The Sun. — London, England, 1845-08-05 00:00:00

Were foreigners, were at issue, knowing too that the counsel on both sides were not prepared with authorities upon the point—under these circumstances he hoped that the Right Hon. Baronet would advise that these unfortunate men should have the benefit of these appeals. Sir J. GRAHAM said the question put by the Hon. and Learned Member was one of the highest importance. He had, beard the particulars of the case, and after giving the matter every consideration he had communi cated wijh the learned judge who had presided over those trials, and he had consented to reserve the point. NEW ZEALAND. _ _ Mr. P. HOWARD unshed to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he was prepared to state if any, and what, arrangements had been come to with the New'Zealand Company, as it was important that the House and the country should have every information an the subject? Mr. G. W. HOPE said that he had to inform the Hon. Gentleman opposite that a suggestion had been made by the New Zealanj Company to the department of Government in which he had the honour to serve, and he had had an interview with a deputation from that Company. Communications were still passing be tween them. SOUTH-EASTERN AND DOVER COMPANIES - ACCIDENTS. Lord PALMERSTON said that he had bad a commu- Ideation with the Directors of the South-Eastern and Dover Companies, and they stated that the cause of the late accidents was that the engines were toe weak for the work required from them, and that the subject had been fully considered by the Board of Directors. They assured him that there was no mistake in the quality of :the material, the mistake_ was in the calculation at the time the engines were made. They also stated that the party who were directors at the period he had alluded to, were not directors at that time ; and, they added, that, on the Ist of October last, when they found that the en gines were too weak, they gave fresh orders for engines of gicater power. He did not, however, think that ex :planation was sufficiently satisfactory. He thought that 'when they found out that the engines were weak, they ought to have proportioned the weight of the trains to their capacity, and -instead of putting two weak engines to a heavy train, they ought to have lighter trains to the -weak engines. According to their own explanation they .did not do so. They stated that it was only on one part .af the line where the inclination was very steep that they did put one engine before and another behind, and that the trains in there cases did not go at a greater rate than ten or twelve miles an hour. He was no engineer, and, therefore, would not presume to say that his opinion was entitled to any value, but it appeared to him that that _pace was too great for public safety. He thought the two engines ought to be in front ; but if the one were to be in front, and the other behind, then, in his judgment, four miles were amply sufficient. E CASE OF JOHN MAYES. Mr. TINFNELL put a question to Sir James Graham respecting the imprisonment of one John Mayes, who had been tried before Lord Chief Justice Tindal at the Spring Assizes. and iu whose favour the judge, sheriff, mad others, had declared themselves. The Hon. Member was not distinctly audible in the gallery. Sir J. GRAHAM said some delay had necessarily oc curred with respect to this case, but the individual was only kept in prison until the opinion of the judge who tried him (Tindal) was ascertained upon some documents which had been submitted to him. It was believed the party had not been guilty of the crime of which he was convicted. He had been originally sentenced to trans portation for 15 years, which had been commuted to seven years, and the sentence was ordered to stun* over until acts, which had subsequently transpired, were in quired Mo. If the judge's opinion were favourable, he would feel great pleasure in recommending her Majesty - aLI grant him a free pardon. TfIE NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT. Mr. MOFFATT asked when the new houses of Par _ainent would be finished. The noble lord opposite • (Lord Lincoln) said in 1842, that they would be finished in 1846 ; but there was now no chance of such a com pletion.—Would they be finished in 1847 ? Lord LINCOLN said that Mr. Barry was doing his utmost to' forward the building—that he could answer for. No great national building of the same magnitude had advanced so rapidly. Last summer some impute tong were thrown upon Mr. Barry, which had an effect the reverse of what was intended, for it threw him into a state of nervous anxiety, from which he was ill for two months. He could only say that the Central Hall would not be ready in the session of 1847. The Com mittee-rooms of both houses would be ready by that session ; and it would be for the House to say whether it would be more advisable to complete the other parts with undue haste, or wait for another session. SPAFIELDS INTERMENT NUISANCE. In answer to a question froin Lord EBRINGTON, ,Sir J. GRAHAM, who, as well as the noble lord, nes heard but imperfectly, said that measures had been taken to abate the nuisance of the Spafields interment, and to prevent the recurrences of the revolting transac tions connected with that place. The louse then proceeded to the orders of the day. BRAZIL AND BRITAIN. On the reading of the order of the day for bringing ..tip the report on the Exchequer Bills (49,024,900) Bill. Mr. M. GIBSON took the opportunity of pressing upon the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Govern me.nt the necessity of taking into consideration the pre sent position of British subjects resident in Brazil. It appeared, previous to the expiration of the treaty in 1844, they had the privilege of disposing of their pro perty by will, and also certain personal privileges, of which they were now deprived, although other foreigners possessed them. Thus the property of the British in that country was placed in great Jeopardy. The Brazilian •Government had also imposed a differential duty of 20 land 30 per cent. on cotton goods, the manufacture of this country, over and above the duty upon other foreign manufactures. It was, however, intimated by the Brazilian Government, that the differential duties against us a ould be continued no longer than we continued to proscribe their sugars. On these grounds he did not :think he would be warranted in allowing this oppor tunity to pass without endeavouring to impress this sub ject upon the attention of her Majesty's Government. — (Hear, hear.) All these unpleasant circumstances and differences had been owing to the unfortunate policy of the Government of this country in reference to Brazilian sugar.—(Hear.) He would riot now say a word about slave-gown sugar, or the itnioolicy of the mode in which .slave-grown sugar was admfrted into this country feem ;Brazil ; but, in consequence of the mode in which that measure had been allowed to exist, and the monopoly of labourers exercised by the producers of slave-grown eu e esr, he would wish to ask whether any steps had been - taken' for the immigration of labourers into the interior of the West Indies, in order to meet this alleged dearth of labour?, He had understood that a measure was in tended to be proposed by which to procure funds to .carry on this bettnigration, He would say nothing now .on the policy or .!inpolicy of the other measures of the Government on this subject ; but he trusted he might be allowed to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Colonies, whether hny such loan had been asked for or guaranteed ; and if not, whether any steps had been taken in reference to the dispatches laid upon the table, of this House in reference to the subject.—(Hear.) Mr. HOPE said the state of the ease was simply this, that a loan ordinance had been proposed, by which to raise the means of defraying the expenses of the immi gration, and had not been objected to ; .but at the same .time other parties not connected with the Government had declared their intention of raising a fund for the purpose, indepeedent of the loan ordinance. telt R. PEEL said, lie stated at an early period of the session that plenipotentiaries had been appointed to ne gotiate a treaty with the Brazilian Govornment on this subject, with a view to conferring on British subjects all the privileges in respect to this question, which the sub jects of other nations possessed.