The Sun. — London, England, 1836-04-13 00:00:00

-- ion payment, and h e h a d no d ou b t would fulfil its obli gat This and the other resolutions were then agreed to. the The other O r d ers of the Day were then disposed of, an d House adjourned, at half-past Eleven o'Clock. HOU SE F O LoRDS, AritiL 12. The LORD k his seat on the woolsack at 1 h ANCE the usual our. LLOR Nir. BERNAL and others from the Commons brought up the Prisoners Counsel Bill, the Birmingham and Gloucester Rail way ill, and the chequerEx Security Bill, which were seve rally read a first time. CHANCELLOR'S DUTIES. trodu The ction LOR D CHANCELLOR sa id, preparatory to t h e of a Bill f or t h e b etter Administration of Itl,as"t tice in the C ourt o f Chancery, he begged to move there be l a id b e f ore the House a return of the num- J'grf appeal s w hi ch had been brought to that House in each to since 1790 to the present time ; also the number dis posed of in each year ; and a return of the number of ap peals hea r d b efore the Privy Council during the same period. T he Nobl e and Learned Lord begged leave to give notice, th at next wee k it was the intention of his Majesty's Go vernment to i ntro d uce two Bills—one to provide for the !letter a dministration of justice in the Court of Chancery. The title of the other we did not hear in consequence of the low tone in which the notice was given. The Archbishop of .CANTERBURY presented a Bill ffor ounded upon a Report of the Church Commission to provide the b etter regulation of pluralities and residence of the ti t ZgY, and th e appointment of stipendiary curates. As the 10 was in st r i ct conformity with the Report he would not the then go into its details, but content himself with moving that Bill be read a first ti me . —A gree d t o . Th e most R ev . the B ill on :relate gave notice that he would move the second reading of that night se'night. of er Lord LYNDHURST sa id as a Bill h a d come up f rom t h e House providing counsel for prisoners, he begged to Move that the evidence taken before the Committee, which sat on the su bj ect last Session, be printed. Being nf°l7 hed that i t h a d not b een reported, he moved that the Committee be revived for the mere purpose of t r e r ti ltg the evidence, as the Noble and Learned Lord "13wh.— rougham) wh too was Chairman of the Committ ee was no t i n Agreed . CONSTABULARY BILL Vis e ountIRISH- DUNCANNON moved the second . reading of ibis Mi. That was the same Bill which had been before the House last Session, when he understood their Lordships had the 8 9 much o bj ect i on to the pr i nc i ple of the B i ll, as to „s 7 time of th e S ess i on at w hi c h i t was b roug h t up to t h em . e Att Noble Lord then stated the nature and effect of the various c lauses in uses m the Bill, which the public have already been made acquainted with. , The Earl o f HADDINGTON sa id, t h at a l t h oug h h e was proposed g'ad to find it was to give a small increase to the lower clas s of constables, yet, considering the great changes that were contemplated by the Bill, and the difference between the Present Bill and the Bill introduced last year, he had hoped they tould have had a l ess meagre an d a f u ll er s t a t emen t f rom hi s „ ,!'I rjestyis Gov ernment upon th e i ntro d uct i on o f t h e measure. ei Lordshi ps were told that th i s measure was s i m il ar to Itihnat of last year, but he defied the ingenuity of man to intro of two measures so completely unlike as this Bill and that last year. _(Hear, hear.) It would be in the recollection tf their Lordships that the last Session was followed during the recess by a great deal of itinerant agitation, to excite the public mind against their Lordships House, to misrepresent etr Lordship s ' mot i ves an d procee di ngs, to hold them up to public scorn and detestation, and to call for a reform which 114s euly an equ i va l ent to an a b o li t i on o f t h e H ouse o f L or d s. %I (tile ar.) He only mentioned this because it happened, though undoubtedly they did not join the general e•PY that two personages, very high in his Majesty's Govern recut, the one his Majesty's Attorney-General for England, t 44 d the other the Attorney-General for Ireland, paid a visit his constituents—his Majesty's Attorney-General for isuglsnd to his w o rthy constit u e n t s o f Edi n b urg h— an d th e hil tor ney-General f or I re l an d, wen t over t o h arangue co Dunarvon. In the course of their eeches t he y dealt very nstituents g se hardly with that Hou, giving thereby a good pSlang that was directed against their Lordships' House. The tor noy-General for England did not refer particularly to the Constabulary Bill, but there were others which he accused 1 1 :at ., House of throwing out. The Attorney-General for Ire -nu, on the contrary, naturally went over those measures which ;ere interesting to that country, and amongst others he re erred to this Bill, and stated that he had never heard ri s s Y t hing• like a reason for its rejection by that House.— „.\ hear.) He said that it was an economical measure, jt went t o re d uce the expenses of the police force; but t ., - " t. this he (L or d H.) knew that the Hon. Gentleman was b Z t alt mp en.—( Hear, hear.) He (Lord H.) was much sur rad that th e Hon. and Learned Gentleman did not core -4 -the reason for throwing out that Bill. The reason was enver y short, and had been stated at the time. The Bill had Ali e n br osg ht i n to the House of Commons on the 10th of gust and came up to their Lordships's House on the 20 th. It ha dpassed the House of Commons without examination, 31 4 thei r L or d s hi ps did no t choose to undertake the respon aisl " itY of passing a Bill of its nature at so late a period of the f he on, when it was impossible to give it mature consideration. ta pe pres en t Bill was a goo d one , a we ll cons id ere d measure , s one that wou ld ten d to th e a tt a i nme nt o f th e p u blic wel are, then was the measure rejected by their Lordship's last __ssion one o f the most worthless, one o f the most use l ess, 7 1 ( 1 most slov en ly pi eces o f l eg i s l a ti on ever b roug ht b e f ore eir Lordships.—( Hear.) The differences between the two ,ti!olls were very c ons id era bl e . Th ere were no two claus e s 22 ". The present Bill contained 47 clauses, the other 20 or The Bill of last year incorporated the Peace Preserva m Act, the Police and other Acts, whereas the Bill of Le present year repealed all these Acts, and made one calsolidated Act. All these differences - might or might not h uprovement s --it was not for him (the Earl of Hadding vvar) to say which ; b u t if th e y w ere improvements, the more Ze their Lordships justified in throwing out the former Bill. 'Hear, hear.) The more were they justified in rejecting it, vtsithstanosing the summary and authoritative manner in to Ado they had been call e d u p o n, by the Noble Lord opposite, eh Tle pt the ill-considered edicts that had come from another ace (Hear, h ear .) B y t h e 12th Clause of the Bill of 4 10 4 year, the Lo r d Li eu t enan t h a d th e power to make rules The regulations for the general government and discipline of el la P°li ee• By the 4th clause of the present Bill, it was n tits .d th a t t h e Inspector-General with the approbation of dLLord Li eutenant, might make-What? Rules, orders, 17it . (Ire gulations f or t h e genera l government o f th e p o li ce . i t sh had b een expedient to give any such power, surely ei id aid have been given to the Lord Lieutenant in council ; of th net to himself alone or to the Inspector-General e v police, that such a power should have been given. That a . e er was but a trivial objection, for the present Bill gave cve l lsP rshig power to the Lord Lieutenant to overlay and veh . the duti es o f t h e po li ce cons t a bles. The 10th clause b : i at disp ens i ng to the Lord Lieutenant, which prevented so a g employed i n t h e recover y o f tithes or matters of that intrt, ,a 'Mess in c ases w h ere actua l res i stance t o th e l aw s h ou ld 10 3, been com m i tte d an d prove d . Th e A ct 3d G eo . IV . , c . The for the regulation of the police, contained no such proviso. dill of last y ear l e f t t h e l aw on t h at po i n t as i t now stoo d ; the resent Bill went to alter it very materially. It enacted lis t ' U se constabl es were not to i nter f ere unt il t h ere h a d b een a h ee - t i--:until some h ea d s h a d b een b ro k en , or per h aps lif e h a d b a e 'lciatiger e d, and then--not till then, were the constables his N armed with a warran t.