAHAM, and RUSSELL, and RICE, cheered loudly at their success. Sir F. TRENCH postponed his motion till this day. and the House adjourned a little before one o'clock. Ministers were defeated last night on Mr. DUN COMBE'S motion respecting Westminster Theatri cal Entertainments in Lent, by a majority of not less than twenty I We are heartily glad of this defeat. It is just the fitting way in which cant and hypocrisy should ever be treated. The Hon. Mem ber for Finsbury's motion was to the effect that no greater restrictions should be placed on theatrical entertainments in Westminster during Lent, than were placed upon the like entertainments at the same period in every other part of the metropolis ; and in support of this just and rational proposition, he made one of the most sprightly and convincing speeches it has ever been our good fortune to read. And how was it met by Lord JOHN RUSSELL ? In a spirit of the most unleavened Pharisaic cant, such as no man can wade through, without imagining at the time that he is perusing a dull sermon by some ultra-ortho dox Prelate. His Lordship put the question on a purely pious footing, regarding it as one " which affected the established religion of the country !" Hence, he observed—and we can fancy how he looked, when be said it—he had taken counsel of the Bishop of LONDON on the subject, and that immacu lete Apostle had told him, " in the presence of another distinguished Prelate," that he considered that " out of respect for the Protestant faith, thea trical performances should not be allowed in West minster on Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent." Was ever such intolerant trash spoken—even by a Bishop ? How can theatrical entertainments in Lent injure the " established religion?" The band of the Coldstream Guards plays at the palace during Lent ; Bishops give large dinner parties during Lent ; Royal Dukes preside at convivial meetings during Lent, at which hired theatrical singers are pre sent;—all these festive and vocal amusements are freely partaken of during this season of fasting and mor tification, without in the slightest degree militating against the Protestant faith—or surely the pious Bishop of LONDON would issue his veto against them—how then can theatrical entertainments be de trimental to religion? Can that be sinful at Covent garden which is virtuous at Buckingham Palace ? Is the song which is strictly orthodox at the Freemason's Tavern, atheistical at Drury lane ? Are we to be fortified in our faith by hearing music in one place, and to be quavered into infidelity at the other ? If so, then is religion a mere matter of locality, to be regulated by the map of London. Lord TEIGNMOUTH objected to Mr. DUNIIIO.IIIBE'S motion, not so much, it seems, as a matter in which the interests of religion were concerned, as because in his speech he had spoken irreverently of one of the Bishop of LLANDAFF'S Lent dinner-parties. On this point the Noble Lord expressed quite a holy horror. The excellence of the episcopal viands—the episcopal turtle-soup, the episcopal venison, and champagne of equal excellence—all these savoury and irresisti ble arguments had convinced him—for he had tasted them all, he said—that it was just as wicked and immoral to object to a rich Bishop's giving a sumptuous dinner in Lent, as to permit a poor player to dine at all in that season I Perish the atheistical notion, that Prelates should not, and that actors should, dine during Lent ! So ran Lord TEIGNMOUTH'S argument, from which we draw the inference that to be a Tory Member for Marylebone, is by no means to be a model of tolerance, sagacity, and high-mindedness. Lord JOHN RUSSELL may rely on it, that he has done himself and his Colleagues infinite mischief by his last night's speech. He has shown a dispo sition to truckle to High Church intolerance, and conciliate his bitterest opponents—even at the ex pense of his own character for common sense and liberality of sentiment—which argues a most deplor able sense of weakness, and, as such, will cause all the petty, selfish hangers-on