—(Hear, hear.) The last accounts received from Brazil stated, that a change lad taken place in the Brazilian Government, and that ;fie Secretary of state had been removed from office ; but it would be seen from the report, that the Minister at the Court of Brazil had said nothing in reference to she /fon. Me mber's question. WESTMINSTER ABBEY. Mr. HUME said he had delayed, until this late period of the session, asking the Right lion. Gentleman opposite, whether it was the intention of her Majesty's Government to take any steps for discontinuing the fee mow exacted from persons visiting Westminster Abbey ? -- (Hear.) He should say it was extremely discreditable to 'exact such fees, and it was the first thing complained of Sly all foreigners visiting the Abbey, on their return toeleir own country, knowing; as they did, that nothing .of tee sort was known on the Continent. The Hon. iMember concluded by reading his motion, as follows, but did not press it :—" To call` the attention of the ouse tv .the practice of exacting fees or receiving gratuities fr(la the public as the conditions of their admittance to ea , t h e drals and other public buildings ; and to move, that, in the opinion of this House, the practice of ex acting fees from the public as the ( conditions of their ad mittance to cathedrals is highly improper,"and ought to be discontinued." Sir R. PEEL said he had always expressed an opinion in favour of free admission to all the public institutions of thit . country, in so far as was consistent with the safety o f the work of arts, for he conceived that nothing exeresed n more beneficial effect on the minds of the people than being permitted to have free admission to .such pi a cos.—(Hear.) He should here add that no thineecould. he more exemplary than the conduct of the working claSses at those places, for instance, during their free admission to the cartoons at Westminster Bet then due caution was necessary to be exercised iu ordev to guard against such oceurrence.; ,as had token place, in reference to the destruction of *works of art, as the case of the Portland vase. The Bight Flon. Baronet then rear: a letter, which he said be h.eo received upon this subject ; in which the writer Ste ted that measures had already been taken whereby to effect a change in the charge now made for the ad mitts Ace of strangers to Westminster Abbey. The .substance of whieli was, that, in future, strangers were to - t he admitted to the nave, and the choir, and the north s e nd south transepts, without any charge ; in fact, there wag to be free admittance to all persons to the body of te4 ohnreh,—(Hear, bear.) At e WM. COUPER said that it afforded him very great geatification to have heard the statements of the Bight Hon. Baronet, for he did conceive it was a great sc andal to the church that such exaction should ever have beer made ; and be doubted very much whether the Dean and Chapter had ever any right to make any such charge.-- (Hear, hear.) He trusted that this change a eould prove to be but the forerunner of a total removal at' the exaction of any fee whatever.—(Hear, hear.) Mr.WILLIA MS concurred with the Hon. Gentleman why had just eat down, and said that this was the only country in Eurols in which the clergy exacted such charges. Mr. P. BORTIMICK quite agreed with the Right ET.onourable Baronet at the head of the Government, that it was better this thing should be carried out by the good will an concurrence of the clergy,. than by compulsory enactment. Still he thought all those public building's ought to be opened without any tax whatever. English men ought to be at home in their own country, and not be met with charges continually whenever they went to examine any of the public monuments. It was not so on the continent, where all the cathedrals and public buildings were thrown open to the public without a tax. He condemned the practice of turning St. Paul's Ca thedra and Westminster Abbey into show-rooms. They ought, as had been originally intended, to be open at all hours of the day for religious purposes, when the public could be allowed to enter without money and without price. Mr. HUME said, that what the Right Honourable Gentleman had stated was quite satisfactory. He was sure that by carrying out such an arrangement as that spoken of, the greatest good would be realised. The report of the Exchequer-bills Bill was then agreed to. SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY.—THE CASE OF MR. WRAY. _ _ Mr. HAWES rose to move the following resolutions of which he had given notice :—" That it appears from the report and evidence laid before this House by the Select Committee on the South-Eastern Railway Com pany's petition, that Mr. Wray, the Receiver of the Metropolitan Police District, was, in the year 1836, the retained and paid agent of a private Company, to pro mote the success of a Bill introduced'into Parliament on their behalf. That it also appears, from an address of this House, that the Secretary, of State for the Home Department has, in consequence of the report and evi dence referred to, addressed a letter to Mr. Wray, ex pressing his strong disapprobation of Mr. Wray's con duct. That it appears to this House, upon a reference to the evidence, that Mr. Wray, on behalf of the South- Eastern Railway Company, paid the sum of 300/, de rived from the sale of railway shares, to Mr. Bonham, for his services as a Member of this House, and as a Member of a Select Committee, to which the Bill of this Company was referred ; a circumstance to which the Secretary of State has not adverted in the letter ad dressed to Mr. Wray. That, in the opinion of this House, such conduct deserves not only the serious ani madversion of the House, but disqualifies Mr. Wray from holding an o ffi ce of trust and responsibility under the Crown. ' The Honoutable Gentleman said he regretted to call the attention of the House to the subject, as he had hoped that the conduct of the Government would have spared him the necessity. He had no personal ill will towards Mr. Wray, but ha thought it was perfectly impossible for the House to pass over the subject in the way the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of the Home Department had done. It was no doubt a late period of the session for him to introduce such a motion, but in justification of that he would call the attention of the House to the fact that the report of the Select Committee, that sat to inquire into -the allegations preferred against certain Members of that House in relation to the South- Eastern Company, was not laid on the table till the 12th July. After that, it was not till the 19th, that the Honorable Gentleman at the head of the Home Department addressed the letter to Mr. Wray, in reference to his conduct,and it was not till the 22d that it was printed. It was, therefore, impossible to have brought it before the House on an earlier day. What was the conduct of this person, as shown in the report unanimously agreed to by the Committee, not one part of which but what was sustained by the evidence adduced ? Mr. Wray was a public officer, holding an important and responsible situation, and a person who from his office held large sums of public money in his hands. In 1837, while holding this situation, he allowed himself to become the paid agent of a private company, in order to promote a private Bill through the Legislature, and it had been clearly shown that in that capacity, while fulfilling engagements that were strictly private and confidental on behalf of this company, he hod been engaged canvassing Members of Parliament to support the Bill for which he was retained, and on one occasion he paid 3001. to a certain Member, in order to obtain his assent to the Bill, that Member being one of the Select Committee on the Bill. This could not be considered professional conduct. He (Mr. Hawes) had conversed with most respectable legal gentlemen on this subject s , and they all expressed their indignation at the circum- s , stances, and condemned the conduct of Mr. Wray as altogether unprofessional. The Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government had given permission to Mr. Wray to follows his private business. But proceedings such as these could not be considered a legitimate following out of private business. Here was a public officer becoming the paid agent of a private Company, and in that capa city paying sums of money to Members of that House in order to obtain a favourable result to his measure. Yet the House would be surprised that the Right Hon. Baronet the Home Secretary, in his letter to Mr. Wray, had not made a single allusion to that remarkable oc curence. There was no fact in the case which had not been developed in the admissions of Mr. Wray, in the evidence he had given before the Committee. But it would be important to learn what the House had done under similar occurrences in former times, in order to see whether the House could agree with the slight man ner in which the Right Hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary had passed over the conduct of Mr. Wray, who had evidently committed a breach of the privileges of the House. In 1695 serious abuses and corruptions were brought before the House of Commons, affecting certain Members. The inquiry took place, and the re sult of this inquiry, and exposure of the transaction, was the passing of a general resolution to the effect:—That all offers of money or other advantages to Members of Parliament, in order to obtain any legislative advantage, or to forward any Bill, was a high crime and misdemeanour, and subversive of the Constitution of the country.