—( H ear , h ear .) H e hoped h tt :11 le F r i ends belonging to Ireland would forgive him, Irish must say that this appeared to him to be a very With Mode of legislation.—( A laugh.) He had seen 1 1 a Zyise the statement reported to have been made Wie t Cab and Learned Lord in that House—that the Bill iii that the same principle as they had acted upon while thas > Wer ; n ghat was most erroneous—all they required was, r ear 41 , s ,atMlas it should be made that there was a well-grounded s ,,,euti st X t at the peace would be broken, and then the :.`hen — t e a were to act under the direction of the magistrate. very ( L s ... a gain, the puwers of augmenting the police force were th e 17rterent in this Bill from what they were last year ; also s kit its ct ° illation of c o nstables was very different. He did I, ta th `a c to s a y w h et h er t h e a l tera ti ons were r i g ht or wro ng, Wi ltsi _. B Bills w ere very diff erent . Th e a pp o i n t men t o f res id en t N s ; rra tes--there was nothing of this kind in the Bill of last 14 th e might be, nay, it would be, very useful ; but it was not tre at . 1 11 of la s t year.' In the Bill of last year there was a t it l e I►ll-1111cs 'ease of patronage, but in the Bill then before - ' 4l se . that patronage was very much increased—in the General " 1 las t there was to have been one Inspector tier) with a salary of 1,0001. a-year ; by the present Bill tit'vfietihk h li e T, t ° be one Insector- General at 1,500/. a-year. there were to be g one or two inspectors, he did not Were 00 /. a 3'cai • ' • a bit too much. By the former Bill there it kas tr o be 32 i nspectors at 3001. a-year ; by the present Bill posed. there sh ou ld b e 42 i nspec t o rs at 5001. a-year. ellt 3 not • tso e quite sure that that was altogether b honest : h. q ... e rezi n s was that the increase in t e number and r be x 9 of salary ought to be the subject of esitat animation, and that their Lordships ought to e before they sanctioned such an expenditure t'in t i t % patronage as that ; and were entitled to insist . upon n reveateetisroved to them that it was a real and substantial s _as p ro (Hear, hear, hear.) By the last Bill . it prese 'xi to have 32 S b 1 , it U -inspectors at 100/. ; by this la._`6o/. 4e as proposed to have 42 S.ubinstpoectors lethe.thought they were also entitled sser ,. . , 1` _ 40.b!e Lord, when they went into Committecael,l l for Information from him, to show why it was ne . - ;: 4 9rd s t i ` .. °: make that increase. He would not trouble their 1. Z1 ) . ec r about Paymasters, Storekeepers, and so on. He a tde u r, Te* •sed he did not understand completely, although at of ' l ° ad it a little better now, after bearing the state art of th e Noble Lord, than he had done before, that I,etit e , la til t : Bill with iscference to the power of the Lord a great t 9 create alief constables. There would 11 "_1)e 1114,‘. increase of expense by the present Bill. ( tii tse s, year, including 70,000/. for clothing, arms, file Pres en ' t 3 s 6 ,630/. ; while the expense, sum o of Bill cf itt e hop ed h yea r, vvould amount to the sum of 407,0801. s ti ,.__PPesed 4 t nai- 1 said sufficient to guard himself against being and ,t 9 be aware of the great importance of this tiestid e a he believed that there was not a Noble Lord on t i es ° l lll, ne e, th e House who was not aware of that b e -I roUs t o „,.... Itl to Wile was not ready and willing, and cierit ce ssary f -61-e e to any measure that sh . ould be shown to be f oreQ. cr th e improvement of that most valuable and effi. fi Nt He could not dissemble that he entertained very h ad hee ..st it this subject, arising from the comparison ;)a, llB , e ntitl e e t making --he felt a distrust which every man 2: . •r otztße 0 t o. feel at a t gratuitous and profuse lavishing of 1 1 1 411 Ytiti e f l , 1 his Majesty's Government. He did not wish tc l a willi ng I , to create ill feeling, but he would be extremely h er`;., di ° y great extent of patronage in the ef e Present Government, not from any distrust of t se without whose support they could not stand a single day.--( Loud cheers.) He would only add that it was his intention on Thursday to move for certain returns relative to the strength and expense of the existing police force. ' • - - Lord DUNCANNON said that the principle of this Bill was precisely the same as the Bill of last year. The rea son why the salary of the Inspector-General was so high was on account of the diminution in the number of inspectors. Lord BANDON bore testimony to the high character of the gentleman who had been appointed to the office of Inspector- General. Lord HA THERT ON denied that there was any essen til difference between this Bill and the Bill of last year. In principle there was certainly none. In the details there was some difference ; but it must be recollected, however, that this was a Bill to consolidate, while the Bill of last year was a Bill to amend. The Noble Lord then defended the 10th clause, and denied that it bore the construction which his Noble and Learned Friend had put upon it.—(Hear, hear.)_.. His Noble Friend had alluded to the difference of the mode of proceeding between the Government to which he had belonged, and the present Government, relative to the employ ment of police in aiding in the levy of tithes. He believed that the result of the system of so employing the police had been attended with a daily diminishing success. The Noble Lord's Government had been succeeded by the Lords Justices who had in almost every instance refused such ap plications. If the Noble Lord was now at the head of the Irish Government, he would, he (Lord Hatherton) believed, act in a precisely similar manner, for things wore come to such a pass in Ireland relative to the payment of tithes that no power on earth could succeed in enforcing their payment, and it was therefore absolutely necessary some other system should be bad recourse to. He trusted that these explanations would be considered sufficient with reference of the observations of his Noble Friend. The Earl of H ADDINGTON explained. The Duke of WELLINGTON said—My Lords, I do not think that it is worth while to give much consideration to the Bill of last year, particularly after the details which my Noble Friend has entered into ; but, however, there is one general remark on the subject which I shall make, and that is with respect to the expense. By the Bill of last year, the ex pense amounted to the sum of 346,0001., a sum exceeding by 100,000/. the average expense of the existing system, which is 250,0001. The expense proposed by this Bill is 425,000/., so that the difference in the expense is nearly 100,0001. sur plus over the sum proposed last year, and 200,0001. over the average expense of the existing system. Now, my 'Lords, I think your Lordships ought to be convinced of the absolute necessity of this new system—of the great benefits it would confer on Ireland—before you adopt it in Committee. My Lords, I must confess, that I came, down to the House with considerable feelings as to the dismissal of the whole of this force, and as to the dismissal of all the officers who have been serving so long ; but the Noble Viscount who spoke on the other side of the House says that it is not intended that this dismissal shall take place. With this declaration lam quite satisfied ; but I do think that a few words ought to be intro duced into the Bill—(Hear) —in order not to put an end at once to the whole of this force. Let the Lord Lieutenant have the power of dismissing, but do not let the whole force be put an end to at once. My Lords, lam extremely averse to this appointment at once of officers, considerably exceeding 100 in number, with salaries of 3001., 4001., 5001., and 8001. a year. My Lords, I must also express my regret that a part of this expense is about to be thrown upon the landed pro prietors in Ireland. The expense they now incur is about 100,0001. ; but the expense they will hereafter incur is two hundred thousand pounds.