of Government to take instant alarm, and look out for a berth in the event of a Ministerial shipwreck. And how will the country at large receive the strong dose of cant which he has poured forth for their edification ? NVith contempt, of course, and ridicule—for of this only is it worthy. A smart personal discussion took place in the House of Lords, last night, relative to the appoint ment of Lord EBRINGTON as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. His Lordship's speech in the Commons, in 1838, on the Irish Church, obtained for him the fierce hostility of the ultra, pure, high Church Lords. It is, therefore, become a speech of great historical importance, and we shall reprint it here : " House of Commons, July 26, 1838. (On the third reading of the Irish Tithe Bill.) " Ebtington--I am desirous of saying only a few words. I for one entirely concur in what was lately said by the Noble Secretary at War ( Lord Ho.•. kik), that this Bill will be a mere adjournment of the question. I have ever considered the existence of a Church Establish ment, so utterly disproportioned to the wants of the people as that of Leland, a stain and a disgrace to the Protestant religion, and a great rni,fortune to the coun try. I should not be induced to support the Bill if I thought its effect would be to prevent that reduction of the Irish Establishment which I believe will soonbe extorted by the unanimous demands of the people. It I could see in the present state of parties any prospect of carrying into effect the principle of appropriation, no consideration whatever would lead me to listen to the question of a compromise. I shall vote for the Bill only because I expect, that so far from preventing a thorough reform of the Irish Church, it will, by throwing the payment of tithes into the hands of those a ho have more power and influence than the present payers, render the war now waged against the Church more for midable." Such a speech was honest, and therefore it morti fied Lord LYNDHURST; it was candid, and therefor was an insult to Lord RODEN; it was bold, and there. fore a censure on all the timid, time-serving Peers ; it was true, and crossed their habitual attachrne-: , to deceit and my s tifi ca ti on lik e a suddenc:?,'„,' 'Utast. What wonder then th a t the ai'"n Lord, who has for ever forfeited th e respect of the Irish, should be anxious, if possible, to reduce Lord EBRINGTON to his owti level f What wonder, too, that the Noble - g a d whose family name is so offensive to mankind, and whose family has inflicted a deeper stain on the Church than even his piety, though it be warm and unaffected, can ever wipe off, should have bawled aloud against honest Lord EBRINGTON t confounding religion with a Church Establishment, having no conception of piety except that it is lawn-sleeves, and of virtue, except that it is a coach and four, with two footmen in purple, the noisy Tory Peers declared that the appointment of Lord EsRINGTo ri would destroy the Protestant reli gion. To make this furious attack, the Noble Lords forgot th.t:ir usual respect for each other, and in their eagerness to assail an opp on „. stepped all the orders an ,l _ - over regulations of their own and u'r every Legislative Assembly. Without giving any notice to the Ministers that they meant to ask a qu es ti on , w i t h out i nqu i r ing of their new colleague, Lord EBruNerGic, whose entry into the House was marked with discour tesy enough to make him desire to turn his back on it for ever, whether he acknowledged the report of his speech or not, the Tory Lords were so ear :r for the fray that they rushed to it over all the obstacles which good breeding and regularity of proceeding generally impose on their Lordships' quarrels. We were afraid that the Session would be tame and dull till last night convinced us that the train of party warfare is ready laid, and that every spark will blow the Peers into a wrathful contest. We should have had more re spect for their Tory Lordships, if they had not taken their cue from the Times of yesterday, though it