—(Hear, hear.) After that resolution was passed, a certain individual commit. ted the identical offence, a Mr. Bird, and he was in con sequence summoned to‘the bar of the House, and repri manded by the Speaker for having offered a certain re muneration to a Member of that House. He (Mr. Hawes) called the attention of the House to these precedents, that Hon. Members might see how such transactions were dealt with in former times, in order to guide them at the present time—a time which never had its equal for a disregard of honesty and fair dealing, and for over looking all prudential considerations. But the House had another case much clearer to assist them. He would give the opinion of a former House on public com panies that tampered with the honesty of Members. The South Sea Bubble Companies employed large sums of money for that purpose, which were distributed among public officers and Members of Parliament. In conse quence of this, the House passed a resolution that the taking in, or the holding of stock by Members without giving in exchange any valuable consideration, or pay ment in money, were infamous and disgraceful practices. He gave this to show the opinion of Parliament at that time. Under these circumstances, he thought the House ought not to pass over that delin quency of Mr. Wray ; nor should they be content with the weak and unsatisfactory letter of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State. Considering the important admissions of Mr. Wray, he could not be lieve the House would pass the matter over with the re proof of the Right Hon. Gentleman. It was right to make a stand on the part of the public, and for the cha racter of the Government, against such malpractices. It was especially necessary that the Government should hold up the purity of its subordinate departments, and show its decided repudiation of such conduct. It was of no little importance that that House should look to the character and proceedings of those who held offices of trust under the Government; and hence it was that he brought the motion under the consideration of the House, as he had no objection to Mr. Wray on private grounds. He had avoided saying anything harsh or un kind respecting that gentleman,but he must sayhisconduct had been such as ought not to be passed over by that House., He took this money to Mr. Bonham. whose services he had purchased.—(Cries of No, no,") He said he took this money to Mr. Bonham Mr. Benham being under obligations to him. He did not say this to the dis paragement of Mr. Bonham—his observations were directed to Mr. Wray. He should have been the last man to solicit his services, and if Mr. Bonham unhap pily lent himself to Mr. Wrav, he said Mr. Wray was to blame. Such conduct in one holding a public office, like Mr. Wray, could not be too highly censured. He (Mr. Hawes) had discharged a painful duty in bringing the subject before the House. In the expediency of bringing it forward he was borne out by the judgment of those most competent to judge. He should therefore leave to the House, and to the Hon. Gentleman, to de cide what course they should take ; for himself, he should divide the House on the motion he had made. The SPEAKER having put the motion, Sir J. GRAHAM said if the Hon. Gentleman enter. tamed doubts as to the course he waspurauinginhisofficid capacity with respect to Mr. Wray . , he could not but doubt that it was a painful duty which he had to dis- charge. The case lay s in the narrowest possible compass He should not, therefore, discuss the constitutional doe- trines brought forward by the Hon. Gentleman, who rested his arguments on precedents and on the strong declarations of that House in past time. There was not a Member in it more anxious than he was to guard its purity, especially at a time when it was exposed to some danger by the wide-spread speculation of the pre sent moment—(Hear, hear)—as he considered that the high character of the House should be steadily guarded against its influence. With these general doctrines, he would proceed to the question. He was not about to extenuate—he was not there to defend the conduct of Mr. Wray. To the best of his (Sir J. Graham's) judg ment he had endeavoured to do justice to that House, and to give effect to what he thought was the wish of the Com mittee over which the Hon. Gentleman presided.—(Hear.) The Hon. Gentleman said that he had no personal con nexion with Mr. Wray. It did so happen that in the execution of his official duties with Mr. Wray he bad never been called into personal contact with him, and therefore he could have no favour with him. He might, therefore, say solemnly that, until he a rote the letter, from no friend Mr. Wray, and from no individual what ever did he receive any application concerning him. (Hear, hear.) He was, therefore, solely responsible for the letter, which was written by himself. After a dis passionate view of the circumstances of the case, that judgment not being grounded on personal favour, either one way or the other. The Hon. Gentleman regretted that he had brought toward this question at that late period of the session. He (Sir James Graham) re grettedrwoaurtd a o fw theeek o fi r f t e t e e n n days-ago. There were only that he did not bring t t h r f e t e ' Members to whom the question had been referred present.— (Hear, hear. ) This showed that the subject did not greatly interest those that were absent. A fter all, the matter really at issue was—had he or bad he not followed the recommendations of the Committee.—(Mi nisterial cheers.) He repeated that he had endeavoured to carry out their recommendations to the best of his ability. However there were two or three circumstances which, before they could decide the question whether he had fairly carried out the recommendations of the Com mittee or not, ought not to be lost sight of. The Honourable Gentleman used 'the expression that a bribe had been given to Mr. Bonham.—(Ministerial cheers.) In the first place, it was distinctly shown by the evidence, and admitted in the report, that the part taken by Mr. Bpi:4m l as a Menaber of that 1401130 0 was taken without any prospect of reward from the company—(Hear, hear)—that was expressly set forth in the report, and borne out by the evidence. It did not appear that the money paid to Mr. Benham was made at Mr. Wray's suggestion, but at that of a gentleman connected with the company. He had said that Mr. Wray was unknown to him, whereas Mr. Bonham was intimately and well known to him. He was still proud to call him his friend. —(Hear.) He committed a grave error—he acknow ledged that he committed a grave error. He could not offer to extenuate it. He (Sir J. Graham)regretted that he could not extenuate it, but still he said Mr. Bonham was his friend, The Hon. Gentleman said that Mr. Bonham was under obligations to Mr. Wray. The statement that the money paid tp Iylp. Bonham went to liquidate a debt owing by him to Mr. Wray had been refuted, and was without foundation. Mr. Wray's was only the hand that gave it to him. The evidence proved that Mr. Wray 4j4 not directly or indirectly receive any benefit from the money, 41 gispod, who was in at tendance on the Committee, had been examined, he would have proved that the money did not pass through Mr. Wray' private account, He called upon the members of the Committee who were preseni to state, whether be did not include, in the statement which he had made to the ffeese, his strong disapprobation of the conduct of Mr. Wray With regpect to Mr. fig. nett, he distinctly stated that his conduct rendered him unfit to be employed as a servant of the Crown. Then with regard to Mr. Bonham and paptain Boldero, who had stated that they were of opinion that they had done nothing to Impair their efficiency as members of the Ordnance ; but thinking that the public service would be impaired by their remaining in office, they tendered their resignations, which were accepted by the Govern ment. The report of the Committee stated that the con duct of Mr. Wray was deserving of serious animadver sion. —(Hear, hear.) He would state cordially the in formation he had received with respect to the proceed ings of the Committee. In the draft framed by the chairman, the words " deserving of serious animadver sion" did not stand alone, as there were added to them, and afterwards expunged, " that the attention of the Secretary of State be especially called to this subject." —(hear, hear.) If those words had been inserted, they would certainly have called his attention to the subject more strongly than " serious animadversion." He thought it right to state that the suppression of that pa ragraph by the Committee materially affected his deci sion.