—( Hear.) My Lords, I beg you also to observe that by this increased expense you also deprive these gentlemen of the only constables, the only parties who could give them protection of civil power to recover their pro perty. My Lords, I shall merely advert to the clause which restricts the use of the constables by the magistrates in the Quarter Sessions. The clause is clause 10. The Noble Lord has stated that this clause is the same as the clause seven and eight of the Act of Geo. IV., called the Act establishing sessions in Ireland. It is perfectly true that this clause con tains a restriction upon the use of constables by the magis trates and petty sessions in respect to tithe cases and cases for the recovery of property ; but there is a great difference be tween the two classes, and I do entreat your Lordships to look at both before you come into Committee, Lord ['ATHERTON explained. The Earl of WICKLOW said that it was consolatory for him to know that no dismissal was to take place ; but he thought that some enactment on the subject would be more satisfactory. The Noble Viscount opposite had declared that the magistrates of Ireland were free from blame. Why, therefore, he would ask, should the Government deprive them of the power of ap pointing constables ? He thought that having one Inspector- General instead of four Inspectors would be attended with ad vantageous results ; but then it should be remembered that there was a great difference between merely altering a system and introducing one entirely new. He firmly believed that this measure was introduced for the purpose of bringing num bers of Roman Catholics into the police force. This Bill, he would also contend, had the effect of creating a standing army in Ireland. The power of increasing it would be placed in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant—a power which the King himself did not enjoy. He felt great pleasure in knowing that a declaration made that night with respect to tithes had not come from a Minister of the Crown, and he hoped that no Minister would venture to rise in his place and avow that he participated in such a doctrine. He should not now oppose the second reading of the Bill ; but he should feel it to be his duty in the committee to propose one or two amendments. The Duke of LE INSTER made a few observations which were totally inaudible in the gallery. The Earl of WINC HIL SEA should feel extreme jealousy at granting to the Lord Lieutenant the appointment of con stables under the Bill. He thought it would be much buttes to leave those appointments in the hands of the magistrates of the country, who were admitted on all sides never to have abused that power. Why was it, he should wish to ask the Noble Viscount opposite, that the patronage of the Govern ment was to be increased by the present Bill, as compared with the Bill of last year, 100,000/. ? He should not detain their Lordships longer than to express his determination to oppose the 10th clause in the Committee. Toe Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, if the powers asked for by this Bill was granted they would be at the dis posal of one individual, whose baneful influence was already too deeply felt in Ireland.--( Cheers.) He had within a few days received a letter from a gentleman residing in the county of Armagh, describing the manner in which the Government patronage was disposed of in that part of the country, and that nothing but a system of O'Connellism pervaded the whole of the appointments made, both in the police and in the law, and this the writer of the letter said would be clearly shown if returns of those appointments were moved for. By these re turns would be seen the shameless preference given to Roman Catholics over Protestants, in the proportion of ten to one.— ( Cheers.) The letter went on to state that this conduct of Lord Mulgrave had excited the greatest disgust in that part of the country, not so much on account of the preference given to Roman Catholics, as because the Catholics selected were invariably of the O'Connell party. He should not trouble their Lordships with any further observations, but he should feel it to be his duty, unless great amendments indeed were made in the Bill, to oppose it on the third reading. Lord LYNDHURST wished to ask the Noble Viscount opposite if he would have any objection to the introduction of a clause into the Bill to prevent all persons employed in the police from voting at elections, similar to the clause that was in the English Police Bill? Viscount MELBOURNE did not think there was any such clause in the English Police Bill, and if there were not he should certainly not consent to the introduction of any such into the present Bill. If there were such a clause in the Eng lish Bill he admitted that it would be a fit matter for consi deration if it ought not to be also introduced into this. He thought the objections urged against the Bill would have been better reserved for the Committee than brought forward in the present stage, more particularly as it seemed to be the disposi tion of their Lordships to suffer the Bill to go into a Com mittee. He thought too that it would be better to abstain from all angry feeling and dissension in the discussion of an important measure like the present, and he begged it to be dis tinctly understood and recollected by their Lordships. that this display of angry feeling and personal attack did not com mence with his side of the House.—( Cheers.) One Noble Lord had stated as the grounds for not agreeing to the Bill of last year the lateness of the period at which it was in troduced ; but although this might be the ground upon which the Noble Lord acted, and thought the House acted, yet it must be recollected that other Noble Lords had stated very different grounds for their opposition to that Bill, namely, grounds of a political and personal nature.— ( Cheers. ) And those very grounds had been even that night adopted in his speech by the Noble Marquis who had lately spoken, and by other Noble Lords. The Noble Earl ( Had dington) had stated his reluctance to place any patronage in the hands of the present Government, because that pa tronage must be, as the Noble Earl assumes, at the disposal of a party, without the support of which the Government could not last an hour. Now, he (Viscount Melbourne) did not wish to introduce any contrast, but he believed that no Go vernment could last in this constitutional Monarchy unless it had the support of a majority of the House of Commons -( Cheers) --and this fact he believed Noble Lords opposite had pretty good reason to know.