seems only suitable to their character that they should now be the humblest slaves of that Journal which long braved and bullied them. If there be one degradation on earth greater than another for the Tot' Peers, it is that of being the servants of the Times. One important truth is made manifest by the fero cious attack of the Tories. Lord EBR I NGTON is a very fit man for the office. They would have rejoiced at a false move of the Ministers ; their wrath demon strates its excellence. We were not before so fully aware of Lord EBRINGTON'S merits, and the Tories have now marked him out as an object worthy of tht respect, support, and honour, of all honest men. If is important also to notice that the persons ho are so furious attains Lord EBR I NGTON, and so zealous to support the Irish Church, are also th, very persons who are most eager to support the Corn, or Devil's laws. Protestant landlords com bine to fasten starvation on the English and bigotry on the Irish. We cannot tell how far Lord EB RI NG TON'S appointment may hasten the destruction of the Irish Church, that "gigantic political nuisance," but we are well assured that it and the Corn-laws are part and parcel of the same system of enriching the idle aristocracy at the expense of the indus trious classes, and that one cannot be weakened or destroyed without the other suffering decay and annihilation. Now that the war is begun, we (lo not see how peace can be restored. If the Tories, aware as they are of Lord EBRINGTON'S sentiments, and having, as they have, an overwhelming majority in the Upper House, allow of his going to Ireland, they will be more to blame, with their opinions, than the Ministers. They must, to be consistent, move—and if they move they will carry—in the Peers, an address to the QUEEN to rescind Lord EBRINGTON's appointment. They will, in so doing, only follow the example of the Whigs in relation to Lord LONDONDERRY, and thus take at length a sweet revenge. Their own honour, and the certainty of a triumph, command them, by all the means in their power, to resist the appointment of Lord ERRINGTON. Will they betray the Church ? Mr. O'CONNELL'S motion for leave to bring in a Bill for placing the elective franchise in England, Ireland, and Wales, on a footing of equality, was rejected last night by a majority of sixty-three votes. When we consider that the Honourable and Learned Gentleman had not only the Tories, but the whole weight of the Government, to contend against, we must con gratulate him upon his success. The speech of Lord MORPETII against the proposed Bill was temperate and judicious. His Lordship ad mitted the great inequality in the elective fran chise in England and Ireland—showed by a passing reference to Scotland that Ireland was not peculiar in grievances of this kind —and expressed a hope that the time would soon come, when it would be permitted to the Govern ment to sweep away every inequality from the Statute book. In this . ! great work Ministers were already engaged in another field, and his Lordship apprehended that by multiplying their objects, they would run the risk of distracting their attention, and paralyzing their exertions. This language, worthy of an honest, enlightened Minister, and calculated to soothe the feelings of the Irish people, gave great offence to the Tories, who appeared to think that the proposal of assimilating the franchise in the two countries ought to be scouted with contempt by the Government. For our own part, we con gratulate Mr. O'CONNELL and the Irish electoral body upon a defeat which perseverance may very soon convert into a splendid victory. Mr. O'CoNi- NELL has made out a good case, and at the head of a minority of ninety-two, must, by taking a proper course, eventually triumph. In the House of Commons last night, Mr. O ' CONNELL obtained leave to bring in his Bill for the Amendment of the Libel Law, and the extension of the Liberty of the Press. The Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin, must be aware that his conduct on a recent occasion to- wards the Press of Ireland, has