— (Hear, hear.) Mr. Ilignett had been ignomini ously dismissed. One Member of the House had re signed his office under painful circumstances to himself and to his friends. No dispassionate person could blame him for the course he had adopted ; but if he had erred, it was for the House to say. Mr. HAWES said as the paragraph in the report was originally framed, it stood thus—" That Mr. Wray's conduct deserved the immediate notice of the Secretary of State for the Borne Department." Some objection was raised in the Committee to referring the subject to the Secretary of Srate, the general opinion being that it should be referred specially to the House, and, conse quently, the words " that his conduct deserves the notice of the Secretary of State" were expunged, and the words " serious., animadversion" were inserted in their place. _ _ Mr. SHEIL said it appeared from the statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman that, with respect to the conduct of Mr. Wray, he did not come to his determina tion without the utmost deliberation—at all events he was in communication with one of the Members of the Committee. He (Mr. Sheil) thought he mentioned the Noble Lord (Lord 'Ashley) whose name he found in the Committee. He understood he was the noble and dis dinguished person to whom he referred.' He (Mr. Sheil) thought that it was rather extraordinary that he should not have consulted the Chair man himself on that point—in which he was the principal and original agent. The draft of the report was furnished by the Chairman of the Committee in ,the performance of his official functions as the head of .the Committee. Would it not have been more regular, ,a . p i d more consistent with the duty of the Right Hon. Gentleman, to have sent fist the Chairman in s t ea d o f en ,teripg inW a eommunication with ore individual Member of ,the committee. .At 'all events - ,'lt'aPiteatiefriliat the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head of the Home Depart ment did not write the letter in a hasty mood. Non, it was singular that the Hon. Gentleman should have omit ted from the letter addressed to Mr. Wray all mention of the most material charge against that gentleman. The report of the Committee made a distinct specifica tion of that particular charge upon which the Hon. Gen tleman has expatiated.—(The Hon. Gentleman then read the resolution of the Committee, which stated that 3001. was paid to Mr. Bonham, and that. 100 shares were re served for him before the passing of the Bill, which were disposed of for his sole benefit, and paid to him by cheque as a gratuity for the services rendered to the South-Eastern Counties, both in and out of Par. liament, as a Member of the Committee on their Bill.) He would now pass from one branch of the transaction to another, namely, to the letter of the Right Hon. Bart. What was the complaint made by the Right Hon. Bart.? Why, it was limited to what was not really the most serious part of the charge which the report of the Com mittee made against Mr. Wray. The Right Hon. Baro net only animadverted upon the charge, that Mr. Wray had been the paid servant of the company, while he was one of the paid servants of the Government ; but the Right Hon. Baronet spoke of his having canvassed men out of Parliament,—he did not say a word of the trans action which took place between them, and which was so minutely detailed in the report of the Committee,—so minutely indeed, that the whole evidence of Mr. Bonham upon the subject was transcribed and cited at length. Now a general canvass of Members of Parliament was a very different thing from applying to a Member of a Committee to whom a Bill had been referred to support that Bill. Every clear minded man would see that it was something to canvass Members of Parliament in the lobby of the House, and an ther to canvass an individnal sitting as it were as a juror, and solicit his sentiments upon the measure which had been referred to him in his judicial capacity. Now in the report of the Committee they had evidence coming from Mr. Bonham, and a statement given by Mr. Wray. Mr. Bonham stated that in the early part of the session of 1836, Mr. Wray, to whom he was under considerable obligations, and to whom he owed money,. came to him and said he was very much interested in the success of the South-Eastern Railwat , and he wished him to give it a lift, and wish ed his advice upon some points. He replied that he was under considerable obligations to Mr. Wray, and should be glad to do anything to serve him, and the report added that Mr. Bonham regularly attended, and voted in the committee. Now, he thought everybody who read the evidence must admit that this was a case entirely dis tinct from that of simply canvassing members of Parlia ment. Mr. Wray i said no conversation . took place be tween him and Mr. Bonham as to the advantage the latter was to receive for "giving them a lift ;" but he admitted that afterwards Mr. Bonham received 300/. as a gratuity fer his services in behalf of the company, both in and out of the doors of Parliament. Now, could the House, under these circumstances, be of opinion that the letter ad dressed to Mr. Wray by the Secretary of State for the Home Department was a sufficient reprimand upon Mr. Wray ? The committee was composed of men of all parties. and of high rank and station in that Honse, and they were unanimously of opinion that th e con d uc t o f Mr. Wray was deserving of serious animadversion. The Right Honourable Baronet, however, had omitted all mention of the most serious accusation against Mr. Wray, and he thought, in this respect, the Right Honourable Baronet had been guilty of some departure from his duty. , W. PATTEN said, whatever might be his opinion upon the conduct of Mr. Wray he could not but lament that the Hon. Membar for Lambeth had felt it to be his duty to bring a motion forward upon this most painful subject, for the question could not be discussed without points being entered into which were painful not only to the House, but many individuals out of it. Upon two inflicted quite those individuals a punishment h a d b een quite commensurate with the nature of their offence ; and he should abstain as much as possible from saying anything upon the subject. Allusion had been made to Mr. Bonham, and perhaps he might be allowed to say a word or two with regard to another individual concerned in the matter, namely, Captain Boldero. He believed that the Committee concurred in stating that Captain B.. Hero's character remained perfectly unimpeached. The honour of Captain Bolder°, they said, was unsullied and untouched; and ho thought his resignation added still more to the honourable nature of his feelings.—(Loud cheers.) He was bound to say, as a Member of the Committee, that he had been taken by surprise by the Hon. Member's motion, and he thought, if the Committee were again called together, to consider this subject, they would not express themselves upon it in exactly the terms of the Honourable Gentle man the Member for Lambeth. The Committee, in his opinion, only intended that a serious animadversion should be passed upon the conduct of Mr. Wray ; and he thought the Right Hon. Baronet had placed a fair and proper construction upon their report —(Hear, hear.) Under all the circumstances of the case, had the Right Hon. Baronet proceeded to dismiss Mr. Wray from his office, he would not go so far as to say it would h ave . . been gross injustice ;but the Right Hon. Baronet would have pursued a rigid course of justice towards him. He concluded by moving the previous 'question as au amendment. Colonel PEEL seconded the amendment. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, the question before the House was whether the House should take any notice of the transactions in respect to which the Committee had laid their report upon the table, or whether the House should entirely pass it by. The Hon. Gen- . dem= who moved the previous question, had said that tie subject was a painful one, and involved the cha racters of individuals out of doors ; but because it was a painful case were they altogether to abstain from ex pressing an opinion upon it ? It was a question upon which the House was bound to express an opinion, and it ht•ing a painful duty was no reason why they should shrink from the performance of a duty which the Con stitution had placed upon them. The Government complained of the Hon. Member for Lambeth having brought the question forward at this late period of the session, but he had postponed it with a view of suiting, not his own, but the convenience of the Government. When the report was laid upon the table, he asked his Hon. Friend whether he intended to take any notice of those transactions • and he replied th a t h e th oug ht it right to wait a week before he did so, to giie the Government an opportunity to deliberate and decide upon the course they intended to pursue.—(Hear, hear.) It was rather hard, therefore, for the Government to complain of the delay which his Hon. Friend had allowed to take place before bringing the question before the House. The Right Hon. Baronet had said that he acted upon the re port of the Committee, and had carried into effect what he understood to be their intention. But he (Lord John Russell) had never heard of a case in which the Com mittee did more than report the evidence adduced before them, and their opinions as to the charges referred to them; He had never heard of a Committee specifying the punishment to be inflicted, or the course which the House ought to take in any particular case. As for instance, in the case of Sir Jonah Barrington, whose case was much graver than the one now under the consideration of the House, the Committee in that case did not lay down what was to be the penalty. They stated no more than that he had been guilty of a'grave offence in appropri ating to his own use • money paid into his court. But they never attempted to indicate the course which the House or the Government was to take in that case. Both Houses of Parliament consWered of themselves what was the course, and they addressed the Crown to dismiss Sir Jonah Barrington from his office. Tlie Right Honourable Baronet was in error, also, when he applied to members of the Committee for their individual opinions. If he thought it necessary to ask any one's opinion, it should have been the chairman of the Com inittee.