—( Cheers.) They remained more than one hour, he believed they did several hours, in office, but not many weeks, in opposition to a majority of the House of Commons. He would repeat that the existence of every Ministry must depend pro Canto on a majority of the House of Commons, but he utterly denied that the present Government was dependent upon any one individual of that majority, as had been stated. He certainly did not feel him self at liberty to reject the support of any Member of the House of Commons who was thought by his constituents to be worthy of a scat there. As to the clauses of the Bill, it cer tainly was not his intention to discuss them now; but, with respect to the power given to the Lord Lieutenant of dis missing persons from the police, it was no more than the power he possessed at this moment, for he could now dismiss any person he pleased from the police. He was certainly much that tm those e a s statements t t e h m e e nin crease iseedf aetx t p h e e us s e t , at b e u m t e le ts u th rd at er h s a to d be h understood were not correct. H e was also much surprised to hear the Noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Wicklow) state that the Bill of last year was suffered to pass the House of Commons without opposition, in order to make it the fou n d a ti o n of . as to suppose an a rgu ment against anot her measure. Now he ( Viscount views.He hoped the by the statements made by o e Melbourne) Earl's fri friends d s iie did t, not ° other House that th e y were i n fl u enced by any unfavourably s country would not be carried away k so u c l iam nt of the Noble Nobl e D u k e or N o bl e Lords opposite. . s to any attacks that had been made elsewhere upon the House of Lords, he had never sanctioned or joined in those attacks.— (Cheers.) Anything that he had ever said of the House of Lords he said in that House.—( Cheers.) His disposition always was to act upon the principle of the Roman orator, Cicero he believed—Mihi semper in animo fuit, in senatu populum defendere. Lord L YNDHURST had just looked over the English Police Bill, and found that there was a clause to prevent all persons employed in the police from voting at elections for the counties of Middlesex, Surrey, Kent, and Essex. The Noble and Learned Lord read the clause. The Earl of HADDINGTON, in explanation, said that as to the attacks of which the Noble Viscount had spoken as com ing from his (the Earl of Haddington's) side of the House, he could only say that if the attacks were on his side the anger was on the other. The Duke of WELLINGTON said that the statement he had made of the increased expense was taken from the schedule of the Bill itself.—[The Noble Duke here read the list of the various appointments under the Bill, and the salary attached to,each, by which it appeared that the whole cost would be 425,000 E, whereas the expense of the present police establish ment was only 250,000/. The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Tuesday next.—Adjourned. SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS. If the Conservatives had ever been really alarmed for anything beyond the loss of place and power to their party, some of the proceedings in the House of Commons last night would have afforded them infinite comfort. Mr. Ewart brought forward a motion, the object of which was to make it law that the landed ' property of persons dying intestate, who have fami lies, should be equally divided among the children of the deceased. However great the advantages which the Aristocracy think the country owes to the law of primogeniture, it cannot be denied that to common minds there appears something desirable in the " share and share alike" system. That in a noble family one son should succeed to immense wealth, while the rest are left in indigence, is that against which the philan thropic reformer may eloquently declaim ; and when we look to the consequences of the law in question— at least when we look to the character and conduct of the sons of the nobility—we cannot much exult in the view thus obtained. But the motion was resisted by Mi nisters, on the around that the change was not called for by the public—and that while so many grievances pressed upon them for redress, it would be folly to enter upon a speculative reform, which would go to effect a grand change in the Constitution of the country, in which they were not prepared to concur. The subject was opened by Mr. Ewart in a very tem perate manner. Mr. Tooke opposed the motion as absurd, and as unworthy of the consideration of the House. In answer to that Honourable Gentleman, Mr. Roebuck, in a very clever speech, vindicated the proposition embodied in the motion, and spoke against aristocratical influence with much emphasis, and in a manner which was considesed to point directly to the abolition of the House of Lords. He was instantly replied to by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and broadly told, though he might feel satisfied that there was a party in the country who would approve of such a change, he had only to bring it forward there, and he would soon find that it would meet with no support in that House. This we say would comfort the Con servatives, if, when they were ejected from Downing street, they had been really afraid " the time-honoured fabric" of the Constitution was about to be laid in ruins by their desperate successors. It was at tempted to make the more timid portion of the public believe that all the furies of revolution were about to be unchained, and that the atrocities of Robespierre and the vagaries of the Goddess of Rea son were to be acted in England. They will now see the fear was vain, and. be satisfied, whatever the ex pectations which brought Nina Lassave to the Strand, that she will not easily find a Fieschi the Second in London. From what passed last night, when Whigs' and Tories found themselves dividing (if we may in dulge in the solecism) together, they must perceive, with this great body of the nation, that when they think there is cause for alarm, the present Ministers will as promptly and as sternly defend the Constitution as ever those could do whose good pleasure it was to stigmatise them as the unreasoning advocates of inno vation, and the foes of everything ancient, venerable, or sacred. Whatever may be thought of primogeniture, it must be admitted that much discussion must precede the introduction of any motion on the subject into the Legislature, with the hope of its being extensively sup ported.—Morning Chronicle. The wanton destruction of a very excellent work of art like the equestrian statue of King William 111., in College-green, Dublin, which, as our Irish correspon dent shows, was the other night blown up with gun powder, would be an act of mere Vandalic barbarism, if it were not inspired by religious bigotry and political malevolence. That statue, the symbol of the revolu tion of 1688, was a memorial of the deliverance of the civil and religious liberties of the British people from the grasp of a sullen and ruthless tyrant, who laboured through his short and igno m i n i ous re i gn to prostrate the Protestant Constitution, and the hrone of a free people, at the feet of Papal Rome. As such a memorial that statue has always been an odious thing in the eyes of that class of the Irish people who kate the principles which the Restorer of Protestant freedom successfully asserted, and would rather he the slaves of the vassal despot of the Romish Power than the free subjects of a Protestant British King. w e are far from including all the Roman Catholics in this description. The more educated classes of that persuasion are, in general, too enlightened to under value the advantages of the freedom which they now en joy. But it cannot be denied that there is in Ireland a numerous and desperate faction, headed by the more in tolerant members of the priesthood, and by the political agitators whose aim and object is to subvert all Pro testant institutions, and eventually to get rid of the hated connection with England altogether. That party has existed by succession in Ireland, ever since the days of the Stuarts ; and though they were long qu i e t, after the defeats at Londonderry, the Boyne, and Aughrim had crushed their guilty designs, yet they never failed to cherish a pious hatred for the principles which triumphed at the revolution ; the principles that are embodied in the Bill of Rights, and for the preservation of which the illustrious family of Brunswick were raised to the throne of these realms. It is not the first or second time that the same faction have shown their malignant and implacable hatred to the memory of William of Orange, and the principles of the revolution, by defacing the statue of the great Deliverer of the Protestant empire and the Protestant religion. They have at length succeeded in their bar barous object of destroying the statue. We have no doubt that they regard it not only as some revenge for the past, but as a pledge of a more complete triumph for the future. Over the fragments of the mutilated image of the hero of civil and religious liberty the shouts of savage exultation have been raised by that faction, whose seditious projects have, of late years, been so successful, that they expect the day is not far distant when they shall shout over the ruins of the Protestant Constitution, and the broken links of British connection I As a work of art, the loss of that splendid and truly classic statue can hardly be re paired. This is bad enough—but it is worse to thin k that there is an active and virulent faction in Ireland whom no kindness can conciliate, and whom every con cession on the part of the British Government renders more daring, fierce, and insolent. Nothing can satisfy that faction but the complete surrender of the Govern ment of Ireland into their hands I Are our Whig Ministers prepared to make the sacrifice ? If not, they must stop somewhere.