subjected the sin cerity of his professions upon this subject to some degree of suspicion ; consequently the steps which he may take towards carrying the present Bill, will be carefully scrutinized. Even should he carry the Bill, he can only expect the Press to receive it as a reparation at his hands, for the attempts made by him to destroy its independence in the Siser King dom. We have only time and space to direct attention to the tumultuous proceedings which took place at Manchester last night. The Chartists defeated, by uproar, the Anti-Corn-Law people—but Mei? victory will ere long recoil on themselves, in the compound evil of no work and dear, dear bread. We have received the Paris Papers of Wednes day, with accounts from Madrid of the 20th ult. They bring no news of any interest. Don CAR LOS has issued a proclamation declaring MAROTO a traitor, and MA RoTo, in his turn, has sent forth a bulletin. addressed to the army, in which he represents his Royal Master as little better than an idiot, the slave of profligate courtiers. The impres sion is becoming general that Don CARLOS has lost the confidence of the army, and that a con spiracy has been set on foot among his followers to compel him to abdicate his pretensions in favour of his son, and thus pave the way for a general peace by means of the marriage of Queen ISABELLA and her Royal cousin. It is added that ESPARTERO is at the bottom of this plot, which is in a course of rapid development. SOURSE. - PARIS,WEDNESDAIi, FE'. 29. First Highest Lo , ...est I.ast Price. Price. Price. Price. French 5 per Cents . 110 si) ... 110 90 ... Ito 80 ... 110 99 4 4 per Cents 195 50 ... 101 50 ... 1 , 1 50 ... 105 50 S per Cents 7B 65 . 78 80 ... 78 65 ... 78 SO Bank of :'ranee , Latfitte Bark I,'oof. SS.— 1020 —lO2O —.1020 : 1 0 . 20 5,00.4 f 'h 5170 —.5170 ...5170 ~....5170 Belgian .5 per Cents.... lOO ... 100 ~ u. 1 . 00 ... 100 3 per t 'ents 69 75 ••• 6.'' 75 .. 68 75 ... 68 75 Bank. 560 ... 562 50,/... 560 ... 562 50 :4 apish Ac ive l9 ... 19Li ... 10 ... 1,, , Neapolitan Roman RAILWAY syAREs. St. r=ermain Versailles, N. B „ . M 5 ... 547 50 ... 545 ... 545 L. 8.150 ... 150 ... 159 ... '! , O Charleroi .. 450 ... 450 ... 450 ... 1 504 Rouen • 927 50 ... 9.30 ... 927 50 ... 930 Orleans .. Strasburg to Bale . 325 ... 325 ... :320 ... 320 Mulhausen to Thann Sir B. Hall paired off with Mr. Nichol] on Mr. 0 Connell's Bill to assimilate the franchises of electors in England and Ireland. COLBURN'S NEW MONTHLY MAGAZINE for March, is as distinguished for the names amongst its contributory as .ong array of eminent for the intrinsic quality of its Coeteets—eaeh of having articles into- Number : Theodore Hook—Cap+.,i n Marryat—..T. - Hon. Mrs. Norton—The Author of "Paul ' —l'he Right Hon. T. Courtenay—Mies Peadoe— flie Author of " Rattlin, the Reefer"—The Hon. E. Phipps—Douglas Jerrold—John Carne, and J. B. Buck stone ; besides other usual centributors. " Civil War," by Mr. Hook, is a touching narrative of the Scotch rebel lion. The continuation of the " Phantom Sbip," is this month particularly interesting. Mr. Poole has " A Tale of Mystery; or, a Romance of Portland-place," exhibiting the domestic inquisitions of servants. Mr. Jerrold's paper is called " The Manager's Pig"—humorous, of course. " The Canon with two consciences,' by Mr. Howard, is a most delicious tale, after the manner of the old Spanish writers. Mr. Courtenay's Shakspeare paper is on Henry VIII. " Shakspeare's Drinking Bout" is an admirably written article by Mr. Buckstone. The verses by Mrs. Norton and Miss Pardee are replete with their usual grace and feeling. The number is embellished with an excellent Likeness of Mrs. Trollope, the distinguished authoress of " Michael Armstrong, the Factoryand is altogether one of the most agreeable nave seen.AA ' odd last ni g ht i n the at which Mr. F rost was dio a d smseemebtilyngßo ofo me Chartists said Lord J. Re- :el; had been guilty of a direliction from truth he stated in his place in the House of Com mons that he ( Mr. Frost) had disavowed being present at a meeting when particular expressions had been used. He would not give explanation on fuch inq u i s i tor i a l documents as the Noble Lord chose to honour him with.