—(Hear, hear.) He (Lord J. Russell) thought that his Honourable Friend (Mr. Hawes) was justified in bringing before the House this grave case which could not be passed over without injury to the chitraoter elf the House.(Hear.) The offence was that of ofking a bribe of £3OO to a member of that House for services rendered to particular persons in his capaoity of Member. What was the punishment inflicted on him by her Majesty's Government ? It was to inform Mr. Wray that he had done something which was in compatible with the efficient discharge of his duties in his elfice under the Government.—(Hear, hear.) It was much the same as if the Right Hon. Baronet reproved a messenger in the Home-office, that he could not attend to his duty in that office, if he employed his time in running about to distribute bribes to parliamentary electors.—(Flear, hear,) The Right Hon. Baronet said that Mr. Bonham had not been bribed—that it had never been said to him that he was to receive money for his vote. But if the House looked back to what had been done in the reigns of William 3rd and George the Ist.—in those reigns it was declared to be bribery to give any gratuity to any elector after the election, whe ther it could be shown that he had voted in the expec tation of such a gratuity or not. Would the House, in the present day admit, or allow it to be inferred, that they were less pure, and less sensitive as to the evils of the bribery of their members, than their predecessors in the reigns to which he referred, and in which two Acts were passed to prevent the offer of any gratuity to mem bers?—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord then read, the evidence of Wray before the Select Committee, from which he contended that Wray admitted that the sum of £3OO was given to Mr. Bonham for the assistance which he had ren dered to the Company by his services in Parliament. —(Hear, hear.) If such bribery were passed over, how could they condemn to a prison th e poor hand -loom weaver, the cobbler, and the daily labourer, for accepting bribes, to which he was almost driven by the necessities of his family ?—(Hear, hear.) Would it not be a gross injustice to punish such persons when a gentleman of high station, a Member of that House, was allowed to receive 300 l 'upon his vote, and the person who offered it escaped with a mere reprimand.—(Hear, hear.) Taking that view of the case, nothing should hinder him (Lord J. Russell) from giving his vote to maintain the purity of the House as much as he could.—(Cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet said that the offence of Mr. Wray had been committed so long ago as 1836. But, looking to the case of Sir Jonah Barrington, he found that the subject was brought before Parliament and inquired into, and that addresses were pre sented to the Crown for his dismissal from office. in 1829—the offence having been committed 25 years before, that is in 1804 or 1805.—(Hear, hear.) But the Right Hon. Batainet flirther said that the proposition of his Hon. Friend would be a vote of censure upon him (Sir J. Graham). He could not admit that the House should not preserve its purity, because it might imply a vote of censure upon the Secretary of State.—(Hear.) It was not attempted to be implied in the motion:of his Hon. Friend, that the Secretary of State was at all involved in the objectionable transaction.—(Hear, hear.) But only that his reprehension of the offending person was not sufficient to vindicate the purity of the House. (Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet complained of the late period of the session when this motion was brought forward, and said it should have been made ten days ago • when, in point of fact, the motion was delayed out of forbearance to the Government.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet said that he had acted from motives of lenity. That had not always been the ruling motive of the Right Hon. Baronet in the discharge of his duty. He had not been lenient to those foreigners whom he accused of being suborners of assassination, and whose innocence was admitted by his Right Hon. Friend four teen months afterwards.—(Hear, hear.) With respect to Captain Boldero, he (Lord John Russell) did not think that he was not guilty of any criminality, but that he was the least culpable of the three—(Hear, hear)—and he thought that the vindication of the purity of the House required him to give his support to the motion of his Hon. Friend.—(Cheers.) Sir R. PEEL said that the Noble Lord had en tirely mistaken the purport and intent of his Right Hon. Friend, in complaining of the introduction of this motion at so late a period of the session. What his Right Hon. Friend complained of was that the letter to Mr. Wray was laid before the House on the 22d of July, and notice of this motion was not given until the Ist of August.— (Hear, hear.) Whereas the notice ought to have been given on the day when the Secretary of State announced to the House what he had done.—(Hear, hear.) The Government had not shrunk from the pain of accepting the resignation of Captain Boldero and Mr. Bonham, who were the personal and political friends of hts RightHon.Friend and himfelf.--( Ministerial cheers.) He did say, that having had occasion, in his public ca pacity, to perform many painful acts, yet it never had fallen to his lot to have acted a more painful part to his private feelings, than when he . had advised the Queen to accept that resign a ti on .—(H ear , hear.) With respect to Mr. Bonham, he (Sir Robert Peel) had long been upon terms of private friendship with him, and when that Hon. Member was labouring under the in fliction consequent on his removal from the public ser vice, yet he would say, that his friendship for him remained the same.—(Hear, hear.) And with respect to Captain Boldero, though he was not upon the same terms of private intercourse with him that he was with Mr. Bonham, yet when he advised the Queen to accept his resignation also, he did feel a considerable degree of pain ; and this he would say further, of that Hon. Gen tleman, that in the whole range of the public service he did not believe there was a man who had discharged his duties with greater industry, integrity, or fidelity.— (Hear.) He (Sir R. Peel) knew all the difficulties of his position, vet he would appeal to his Hon. Friend, and ask him if he ever knew a man who had discharged the duties of his office with greater satisfaction.—(Hear.) With respect to Captain Boldero, again, he (Sir R. Peel) would ask why had he tendered his resignation ? Not because he felt he could be accused of any breach of official duty, or that his official conduct could be questioned ; but he tendered it i n th a t s pi r it w hich hq felt should actuate him, having seen the report of Committee.—(Hear, hear) But even under these cir-' cumstances he (Sir R. Peel) would have no hesitation in saying that no feelings of private pain would have de terred him from the performance of his public duty. — (Hear.) He did think, then, that he had shown through out the whole of this affair, in the acceptance of the re signation of these two gentlemen, a desire to set an ex ample, and protect the public.—(Hear, hear.). But the Noble Lord said that the House should not be deterred from passing this resolution ; now, he (Sir. R. Peel) begged to assure the House that his Hon. Friend did not seek any exemption from any punishment his conduct in this affairlmight merit.—(Hear, hear.) But let him ask, did his Hon. Friend's:conduct deserve censure? for that was really the whole question now be fore the House.—(Hear, hear.) It was a question as against Parliamentary privileges, and not as against an officer of the police. a Well, then, this House took cog nizances of it as such, and appointed a Committee to in vestigate it, and on that Committee devolved the duty of reporting upon it. Now, if the House were to be called on to decide this question, without reference to that re port, why then he would say it was an attempt to lead this side of the House into a snare.—(Hear, hear.) Let him just read what the decision of that Committee had been. Here the Hon. Baronet read an.extract from the report, which was to the effect that the conclusion the Com mittee had come to with reference to the South-Eastern Company's case was, that Mr. Hignett had corruptly used the influence of his station, and was, therefore, un worthy of a continuance of the confidence reposed in him.—(Hear, hear.) By that the House could see that the Committee did not, as in other cases, state the facts and leave the punishment to this House ; but they stated at once what punishment ought to be inflicted ; and upon that report he (Sir R. Peel) advised the dismissal of Mr. Hignett.—(Hear, hear.) Well, then it had been said by Hon. Members opposite, that the Committee was composed of distinguished men, and tbat they were una nimous. Why, that is the very thing that they at this side of the House hid acted on, for they conceived they could not have adopted a better course than to carry out the intention and recommendation of the Committee.