—Morning Herald. The Crown, it is well known, neither pays nor re ceives costs in any of the numerous prosecutions which are instituted in its name. The result in prac tice of this is that a man may be sued by the Excise, Customs, or any other of the Revenue Boards, for duties or penalties which be has never incurred, and, though, acquitted by a Jury, may be, and some times is, actually ruined by the heavy law expenses which hi s d e f ence aga i nst an un j us t or mistaken charg e has entailed upon him. We are induced to notice this subject by the result of the late four prose cutions tried at the Norfolk Assizes for alleged bribery 0, at Yarmouth —prosecutions which, though unuertaken in pursuance of a solemn vote and address of the House of Commons, were, in fact, scouted out of Court by the Judge and Juries. Yet in these cases we are in formed that the same inflexible rule above referred to prevails ; and though the parties stand not only fully acquitted, but th e p r osecution, it is now manifest , ought never to have beeii instituted, the parties are actually punished in the shape of costs to an extent probably as great as had they pleaded guilty or of fered no defence. Now that here is a great indivi- THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13, 1836. dual wrong committed, cannot, we apprehend, be denied ; and a wrong, too, without a remedy, un less the House of Commons, in a Committee of Supply, has the manliness and the justice to re pair the injury by a vote adequate to cover these heavy consequences. On the general question first alluded to—viz., suits on the prosecution of the Crown for duties and penalties, the remedy perhaps is not so obvious, for in such cases were the Crown to pay costs when unsuccessful, it would of course be entitled to receive them upon verdicts obtained in its favour, which, as they form a proportion of nine out of ' every ten, the consequences upon defendants would be greatly enhanced. But the case is different in prose cutions instituted upon votes of the House of Com mons. In such cases, when they fail it is the Repre sentatives of the people oppressing those whom they represent ; and though we are far from wishing to see the House of Commons shorn of any of those privi leges which they hold in trust for the benefit of the people, we see no reason why they should be entitled to inflict an injury, merely because they can use a name in their legal proceedings which protects them from consequences to which their constituents, under parallel circumstances, are one and all subject. The plaintiff - in a failing action is compelled, in common justice, to pay the defendant's costs. Why is the latter to be placed in a worse situation when the House of Commons (sometimes, perhaps, for mere party pur poses) chooses to become his prosecutors ?—Morn ing Herald. His Majesty's Ministers and all their train seem to regard the blowing up of King William's statue i❑ Dublin as a very superior stroke of pleasantry. Now, it may be a very good joke, but we confess that we do not see the point of it, and it would be but considerate on the part of those grave personages who cannot allude to it without an ecstacy of laughter to intimate to the more simple wherein the merriment of the thing lies. We are really quite in the dark as to the fun of an ex plosion of gunpowder in the public streets of the me tropolis of Ireland—an explosion which blows some three tons of lead up in the air, and then causes it to fall with a tremendous crash into the public tho roughfare,—the drollery of this, however exquisite, is too deep for us. It is true that the explosion took place in the dead of the night, when most people were in bed, and the smashing of the lamps and shaking of the windows, as well as the terrific noise occasioned by the explosion, must have caused many to start suddenly from their slumbers ; but there is hardly enough in this to move a Ministry to unutterable mirth, or to convulse one side of the House of Commons with laughter. We are, therefore, still at fault for the source of the mer riment, and cannot divine why this particular outrage should be more a matter of amusement than other out rages are. We can, indeed, understand that the de struction of a statue which was dear to Protestants, as a memorial of their great leader in a time of im minent peril—we can, we say, understand how this might be a matter of ruffian exultation to the bigotted and Protestant-hating scoundrels who committed the outrage. Nay, we can believe, that to some persons, who are at once the associates of the lowest black guards, and of the King's Ministers, this insolent out rage on the part of congenial bigots and blackguards in Dublin might give a great deal of satisfaction ; but we cannot believe that the Ministers participate in the low brutalities of these persons, though they feel it neces sary to court them for the sake of their political sup port. It was stated yesterday by the Ministerial papers, that when the subject was alluded to in the House of Commons great mirth was immediately ex hibited, and Lord Morpeth, with what is described as at once marked and mocked solemnity, informed the House that he had not received any official information on the subject. This, at least, was no jesting matter. An outrage, which certainly was very daring and alarming, and which had been the cause of very great excitement in Dublin, ought surely to have been mentioned to the Irish Minister by his Deputies in Dublin. The villains who perpetrated the outrage had wantonly put the most important part of the city of Dublin in the greatest danger. It is absurd to sup pose that they could have exactly calculated the quan tity of powder necessary to overthrow the statue, and that the explosion did no greater mischief is no lessen ing of the crime which they have committed. A few ounces more of powder, and the houses would have been blown down, many lives lost, the great door of the Bank of Ireland, which was close at hand, blown in, the Bank probably robbed, and the business of the city suspended. Is it fit that a great crime, which caused much disturbance, and was very near leading to consequences much more serious, should be matter of mock solemnity for the Mi nisters, and cause great laughter in the senate ? We did not think that we had come quite to that yet; but what is there we may not prepare for when Mr. O'Connell gives the cue to the Ministers, and the Ministers to the rabble, in, and out, of the House of Commons ? Lord Morpeth's exhibition of himself in the character of a droll is not surprising, since the discovery has been made that his face is an exact fac simile of the ugliest and most laughable of our comic actors ; but there are times and places for all things, and since, from his Lordship's modesty, he is not much in the habit of displaying talent of any kind, we would recommend him not to waste his jocoseness upon