—(Loud Cheers). Mr Frost then proceeded to de. scribe some of the Magistracy of England in no very complimentary terms. Several of the Delegates also addressed the meeting. of ----- DIED Hig O h n i t i h o e lbo 2 r 6 n th a u g l e t d ., 2 A 7. nne, the wife of Mr. IL 31 : attl'e : 1 1 : 1 ;00 On the 24th ' ult., at 13radwell-near-the red . Spurgin, Esq., aged 71. On the 26th ult., Maria Jane }'ands of Tkietrals,' Esq., of Moor-hall, Harlow, Esse of 11/o:Aar e x of tb aged 41. lct On the 26th ult. at Thornton-heath, Fetse y, re.' d ot , late Joseph Slocombe, Esq., of Stockwell, Sox rey, 3 ig e Ol smormrolimmonsm......--.... -Sea, Ess -14 London : Printed and Published by M l ', RDO , j onti" No. 112, Strand, at The Sun Offic , ~ No. 1 1 2, n ' " - i the ‘!ounty of 111iddl e4ex .—Friday, Pja - rch 1. l$ _...., / ____-------r--.. CHANCERY COURT.-(THIS DO') MUNDAY V. JOLLIFFE. ei d The futtL , ‘r z , ,r; , ,,.1-noub in I iS part-heard appeal, oec u P his Lordship the whole mori:ing. VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS 1)A WOODCROFT V CHEETHAM—INJUNCTION. rice Mr. KNIGHT BRUCE applied in this case, upon I ) : for all injunction t o restrain the defendants from Ira% selling, or using any machi ne s, i n i m it a ti on o f the one I v a vented by the plaintiff for the improvement of looms, a lp for which he had obtained a patent. The plaintiff was ag e e leman residing at Manchester, and the defendants aidr, fustian manufacturers, ca rr yi ng on b us i n ess at ° I L ham. From the statements of the Learned Cou nse be ii appeared that previous to the m o nth o f J a nuary, 1.838r i o ; plaintiff invented a machine for the improvement of ki e t oy substituting what is c a lled a ne w f or th e old TaPP e t plate, which funned the pattern. Formerly the TaP cf r l , plate being in ore piece, when th e p a tt ern wa s change del as neees , ary to take it aw a y, b rea k it u p, an d put en, e in its place ; but that was obviat e d by th e invention ofn'fi, plaintiff, who by making the Tappet plate in co mpartele n ie enabled a great vari e ty o f p a tt erns to b e formed fr O f one set of plates without . the trouble and expan s e continually breaking them up. The plaintiff, en ~.n e e , covering that the defendants were using reac al- d - i• constructed upoia the principle of his invention, imree - ft ately gave the notice of his intention to apply to the fie for an injunction to restrain them from doing so. u rr o p that notice being served on the defendants, an inyestiga t :; took place, which convinced them that they were j ; vading the pl a intiff' s p a t ent , an d t h ey now cense.' e's that. an injunction should b e gran t e d aga i n st the the terms of the motion, the plaintiff agreeing t ° , S t e - p all proceedings, unles s th e d e f en d ants s h ou ld be , fere with the injunction. The Learned Coffna e L bs If !loved that . I rlr. Jacobs was i n st ruc t e d, on the ''' t lo of the defendailts to s a y th a t th e y were sat i s fi e d thati fs course they had adopted was an i nvas i on o f th e Plaint! patent, but that it had occurred through amisapprebe esie His HONOUR granted the injunction- 0 ! The VINE CHANCELL OR was occup i e d t h e remainde r ed the morning with hearing short causes , an d unepr" petitions. MONEY and (. OMMERGIAL NE - TWEL VE 0' CLO f C le We have receiv e d Q ue b ec papers to the 2901 do nuary, one day later than the previous arrivals; tr.,70 not contain any f ur th er news of consequence. A' quiet in the colonies. From Halifax pliers- ree&ved to the 12th February; ST. JOHN'S, NEW BRUNSWICK.—A new Bank is pl o d posed to be establi s h e d i n t h e a b ove c i ty ; i t i s to be ca cti the Mechanics' P ro p er ty B an k , an d i s to be condaqe. [ lit different principle s f rom t h ose a l rea d y esta bli s hen ott outlines given in the prospectus are as follows: ibe rg the Bank shall have f or a cap i ta l 15 0,000 1 ., with' ca rl to increase it to 300,000/. ; that the Bank shall be tY I ducted on the Scotch prin c ipl e . • THE WEATHER.