— (Hear, hear.) With respect to Mr. Bonham and Capt. Boldero, the report st a t e d th a t t h ose gen tl e me n 's con duct had been inadvertent and inconsistent with the integrity of Members of this House, and the cruise• quence was, that they had tendered their resignations.— (Hear, hear.) Well, then he came to the case of Mr Wray; and what did the same tribunal of this House, that pronounced Mr.. Hignett corrupt, say of Mr. *ray ? Why this, that the conduct of Mr. Wray deserved the most severe animadversion. Well, then, what had he (Sir Robert Peel) done, in pursuance of the report of the committee ? Why, this, that Mr. Hignett had been dis missed—the resignation of Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero had been accepted, though his own private and political friends, and they had expressed their disappro bation of the conduct of Mr. Wray.—(Hear, hear). Well, now, let him contrast the motion now before the House with the recommendation of the Committee.—(Hear, hear). The Committee, in their report, had drawn a marked distinction between the merits of the case of Mr. Hignett and that of Mr. Wray ; for in the former they state he is unworthy of confidence ; while in the latter they say the party deserves " severe animadversion," while the motion before the House says that Mr. Wray "not only" deserves animadversion ; but had not the confidence of the House.—(Hear, hear). By putting in these words the conduct of Wray and Hignett would be assimilated, which the report of the Committee had not done.—(Hear, hear). Well, then, if so, let him ask would there be any justice in the House adopting this motion?—(Hear, hear). He begged to declare most solemnly, that if the Committee had come tothe same de cision in reference to Mr. Wray that they had to Mr. Hignett, he had not the slightest doubt but that his Hon. Friend would have dismissed him at once.—(Hear, hear). He also begged to say that, considering the position of Mr. Wray as a member of a high and honourable profession, and that he had had inflicted ou him the expression of the sense - of disappro bation of this Hous e —h e did not k now w hat the Noble Lord opposite might think of such punishment—but he (Sir R. Peel) should say that, next to dismissal, it was the severest punishment he could have got.—(Hear, hear.) And 'what was the object of punishment of any sort, if it was not to deter others from similar courses ? —(Elear, hear.) He would say then that, looking at the whole of this case—taking into consideration the fact of UST 5, 184 the dismissal of one party, the resignation of two others, whose resignation the Queen of this realm had been advised to receive, and the reprimanding of a fourth—if the object was to deter Uthers by punishment—surely be (Sir R. Peel) could not be accused of not having inflicted that punishment.—(Hear, hear.). If the House went further than that, they would not only be driving punish ment beyond its legitimate limits, but they would also be taking out of the hands of their own tribunals the powers they had invested them with. Mr. HUME said he was sorry he could not agree with his Hon. Friend the Member for Lambeth on the pre sent occasion. Not that he did not concur with the con demnation of such practices as those he had referred to, but because he thought the matter against Mr. Wray had already been carried too far. He had known Mr. Wray for twenty years, and until now he had never known that gentleman guilty of a mean or a dishonour able action. He (Mr. Hume) admitted that Mr. Wray had acted a very improper part, but he did not think his conduct at all assimilated to the conduct of JudL e Bar rington, in the case of 1795, which had been referred to. He blamed Mr. Wray for his indiseretion, but he did not think he had been guilty of corruption. There had been no evidence of that kind adduced before the Committee. Mr. Wray had already suffered much ; he had been severely punished in the publication of the letter of the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which must operate very severely on a sensitive mind. That, with the de bat© of to-night, he considered punishment sufficient. Viscount EBRINGTON was surprised at the course recommended by the Hon. Member for Montrose. He recollected the case of the Durham election, on which a Committee of that House sat, and though there was no evidence adduced that Lord Dungannon had used cor rupt means to influence the voters, yet as money had been used by the agents engaged in the election in some form, so as to give a colour to the supposition that the electors had been unduly influenced—he was unseated. This was an analogous case. Mr. Wray had been the agent of the company conveying money from that company to Mr. Bonham. He was surprised that this extraordinary fit of generosity should now be shown in favour of Mr. Wray which on other occasions had been denied to other parties. It was imperatively necdssary to pre-erve honesty and integrity in those who held public offices, when such excitement prevailed in the money market. He should support the motion of his Hon. Friend. Mr. WARD said he would troble toe House with a few words. This was not a question whether the letter of the Right Honourable Gentleman the Home Secre tary WMI33 perfect, but whether by affirming the last reso lution proposed by the Honourable Member for Lambeth they would inflict utter ruin on the party referred to. Nothing, he admitted, could be less acrimonious than the tone and observations of that Hon. Member, yet they ought to bear in mind the palliating circumstances con nected with this case. The House ought to recollect the bad practices which prevailed in 1836, when there we,re not fifty Members in the House but what were mixed up in railway matters to a much more questionable extent than Mr. Wray. At that time it was impossible to carry a Bill through the House without doing what had been charged against Mr. Bonham. He believed that Mr. Bonham had never applied a farthing of the money to his own use, and as far as Mr. Wray was con cerned it had yielded no advantage to him. There had been no previous undertanding between them as to what was then done ; for the offence the suffering had already been great, and as Mr. Wrisy had a large family de pendent on him he hoped the House would not act harshly and run down such small game. To pass such a resolution as that proposed by his Hon. Friend (Mr. Hawes) would be utterly to destroy and ruin a man who had already greatly suffered.—(Hear, hear.) Colonel PEEL considered he was perfectly quali fied to give an opinion disinterestedly in this question as he had never held any railway shares in his life. The Gallant Member, though in a very inaudible and rapid tone of voice, went through the leading particulars of the transactions involving Mr. \'Tray, Captain Bolder°, and Mr. Bonham, contending that none of the gentlemen had been influenced by cor rupt or pecuniary considerations in the course they had taken. Sir J. EASTHOPE differed with the Gallant Colonel and the Hon. Member for Sheffield. Mr. Wray he did not know, but one of the Hon. Gentlemen he did know, Captain Boldero ; and he was pleased that he had been acquitted of all dishonourable motives or practices by the general sentiment of the House. With regard to Mr. Wray's case, he thought something more should be done. What would the public think if they went out of the usual course to screen this party, while on humbler persons they inflicted the full rigour of punishment. He should vote with the Hon. Member for Lambeth. Sir H. INGLIS said that being originally one of the Committee, he might be allowed to say a few words, He had not attended the first day's sitting, but he had after wards carefully attended to the case, and carefully exa mined into, day by day, the report of the evidence ad duced. He then thought the case was pressed too heavily against the three gentlemen ; and if he thought so then, he must view the case of the Hon ourable Member for Lambeth with much less favour now. He considered the punishment had already been too much, and he hoped the Hon. Member for North Lancashire (Mr. W. Patten) would withdraw his amendment of the previous question so as to give a direct negative to the motion. He hoped that the House would negative the proposition of the Hon. Gentleman, and thus testify their respect for the House and their confidence in the conduct of the Secretary of State. Mr. MITCHELL said those who had risen to defend Mr. Wray had only induced him to depart from his original intention of not voting at all and of voting for the motion of the Hon. Member. If Mr. Wray was to retain his situation, why did they accept the resignations of Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero ? Sir J. GRAHAM hoped the Hon. Member for North Lancashire would persist in his motion. Mr. Wray was not placed in so responsible a situation as either Mr. Bonham or Captain Boldero ; but nevertheless he would not defend his conduct. Mr. B. ESCOTT held that Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero were honourable men, and that Mr. Wray, who had offered money to Members of that House, WaS the guilty party, and ought not to be allowed to escape. He should vote for the motion of the