unfitting occasions : " For though his Lordship has much wit He's very shy of using it, As being loth to wear it out, And therefore bears it not about, Unless on holidays, or so, . As men their begt apparel do." It was so near the Easter holidays that Lord Mor peth forgot they were gone by. This is a common thing with schoolboys, bout his Lordship ought to be pleased to remember that, however absurd and incre dible the fact may be, it is nevertheless a fact that he is not a schoolboy, but Secretary of State for Ireland. We must own (at the risk of provoking more laughter from Mr. O'Connell's merry men on the Treasury Benches) that we do think this blowing up in Dublin a very se rious affair, not so much on its own account—though even that is far too important to be treated with ridi cule—as that we consider it symptomatic of a new and terrible resolution on the part of the ,Irish Papists. The election for the county of Clare, in defiance of law, was the discovery which carried Ca tholic Emancipation. The blowing up •of the statue of King William may prove to be the discovery which, by general application, will soon remove the Protestant Churches of Ireland, which are such an eyesore to the liberal Papists. If a statue may b i e l e bblownpug up icri spotthe very within centre tll e i o. limits the is o f metropolis, th at m etr metro polis, n tst. t ly blow places, 3l a up ces , ‘vithout a polls, and if the outrage is s een t o b e b u t a m i r thf u l occurrence in the estimation of th e G overnmen t, h ow great i s t h e temptat i on and (comparatively) how easy the r t task lii l o o Tie churches, lany one which areto g for ua r thed them em most ? pa Numb ers, audacity, and gunpowder, may do anything in th e way of destruction, and if at the commence ment th e G overnment w i ll laugh, instea d o f punish ing, it may find, in the end, punishment instead of laughter. Th e system o f t h e Whi g G overnme nt for these fiv e years h as b een to show t h e I r i s h P a pi s t s that wh atever l aw they are daring enough gene rally a land. t: resist, must from thenceforth be held to be null and v o id. Th e y res i ste d the payment of tithes, ' to which they were b oun d by law, and tithes the Government proclaim e d m ust cease to exist in Ire rhey have but to blow up every building which commo n is offensive to them, and Government will , after their laught er has sufficiently subsided to enable them to speak, a d mit that Protes tan t Churches must not exist if Papi sts are resolved to destroy t h em . W e p u t it t o the "holy to say w h ether if a " holy stone ," suc h as I ris h Pa pists mon sense and candour even of our opponen t s ignorantly worship, had been blown u p , or a well" h a d b ee n d es t ro yed, the British Minister for Ir e l an d would have dared to h ave ma d e a j es t of it in th e H ouse of Commons, or have even r efrained from the expression of his indign ation. W ho does not know that the soul of such a creature as Lord Morp e th would have sunk w i t hin him at the appre hension of Mr. O'Connell's d is p leasure, and that he would h ave run w i th t h e s peed of a hound to express his d eep concern for the outr a g e? But Protestant feeli ngs are not, it seems , wor th caring about, and what they look u p on as an insult is to be treated with mock solemnity and laughter. And this must be borne ? Yes, for the present it must ; but a day of reckoning will come, and the laughter of these jocund days will Plat then be forgotten.—Morning Post. We were th ':first, some two or three weeks ago, to announce to our readers that the Irish Municipal Bill would be rejected by the House of Lords, and that the consequence of that rejection would be, either the resignation of the Melbourne Cabinet, or the dissolu- ' tionof the present Parliament. We still _adhere to the accuracy of our information on that subject, not withstanding some rumours of a contrary character— rumours which give credit to the Tories for having originated the report, but which, at this time of day, and under existing circumstances, they would be the last to circulate. The agony of apprehension which the prospect of an appeal to the various constituencies excites in the Conservative faction, shows at once a consciousness of well-merited unpopularity, and an an ticipation of impending defeat ; n or are t h e i r terrors merely imaginary. We have seen a list, prepared by or der of the Carlton Club, and professing extreme accuracy, which is anything but consolatory to the clique for whose information it has been got up. The circulation of this document is, as much as possible, confined to the parties at whose instance it was originally prepared. That it underrates the amount of loss which they are sure to sustain in the event of a dissolution, is per fectly certain. It is equally so, that its concoctors have been absurdly sanguine in their estimate of the accession they look to, from quarters where they as sert a Tory re-action to have taken place ; but even on their own showing their cause is so hopeless, and their prospects so discouraging, that we shall for the present take the statement on their own terms. It is to be carefully borne in mind that this Carlton voucher does not profess to extend beyond England, and it is perfectly well known that the increasing unpopularity of Conservative sentiments is at least equally prevalent in Ireland and Scotland. The wiseacres of the Carlton Club admit that a dissolution must entail a loss of no less than thirty-seven seats in the boroughs at present repre sented by Memhers of their party, but they console themselves by asserting that they are snre of defeating thirteen of the present Liberal county Members. We have already cautioned our readers that this statement, coming from a deeply-interested party, must be received with extreme suspicion ; but let us for the moment ad mit it to be correct, and see how it will affect the nu merical strength of the respective parties. The thirty seven Members lost to the Tories are, by the same operation, transferred to the Liberals. A very simple arithmetical process will satisfy the most sceptical that this operates in two ways, and must swell the majority in a double ratio—that is, by no less than seventy four votes. Admitting, then, for the sake of argument, that the Tory augmentation in the counties is correctly esti mated (on which point we have already intimated our doubt) it will, by a parity of reasoning, give them an addition of twenty-six, which leaves a clear ba lance of forty-eight in favour of the Liberals. Now, although we could state many sufficient reasons for believing that the Tories have at once exaggerated their expected gain and diminished their probable loss, we are satisfied, as we before said, to take the matter for the moment on their own showing., The accession to the present strength of the Government, which even their adversaries admit to be inevitable, is quite sufficient to justify the despondence of the Tories —but it will do something more for the cause of judi cious and progressive Reform, by enabling the Admi nistration to send up measures to the House of Lords, carried by such overwhelming majorities, as will make their Lordships reflect upon their position more seri ously than they have latterly done. These majorities will not impart wisdom to a Londonderry, or liberality to an Eldon, or candour to a Lyndhurst; but they will teach them in language not to be gainsaid, that the voice of the people orEngland, solemnly and con stitutionally expressed, must not be defeated by con tumacious resistance, nor frittered away by plausible, but dishonest sophistry.