—AThe cold was m os t severe a lrl . og to o, past week. The h ar b our i s f rozen over some d1,5„,0i11d below George's I s l an d, an d f or severa l d ays past T o sledges and crowds of persons have been passing b e the town and Dartmouth. esfe jl Her Majesty's ship Inconstant has been Pre y f if' owing to the ice, f rom ge t t i ng up to town. Part °f re troops landed at Poi n t Pl easant on F r id ay, an d "I mainder yesterday. 6 0 We have received New Brunswick Papers to t be kstei February. They do not contain later news than been already received from the Canadas. We have received Picton Papers to Feb. 6. 0 0 of d PRINCE EDWARD'S ISLAND.— The Legislature ,p, island was opened on the 22d. Mr. William Coope'fro chosen Speaker, We make the following extract Sir Charles Fitzroy's speech on the occasion : r -- . $ 1 Mr. President and G ent l emen o f t h e Councll'gell Speaker and Gentle men o f t h e Assembly,—l ba Ye a tii 4b . pleasure in congrat u l a ti ng you on t h e abundance ,lic prevails throughout th e C o l ony i n consequence Of t.,,P,,tef" plentiful harv e st, an d on t h e e ff ect i t h as had i n 50, " ally increasing the exports of agricultural produce. 05 1 The. Journal of Ant wer p h as b een rece i ve d o f r ester date. The Council o f Ad m i n i s t rat i on o f t h e Belgiall o f # has given notice th a t th ey w ill pay a f ourth dividend9lo per cent. on their cl a i ms . Th ere i s no part i c ulsr in the above papers. sfit' Consols, which clo se d y es t er d ay at 93i f or the AFe6,4°oe! may be quoted at 93i Buyers, Mo ne y 93; Elf b 0 5 ! Bills, 66 68; India Bonds, 6b 67; Bank B'oo , 6i; India, 2561 2571. - et id' In the F o reig n M ar k e t, S pan i s h A ctive is rathBil9' proved, owing to the news from Spain, closed at ~ 1 1 6 , at present 191 1 ; Portuguese, 341 351 1 T ho i - oke l i Cents., 211 22; Belgian, 100,1 loli ; Brazilian , 9' t , Scrip, li 21 p rem . ; C o l om bi an, 291 ; Mexics:: tic' 244; Dutch Two-and-a-Half p er C ents., 55} 4 ' per Cents., 1031 ,i- . . C011°.,, 1 LIYER?OOL COTTON MARKET, FEB. 28.—Tb,t i , e JP Market continues w ith ou t a l terat i on i n prices. '.'" were 3,000 bags, chiefly American. PI(.I(7ES OF STOCKS THIS D AY AT ONE 0 .—'" 'CP/ ~,, Bank Stock 206 5 ; India Stock ............. .. 6 /by 0 per Cent. lied. 93li y„ % Ditto Bonds... ....... ..... .. / 3 per Cent. Cons. s.t 3 South Sea Stook., ........... .. , 3!, 2 per Cent — Old Annuities ,. ..............., 2 Ditto Red. lOl r ri li', New Ditto ~. ...... .."1%, New i..t,4 per Cent loot, :ii 3 per Cent., Annuities, al Olj,d, New 5 per Cent. Exch. 11,,„ £l,OOO ... ' 6 ' l 3 - 63',0 Bank Long Annuities toexpire Ditt o 5OO ..• AllP',o lan. 5. 1860 - /4, Oct. 10, 1859 14 15.-16 Di:au Commercial ...••• ' s 6$ Jan. 3, 186. 14% Ditto Advertised ..• •• ~ Jan. 5, iSBO — Bank Stock for Accoun t ..., illi April 5, 1880. - India Stock for Accetln" 0 1 ',.$ Jan. 5, 1870 Consols for Account , ..Z . cilr, PRICES OF FOREIGN FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE ' / Austrian Bonds Peruvian Bonds .......... ..0.: Belgian Bonds 102 % i iii Ditto AccounL ..... os 0 ", 0 Ditto Account ~ ........ Btazilian Bonds Buenos Ayres Bonds Ditto Account Ditto Acc i , umt ............... / Chilian Bonds Prussian Aunt ...•••• 0 ,.. D tto Account Russian Bonds, 1 . 132q..•': ... , Columbian Bonds 27U Dittri Account ............... j Ditto Account I I).cto Metallic ...... •••',,i , '1 Columbia. Boxuls, ISA ~,0 Ditto Account Danish Bonds 76 I A % Ditto Bonds, 183 4 l'ai.si7i, Ditto Account — Ditto Account. •••'''",'/ Greek Bonds 1 French, 5 per cent. ....... ,l', 0' Ditto Bonds, 1825 — ' "----- 4 per cent. • ..'' 19_' 0, Ditto Accotint ---- 3 per cunt , ...... 911 ) ,4 Mexican Bonds, 5 per Cent. --- Exchan'A ............. Ditto Account — Dutch, Ily, per cent. ••':.O tr, Ditto, 6 per Cent Ditto Acco• a nt ........ ' 0 " Ditto Account ... ......... Neapolitan 101414 Ditto .i,e c 00nt,.......bcP 00 ,1 1 PRICES OF SHARES THIS DAY AT ONE 0 1 C 1 140 / 1 Brazilian Imperial .‘lining Co. (issued at laid. 1 01 Ditto Mac l oi ubas Cocaes 4J'i ... Brighton Railway 9 40 London 01 L Lont d l o and London nn and Southampton ßkwaiißail ßTl way 17 Company 38/. 17s. A - 0 o, Jichestor and Birmingha m Railway - 15 •01 Northern and Eastern R .allway Company 15 5 9' lonian State Bank ........... British North American Bank 2 4 London Joint Stock B an k 10 5 London and Westmin ster Bank 2O National Provincial Bank, of England Fro l °. HALF-PASr _ , nio gd o rl M th (.e Halifax Papers recei7.ted this nint - ea?) Te a .., _ri LATE STORM.—Every mail from the , es sto rio i furnishes additi ona l accounts 'of the destruction °4 , o # by the late r a i n s t orm. Th .e violent storm and btle 4 00. on Saturday and S un d ay n i g h t last so swelled ase and stream s i n var i ous parts of the country, as to i ,, . tensive damage to bridges and private peopertY* io d' UPPER CANADA. „ a ar l idll His Excellen c y Si r G eorge Arthur and s:o7arjr,i here yesterday, J an . 27 , and visited the entire, isii,`A`resss on the fronti e r, an d rece i ve d some excellent n' o ree v St. Thomas and S an d w i c h . We understand he r the ' this day to the Ni agara f ront i er. li e i 4., The Consol M ar k e t cont i nues firm at 9 3 4 —r alv count, Exchequer e e sr y i 9;3.11 Bills,d a 81 66 68; n l o n th d ' i,a ng ß do o i n n d g s : 65 i l i o , Stock, Exc Money is rather in demand. In the Foreign Market, Spanish is a shadel° B( c er e" . ; in the morning, 191; Portuguese 35-1 ; Three-P er. pfe, i l; l 21-R- .i-; Belgian 101 ; Brazilian, 80i ; Scrip, 4 0. 2 " Colombian. 29,-1 ; Dutch Tvvo-and-a-Half per Cen ts Five per Cents.,lo3t. net' THRRR 0 '.-/-- cit.., Consols far th e Account, 931. t ilt 1ar.................., r ,„,___„ . JO POsT-MonrEm ExAM1NAT10 ......... NS.-ofVoit course of an inquest held yest"....tday on the bodY t octi r , which was found d ea d in i'tst bed, Mr. Wilkie,' 5 i fled in every instance of sudden death in France a P 6 cor examina , ion of the b o d y, an d an analysis of tn° of the Qtomach took place. o r S -- ' T O l d PATENT LEV ER WAi 1, 6 0 - 0 Price, at T. COX SAVO RY ' S, 47, Corn,ll3 f 6 SILVER CASES. 1 6 16 With double-bottom eases With hunting 0 cases . ...... . ...... 19 " GOLD CASES. 0 1 4 il Size for ladies, with elegant gold dial. ................. • 14 ott Size for gentlemen, with enamel di-,:i .............. 00 At e ' This celebrated construction (the most accura'' fi rie e ' o ell: a watch can be made) the latest improvements , jewelled in four hol: es, is no's offered at the aho° B B ;„esttr i. e., the detached, el F-tif and maintaining r e ower to c T. COX SAVORY, ef t ), Working Silversmith Goldsmith, and Watchmak er :ore c a o p n p t e i d nua h g an o d ing te wh m il s e re vrin jog cArp, hill, Lor.iton (Seven Doors from Gracechurell ~ o f 1° " i BIRTHS. olc Vsti I' l On the 23d ult., the wife of the Rev. Mord 0 ii ,ifs Ramsgate, of a son. . Os , I On the 6th ult., at Lydney-on Severn, Antelist• 0 A. H. Loughnan. Esq., of a son, who died on the Plots, ei On the 25th ult., at Camberwell, Mrs- T. ell as daughter. wi On the 26th u l t., at Great Witchingltsn, Ne rfo" lie r ' of the Rev. William Howard, of a ior. On the 27th ult., the lady of Charles - Ridge' Esq" M l' 1 Chichester, of a son, f th' 1 n........ 7., On the 27th ult., at Statfoid Vicarage, the vo A. W. Chatfield, of a daughter. .1 On the 27th nit. , f Ol e MA RRIED. Great Harwood, Bucks, to Elizabeth only child , 1 ° . 6 9:1 James Castleden, Dissenting Minister '. /4 pstoa— to , ---. o l' , or am 11 R'sq. , 1 ‘ On the 28th ult., Richard BromeD bry Ile e a ' colo at Hampstead Church, 1%.r. f t he bath Letitia, youngest daughter of Lieutenant- , P l il: 1 combe, C.D. I , o t , BloonO bt : r W o od On the 28th nit., at St. George's, only son of Richard Francklin, of Montagu . ' , P„ l f, e t e er ° f / :Rum Esq., t• Frances Barbara, youngest °auto, ........,,, Edgell, Esq., of Cadogan-place, Chelsea. ter, 8 Pa, bat,