Hon. Member. Mr. HAWES then replied, and said that the Com mittee considered that their resolution would have the effect of leading to his resignation or dismissal. Their words in the report to Mr. Hignett were not so distinct, yet he was dismissed, and then with respect to Messrs. Boldero and Bonham, why did the Government accept their resignations if they did not intend to dismiss Mr. Wray? The Hon. Gentleman had not condescended to allude to the standing order of that House, which ren dered it a breach of privilege to offer a bribe to a Mem ber of that House. With respect to the time he should have breught forward the motion, he held that as long as the Parliament sat he was at liberty to do so, and he was not to be prevented from doing so, because other Hon. Members neglected their duty, or because the time did not suit the Government. - The House then divided, when there appeared— For the motion Against it Majority against it —63 INCOME-TAX COMMISSIONERS. On our return to the gallery we found The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER explain ing to the House that it had been found impossible to obtain the precise return, which related to the pro- Cedings of the Income-tax Commissioners, moved for by the lion. Member for . Rochdale, and ordered to be made a few evenings ago. After a sllNrt discussion the modified return was or dered to be made, and the remaining orders of the day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at a Quarter past Eleven o'clock. r ADVERTISEMENT.] —BRUSHES.---NEW INVENTIONS. —The Triple flair Brush. One stroke of this is equal to the effect of one penetrating, five small-tooth combs, and one even cut brush ; to be had in four sizes, No. 7, ss. 6d ; No. 8,7 s. 6d ; No. 9, 9 s. 6d. ; No. 10, Ils. 6d. The Double Anti- Pressure Nail Brush, which does not divide the quick from the nail, no pressure being required, and thoroughly cleans and po lishes the nails in a tenth part of the time of any other me thod ; price in' bone, No. 1,2 s. ; No. 2,2 s. 6d. ; No. 3,3 s. 6d. ; No. 4, 59. ; and of all sizes and prices in ivory. The New Tooth-pick Brush, which entirely enters between the in terstices of the closest teeth ; marks, full-sized brushes, No. 1, hard ; No. 2, less hard ; No. 3. middling ; No. 4, soft. The narrow brushes, No. 5, hard ; No. 6, less hard; No. 7, mid dling ; No. 8, soft, at Is. each, or 10s. per dozen in bone; and 2s. each, or 21s. per dozen in ivory, the hair warranted never to come out. The Medium Shaving Brush, between the usual badger hair and bristle brush, being a selection of the strongest hair only from the badger skin, in a variety of sizes, both in bone and ivory. The above articles are the inventions' of Ross and Sons, 119 and 120, Bishopsgate-street, Londen, and, being protected, any one imitating them will be proceeded against. ADVERTISEMENT.—Defective Sight and. Hearing relieved. Instruments and spectacles sent into the country by post.—The Eyes.-39, Albemarle-street, Piccadilly. Optical Improvements to enable persons at advanced age to read with ease and to discrimivate objects with perfect distinctness.— Messrs. S. and B. Solomons, Opticians, have invented Spec tacle Lenses, &c., of the greatest transparent power, which are patronised by his Majesty the King of Hanover, her Grace the Dowager-Duchess of Bedford, their Graces the Archbishops of Canterbury, York, and Dublin, the Dukes of Devonshire, Norfolk, Argyle, Marlborough, and Manchester. Bishops of Exeter, Lincoln, Cork, Elphin, and Kildare. By this invention, imperfect vision is preserved and strengthened, and very aged persons are enabled to employ their sight at the most minute occupation, and can see with these Lenses of a much less magnifying power, and they do not require the fre quent changes to further helps. Also, Achromatic Teles copes, Opera Glasses, Microscopes, invisible, and all kinds of Acoustic instruments for relief of extreme deafness. Caution —Messrs. S. and B. Solomons, Opticians, are not in any way connected with a person of the same name, in their immediate neighbourhood, nor in any part of the country. To prevent mistakes, be cautions, and observe, only to be had at 39 , Al bemarle-street, Piccadilly, opposite the York Hotel. [ADVERTISBMENT.]—Ladies, whether temporari exposed to the scorching rays of the summer sun, or frequen In' the crowded saloon, or close assembly, will find Rowland Kalydor a most refreshing preparation and auxiliary to comfort, dispelling the cloud of languor and relaxation from the com plexion, and immediately affording the pleasing sensation at tending restored elasticity of the skin. The numerous va rieties of cutaneous eruptions, sunburn freckles, tan, and dis eoloarations are pleasingly eradicat e d b y th e K a l ydor, and the skin rendered delicately clear and soft. Its purifying and re freshing properties have obtained its selection by the Court and the Royal Family of Great Britain, and,those of the Continent of Europe, together with the elite of the aristocracy and haut ton. The high reputation it bears causes unprincipled shop keepers to offer their s purious Kalydors" for sale, composed of the most deleterious ingredients, containing mineral astrin- ' gents, utterly ruinous to the complexion, and by their repel lent action endang er i ng h ea l t h . I t is therefore imperative on purchasers to see that the words " Rowland's Kalydor" are on the envelope (an engraving of exquisite beauty, from a steel plate by Messrs. Perkins, Bacon, and Co.) All others are raudulent counterfeits. The Earl of Denbigh, Master of ti,e Horse to her Majesty the Queen Dowager, Lccompauied by his family, ar rived at Blackwall Pier yesterday morning by the General Steam Navigation Company's steam ship Soho, from Antwerp; ASSIZE INTELLIGENCE. 110 ME CIRC UIT.— cordon, A agust 4. CROWN COURT—(Before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE. ) Frances Mary Wilson, the young woman who was acquitted on Saturday upon a charge of robbing her master, again sur rendered this morning to answer the other indictments that had been preferred against her. She was first arraigned upon a charge of stealing a cambric handkerchief, the property of Thomas Cook, her master. Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Creasy again appeared to support the prosecution, and Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Hawkins (who held Mr. Ballantinels brief) were for the prisoner. The evidence of Mr. Cook, the prosecutor, was to the effect that he purchased 18 cambric handkerchiefs at a Custom-house sale, and that he put his private mark upon them, and brought them into his stock on the 14th or 15th of May, at which time the prisoner was in his service. On the night of the same day he counted them, and found one was missing, and, upon his in quiring about it, every one employed on the establishment de nied any knowledge of it; and on his questioning the prisoner, she said that she had not sold one, and she likewise said she knew nothing about the handkerchief. He afterwards found the handkerchief in_ one of the prisoner's boxes when it was opened by the constable Collier ; and it was produced, and he swore that it was his propeaty. Cross-examined— He did not say at the station-house " the will get ten years, and I will get her fourteen if I can," but he did say that she was a wretch. He did not say that the prisoner denied knowing anything about the handkerchief when he was before the magistrate, at the examination of the prisoner. This was not because he had not forgotten it, but because he was not asked anything about it. The prosecutor was then asked by Mr. Clarkson whether he had not had some conversation with Inspector Collier outside the Court that morning, and he said he had, but he declined to state the particulars of the conversation, as they were per fectly irrelevant. Mr. Justice COLERIDGE told him he must answer the ques tion. If he chose to talk to the witnesses, he was bound to state what took place. The prosecutor then said that he was standing outside the Court, and Collier told him that the prisoner's father had re ported that he. the inspector, and witness, had been in commu nication together respecting the property, and he replied that it was entirely false, for he had not seen the officer since the conclusion of the proceedings on Saturday. Cross-examination continued—Witness suspected the pri soner was robbing him for a month before she was taken into custody, and the young men were set to watch her. One of them reported that a piece of cambric had been taken from her " playfully," and that he could identify it from its having his writing upon it, and on the morning before the prisoner was taken into custody it was intimated to him it would be better the piece of cambric should be given back to the prisoner. He did not recollect who said it would be better, but they had a consultation about it, and it was arranged that the piece of cambric should be thrown about " playfully" by the young men in the shop, so that the prisoner might have an opportunity to take it, which she did, and put it in her pocket; and it was understood that when it was in 'her possession the inspector should be sent for to take her into custody. He had consulted Collier upon the