—Morning Advertiser. VICE-CHANCERY COURT. The VICE-CHANCELLOR yesterday morning resumed his sittings at Lincoln's Inn after the Easter recess. CANTRELL V. THE GUARDIANS OF THE POOR OF THE WINDSOR UNION. Mr. KNIGHT had to apply for an injunction in this case to which he believed no person appeared to object, and which he had obtained permission from the Lord Chan cellor during the holydays to move before his Honour on this day. The injunction sought to restrain the defendants, who, under the Poor Law Amendment Bill were now con stituted a Corporation, from taking down some premises which before the passing of the Act had been used partly as a Poor-house, and partly let at a low rental to different paupers in the parish. The injunction was granted, but in the course of the morning the Solicitor-General appearing to oppose the mo tion it was directed to be suspended till the first day of next Term, the defendants undertaking not to pull down the premises in the meantime. • THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. SHORE. On the motion of Mr. C. ROMILLY (which was made by consent), the defendants were directed to pay a sum of money into Court which they held in their hands in this cause. 3RAMWELL V. HALCOMB, SWEET, AND OTHERS. Mr. STEWART applied to the Court, exparte, for a spe cial injunction to restrain the defendant, who was a short time a Member of the House of Commons, and Mr. Sweet his publisher, from proceeding to publish a book, entitled, " A Treatise on the Passing of Private Bills through the House of Commons." The VICE-CHANCELLOR directed the injunction to issue. ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. NORTHERN CIRCUIT—LmtarooL, APRIL 11. CRIM CON.—YEOMAN V. ASIIIHIRNER. His LORDSHIP entered the Court at 8 o'clock, and a few minutes afterwards the Learned Counsel for the defence made a long and eloquent address to the jury. The LEARNED JUDGE having summed up, the jury re turned a verdict for the defendant. CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. OLD COURT. In the case of James Barnes, who was tried for a post ollice robbery, and whose trial was not concluded yesterdiiy when we went to press, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Mrs. Murray, a young married female of attractive ap pearance, yesterday appeared before Mr. CONANT and Mr. HALL, for the purpose of charging her landlord, a coffee shop keeper, in Marshall-street, named Saunders, with attempting to kiss her without her consent, and also his wife with having beaten her severely afterwards. The complainant last Sunday, according to custom, went down stairs to get some water, and to borrow a newspaper for her husband. Hearing some one brushing shoes in the area, she went theie and found Mr. Saunders. She asked him where Mrs. Saunders was ?—but, instead of making any reply, he seized her by the wrist, and made an effort to ravish a kiss from her rosy lips. She resisted, and in the struggle her wrist was very much hurt. In this delicate si tuation of matters, Mrs. Saunders, who heard the scuffle, who was washing some cabbage plants in the back kitchen, came running into the area with the cullender in one hand and a bunch of greens in the other. Without staying to inquire into the merits of the affair she bangs the cullender and the cabbages at her spouse, and then, seizing the com plainant by her hair, inflicted on her a severe beating. The complainant called her husband, and when he came to the place told him how she had been used. Mr. Saunders did, not deny what she stated, and said what had occurred was entirely his fault. Mr. Humphries, on behalf of the complainant, asked her if she had ever given the least encouragement to the male defendant ? Mrs. Murray never had. _ In defence the husband admitted that he did attempt to kiss Mrs. Murray, but he denied that there was so much reluctance as asserted. The wife declared that her ire was roused because she saw her husband put out his lips to kiss Mrs. Murray, and that Mrs. Murray, nothing loth, advanced her's to receive the salute. Mr. Saunders hinted that it was not the first time he had amused himself with Mrs. Murray's lips, a communi cation which did not appear on the part of the wife to amend matters. One witnes s ( a f ema l e ) declared that Mrs. Saunders ha d donejust as she should have done, " for women in a pas sion," said she, " are capable of doing anything." The husb an d was requ i red to find bail ; the wife was fined a shilling and discharged. IMPORTANT TO PARI SHES .—A cow -keeper in Great er Coram-street, name d R owe , was summoned at t- ie of the p ar i s h of, St. Giles's, for refusing to maintain his instance wife. Mr. Isaacs, on the part of the defendant,.fe, the principal refusal on tho alleged infidelity of the grounded. the wife, proof of which rested on the testimony of the wife's son, a boy about seven years of age, and two men, whom the wife denied all knowledge of. The wife asserted her innocence, and called her husband's mother, who said that her daughter-in-law's conduct had always been most exemplary, and on the olher hand that her son's behaviour was quite the reverse. * Mr. CONANT said it was a question of some importance, and he should take time to consider his decision. FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE. WHITEHALL, APRIL 12, 1836. The King has been pleased to direct letters patent to be passed under the Great Seal of that part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, called Ireland, granting to the Right Honour able Dominick Browne, and to the heirs male of his body lawfully begotten, the dignity of a Baron of that part of the said United Kingdom called Ireland, by the name, stile, and title of Baron Oranmore and Browne, of Carra Browne-castle, in Oranmore, in the county of Galway, and of Castle Mac Garrett, in the county of Mayo. DOWNING-STREET, Aram 11, 1836. The King has been graciously pleased to appoint Rear-Admiral Patrick Campbell, Companion of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath, to be a Knight Commander of the said Order, in the room of Vice-Admiral Sir Graham Moore. FOREIGN-OFFICE, APRIL 12. The King has been graciously pleased to appoint George Stod dart, Esq., to be his Majesty's Consul in the islands of Madeira. The King has also been graciously pleased to appoint Patrick William Kelly, Esq., to be his Majesty's Consul at Carthagena, in the Republic of New Granada. WAR OFFICE, APRIL 12. Ist Regiment of Dragoons —Major-General the Hon. Sir F. C. Ponsonby, K. C. B , from the 86th Foot, to be Colonel, vice Lieut.- General Lord R. E. H. Somerset, appointed to the command of the 4th Light Dragoons ; March 31. 4th Regiment of Light Dragoons—Lieut.-General Lord R. E. A. Somerset, G.C.8., from the Ist Dragoons, to be Colonel, vice General Hugonin, deceased ; March 31. 86th Regiment of Foot—Major-Gen. J. Watson, to be Colonel, vice Major-General Sir F. Ponsonby, appointed to the command of the Ist Dragoons ; March 31. MEMORANDA. His Majesty has been graciously pleased to permit the 27th, o r Inniskilling, Regiment of Foot to bear on its colours and appoint ments, in addition to any other badges or devices which may have heretofore been authorised, the words " St. Lucia," in commemo ration of the gallant conduct evinced by the Regiment, on the 24th May 1796, in the attack upon the fort Morne Fortune, which led to the surrender of the island of St. Lucia, on the 26th of that month. Major-General the Honourable Sir Frederick Cavendish Pon - sonby has repaid the difference he received, on exchanging from the 12th Light Dragoons to the half-pay, in October 1820. WHITEHALL, MARCH 22. The Lord Chancellor has appointed Edward Stephens, of Llan daff, in the county of Glamorgan, Gent., to be a Blaster Extraor dinary in the High Court of Chancery. Commission by the Lord-Lieutenant of the County of Warwick. Warwickshire Militia.—W. B. Ind, Gent., to be Lieutenant, vice Lambert, deceased, April 9. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. SAMUEL HIBBERT and GEORGE HIBBERT, cotton doublers, Draycott, Derbyshire. BANKRUPTS. JOSEPH COX, draper, Bradford, Yorkshire, to surrender April 19, at two, and May 24, at twelve, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Parker, St. Paul's Church-yard ; Graham, official assig nee, Copthall-buildings. JOHN WILLIAMS, tailor, Strand, April 19, at twelve, and May 24, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Parker, St. Paul's Church-yard; Whitmore, Basinghall-street, official assignee. PETER GREEN, agent, Stamford-street, Blackfriars, Surrey. April 19, at half-past two, and May 24, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee ; Holmes, Liverpool-street, Broad-street, City. CHARLES RICKABY, auctioneer, Chalcroft-terrace, New Cut, Lambeth, Surrey, April 22, at twelve, and May 24, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Belcher, o ffi cial assignee ; Bowden, Great Suffolk-street, Southwark. THOMAS C UNNINGT ON MATH E SON, ship-owner, Man sell-street, Minories, Middlesex, April 22, at two, and May 24, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee ; Dods, Northumberland-street, Strand. EDWIN SMITH, linen-draper, Rochester, Kent, April 19, at one, and May 24, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Green, Aldermanbury, official assignee; Warne, Leadenhall-street. CHARLES ORRAH, draper, Huddersfield, Yorkshire, April 26, at two, and May 24, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Gibson, Basinghall-street, official assignee; Reed, Bread-street, Cheapside. • CHARLES MARTIN and BENJAMIN WARE, wholesale cheesemongers, Great Tower-street, London, April 26, at eleven, and May 24, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Alsager, King's Arms-buildings, Cornhill, official assignee ; Hill, Copthall court, Throomorton-street. CHARLES WALKER, wharfinger, Halkin Wharf, Lower Belgrave-place Pimlico, April 22, at twelve, and May 24, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Groom, Abchurch-lano, offi cial assignee ; Trott, Crown -court, Threadneedle-street, and Lower Elizabeth-street, Belgrave-square. ARTHUR FRY, hat-manufacturer, Blackfriars-road, Surrey, April 19, at twelve, and May 24, at eleven, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Bevan, Castle-court, Budge-row ; Johnson, official assig nee Basinghall-street. JOHN HEAP, builder, Manchester, April 27, and May 24, at eleven, at the Commissioners' Rooms, Manchester. Hammerton, Tudmorden ; Emmett, New Inn, London. SARAH BELCHER, innkeeper, Doncaster, Yorkshire, May 7, and 24, at ten, at the Guildhall, Doncaster. Forbes, Hale, and Boys, Ely-place, Holborn, London ; Mason and Colinson, Doncaster. AMBItOSE GALLIMORE, printer, Stone, Staffordshire, April 27, at twelve, and May 24, at three, at the Crown Inn, Stone, Staffordshire. Barlow, Stone ; Barker, Gray's Inn-square, London. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. E. Baugh, draper, Sloane-street, Chelsea, May 3, at one—W. Mill, woollen draper, Fore-street, May 3, at half-past twelve—C. T. Kirby, laceman, Crawford-street, Portman.square, May 3, at half-past eleven—Sir G. Duckett, Bart., Sir F. B. Morland, Bart., and T. T. Bernard, bankers; Pall-mall, 4, at twelve--J. Wil kinson, J. Staith, and R. J. T. Perkin, brokers, Leadenhall-street, May 4, at one. In the Country. J. Robinson, jobbing smith, Birmingham, May 4, at twelve, at the New Royal Hotel, Birmingham—T. Dalton, merchant, Bir mingham, May 3, at twelve, at the Royal, Birmingham—R. Belt, merchant, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, May 3, at ten, at the Bankrupt Cjmmission-room, Newcastle-upon-Tyne—R. Jackson, grocer, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, May 9, at twelve, at the Bankrupt Commis sion-room, Newcastle-upon-Tyne—G. Hocknell, innkeeper, Stone, Staffordshire, May 4, at twelve, at the Crown Inn, Stone—M. Dunn, wine merchant, Preston, Lancashire, May 10, at eleven, at the, Town-hall, Preston—J. Fisher, iron merchant, Great Bridge, Staffordshire, May 6, at twelve, at the Lion Inn, Wolverhampton —G. Goulden, wine dealer, Liveipool, May 10, at two, at the Cla rendon-rooms, Liverpool—G. Maggs, linen draper, Bristol, May 7, at eleven, at the Commercial-rooms, Bristol. CERTIFICATES.--MAY 3. W. and C. Beaumont, millers, Ember Mills, Thames Ditton, Surrey—J. Puddlecombe, surgeon, Dartmouth, Devonshire. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. R. Cann and H. Martin, cement manufacturers, Portsea—R. Turner and Co., cotton spinners, Blackpits, Lancashire (as far as regards G. Potter)—W. and C. Mole, cheesemongers, King's cross—S. W. Browne and J. J. Coulter, painters, Liverpool-street —J. Whitchurch and R. Randall, attorneys, Southampton—G. Lakeman and T. Kelsey, cabinet makers, Hoxton Market-place—R. Wand and I. Dewhirst, worsted spinners, Bradford—J. P. and E. B. Whitehead, waiter maker, Bilston, Staffordshire—M. and FL Cooper, spur manufacturers, Birmingham—T. Penn and Co., Sledmore and Dudley, Worcestershire (so far as regards E. M. El derton)---J. P. Makeham and J. Simmons, straw hat manufactu rers, Coleman-street—J. Froggart and J. Furnifull, sewing cotton manufacturers, Manchester—A. Mitchelson and W. Hall, brewers, South Shields—A. Booth and G. Ycardley, grocers, Sheffield—E. Hawley and T. Brandon, coal dealers, Penny-fields, Poplar—S. ll.bbert and Co., lace thread manufacturers, Draycott, Derbyshire —T. Tyerman and J. D. Paine, Exchange-buildings, Royal Ex change—C. H. Hervey and Co., school mistresses, Croom's Hill House, Blackheath—.l'. Roberts, jun., and W. Bradbury, mer chants, Saddleworth—H. Budd, jun., and H. Budd, sen., brick layers, Wardour-strect, Soho—R. Fernley and A. Wilson, cotton spinners, Stockport—E. Hardy and Co., turners, York. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. The Matters of the Petitions and Schedules of the Prisoners hereinafter named (the same having been filed in the Court) ore appointed to be heard, at the Court-house, in Portugal street, Lincoln's Inn-fields on FRIDAY, April 15, 1836, at Nine o' Clock in the Forenoon. Bond, F., Graham-street, Pimlico, linen-draper. Fowke, R., Wolverhampton, chemist. Garcia, A., St. James's-place, Aldgate, importer of Dutch grapes. Hassel, E., Bath, stay-maker. Balls, R., Hill-street, Finsbury-squaro, blacksmith. Carpenter, D., George-street, Kent-street, Borough, labourer. Agg, J., Wellington-place, Liverpool-road, Islington. bookbinder. Bates, R., Brighton-terrace, Brixton, gardener. N‘'ells, J. Heath-street, Hampstead, keeper of the Black Boy and Still, Livery -stables. A:lea, W., Ross, Herefordshire, slraw-plait dealer Bays, J., Trinity-street, Rotherhite, shopkeeper. C..4ton, S., Linthwaite, near Hudderfield, farmer. On MONDAY, April 18.—Same hour and place. Morris. J. W., Walworth-road, dyer. Marehant, Z., Kent-street, Southwark, dealer in marine stores. Euler, H., Guildford, Surrey, baker. 13,.:igough, H., Upper Stamford-street, Blackfriars-road, attorney -11-yton, H., Greenwich New-market, Greenwich, hair-dresser. Elliott, A., Cleveland-row, St. James's, lodging-house keeper. Siiiith, W., Lower Shadwell, wictualler. Thompson, H., 114,h-street, Islington, upholsterer. R'binson, E. H., Ipswich, hair-dresser. Parker, J., Henry-street, York-square, Limehouse, clerk to a tim ber-merchant. Arad&ll, C., St. John's -sq ua re, Clcrkenwell, watchmaker. Heslop, C. L., South Weald, Essex, victualler. Adjourned Case from the 16th of March, 1836. Warster, J. 13., Garden- row, Crowe,street, Walworthl The memorial, intended, for presentation to Mr. ex- Daniel, mid sent r oun d f rom door to docir by an the ex-Aidermwa, in th e par i sh of Bedminster, has Illl‘'''k e'd:,:etrc3„n°niafn stol Mercu ry mitted to the saf e custody of the grave-digger.— i. THE DOCK CO NZUITTEE.—The Dock Comm.it tec, we understand, not finding tions to respond to their bitter animosity against 0_ n. the several mercautile associa tions ',oration, have determined to call a public meeting tiele‘ rate payers on Friday next. Th e deputation chosen by the Dock C ,mmittee t o proceed to London in their behalf, eel': fists of 114 , 3gsrs. Potter Horsfall, Robertson Gladstone, and Nailer . Mr. 7 limas Wright, b ac k e d and aided by the i ntrigues of Foster. Th e very reading Tof these names a declaration of war against the people.synonymous with di altness, They are e bigotry, slavery, and ignorance.—Liverpo ol Chronick .