subject, but he did not tell him anything about the manner in which the piece of cambric in question had come into the prisoner's possession on the morning of the 18th of June. Mr. Ctaxxsow asked the prosecutor whether the object he sought to attain was not for the inspector to find, as it were by accident, this piece of cambric upon the person of the prisoner? The prosecutor denied that he had such an object; but it was admitted in the course of further cross-examination, that when he first applied to the inspector, on the morning of the 18th of June, he did not say a word to him about the piece of cambric; and it was only after his return to the shop, where the " play ful" scene was enacted, and the prisoner got it into her pos session, that the inspector was immediately called upon to take the pr;soner into custody. The prosecutor was next asked whether he did not, while the prisoner was at the station•house, use most opprobrious epithets to her, and he denied most positively having done so. Inspector Collier was the next witness. He merely produced the handkerchief, and deposed that he found it in one of the prisoner's boxes. Upon being cross-examined, he said that the prosecutor came to him on the morning of the 18th of June, and told him he suspected Miss Wilson had been robbing him, and referred to a transaction that h a d t a k en p l ace t h at day, when the pri soner cut off a small quantity of glazed lining for a dress, and gave it openly in the shop to a dressmaker named Grainger. Mr. Cook went away for about 20 minutes, and when he came back he told him to go with him immediately and apprehend the prisoner. He likewise said it was very probable he told Mr. Cook that he bad never in all his experience heard of a felony being committed in the presence of so many people. The prisoner was in convulsions nearly all the time the case was under examination by the magistrates, and while she w as in that state h e h ear d th e prosecutor say that hell was too good for her. Mr. CLARKSON—Did you hear him also call her a ? Witness—l did not hear him use that expression, but he did use a vulgar and opprobrious epithet, and I rebuked him for it. He also said that hell was too good for her. Mr. CLARKSON—And this was while the prisoner was in a fainting and almost insensible state? Witness—lt was. The witness was then questioned as to what conversations had taken place between him and the prosecutor, and he swore positively that he had not made any such statement as that de posed to by the prosecutor as having taken place outside the court that morning. Some other persons, in the serviee of Mr. Cook, were then examined, to show that they had not sold the handkerchief to the prisoner, and that she had not made any mention to them of its being in her possession. Mr, CLA RKSON then addressed the jury, and commented with considerable severity upon the conduct of the prosecutor, and urged upon the jury the impossibility of placing any re liance upon such testimony as had been given in support of the prosecution. Mr. Justice COLERIDGE having summed up, the jury re tired, and were in deliberation about five minutes ; when they returned into Court, The Learned JUDGE, in reference to the scene that took place on Saturday, said, that before the verdict was delivered, whatever that verdict might be, he requested no person would presume to exhibit any manifestation of feeling. It was very improper, and he should certainly commit any one who was observed to be guilty of disturbing the Court. The jury then returned a verdict of Not Guilty. Mr. BODKIN said, that after what had taken place, he should not offer any evidence upon the other indictment, and verdicts of " Not Guilty" were accordingly recorded. The prisoner was ordered to be immediately discharged. The business on the Civil Side has been entirely uninterest in., and Lord Chief Justice Tindal was occupied the whole of to-day in disposing of three petty cases of trespass. The spe cial jury causys will not come on before Wednesday. • OXFORD CI I?CUlT—lllownnuth, Aug. 2. CROWN COURT—(Before Lord Chief Justice DENMAN.) Edward Price, 66, was indicted for the violation of Ann Hall, at Abergavenny, on the 18th July and found, Guilty.— Sentence one year's imprisonment George Jenkins, 23, surrendered to an indictment, charging him with violently assaulting Maria Meyrick, on the 16th May, at Newport. On the night in question, a young woman named Higgins, slept in their house, and was awoke about two o'clock by hearing screams, which proceeded from the unfortunate wo man, who ran into the room, followed by the prisoner, who called on her th go down. She refused, on which he said it should be worse for her, and went down stairs. In a short time he returned into Higgins's room with a poker in his hand, with which he struck the victim of his brutality several blows. He then dragged her down stairs again and renewed his ♦io lence ; she cried out. Higgins went to her, and found her lying on the bed, in her night clothes, covered with blood, and the prisoner sitting on a chair opposite to her. Higgins took the poker and hid it from him. The two women then went in their night clothes to the station-house, and Meyrick was taken to bed at a neighbouring house, by direction of the police authorities of . the borough of Newport, who instituted the present prosecution. A brush handle, broken in two pieces, was found on the bed. When taken, the prisoner said, ‘. I did it, and I kicked her several tunes." Having been found Guilty, Lord DENMAN sentenced him to be transported for fifteen years. _ _ William Pritchard, 30, Henry Johnson, 22 (a man of colour), and Richard May, 22, were indicted for burglariously breaking open the dwelling house of Charles Arkwell, at Caldi cot, on the night of the 21st April, and stealing a side of bacon, three spoons, and other articles therefrom. The prosecutor and his wife, two old people, live in a small cottage in a solitary place. On the night in question, the prisoners broke into the house.. which consisted of two rooms only, both on the ground floor. The old people heard the door broken open about two o'clock, and Johnson with Pritchard immediately came in, one standing on each side of the bed. The old man had risen up in bed, and said, " What do you want?" Johnson replied, " Money, and money We'll have, or blow your brains out." He pushed the old man down in the bed, and pressed his hand over his mouth, Pritchard standing over the old woman with a great bludgeon .in his hand. They said, " Its no use, if we can't do it we have got a lot more outside, and we'll bring 'em in." Ark well, on this said, " Take all we've got, but spare our lives." The prisoners then opened the boxes, and ransacked about for nearly an hour. Pritchard then asked the old lady for the key of the other room, and she gave it to him, and they both went in, leaving the old couple locked in their bed-room. The prosecutor heard them go away in ten or fifteen mi nutes after. They were obliged to get an iron bar to open their bed-room door after the robbers were gone, and they found that the articles named in the indictment had been taken away by the burglars. Pritchard took the old man by the shoulder when they first came in, and said, " Give up yourself and money, or you shall hang." Mrs. Arkwell looked out through the window, and by the light of the moon, which was shining brightly, saw May standing at the garden-gate, leaning on his left arm, to whom Johnson went out and spoke. He came back and said to Pritchard, .‘ Can't thee find anything? Look again. They've got some, and we'll have it." She was more frightened when they went into the next room, as she thought they were going to get something to kill her with, and begged them not. Several witnesses were called to prove an alibi, but the prisoners were found Guilty. J o h nson and Pritchard were sentenced to 15 years' transportation, and May to one year's hard labour. John Jones, who was yesterday convicted of stabbing Henry Morgan, was sentenced to 15 years' transportation. John Brothers and William Jones, convicted of a burglary, were also sentenced to 10 years' transportation on the first in dictment, and to be fined Is, on the second. The business of these assizes concluded about five o'clock. THE EIGHTH EDITION OF " MR BURKE'S PEERAGE AND BARONETAGE" has just Mick` its appearance, and com pensates for the length of time devoted to its production by the completeness and finish of its details. Every line seems to have been searchingly revised, and the whole now forms the most comprehensive and perfect history of our Nobility ever produced. Peers, Baronets, and their numerous off-shoots are all accurately and most clearly shown, and the researches connected with Mr. Burke's other great National work " THE DICTIONARY of the Landed Gentry," have enabled him to add a most interesting feature, in the introduction of the thousands of Gentlemen's families allied by descent or inter marriage with the titled orders. Consequently, almost every reader finds some one of his connexions recorded in the pages of the " PEERAGE." It may be said, indeed, that there is no work published more essential than this to the conversation and occurrences of every day life. [ADVERITSEMENT.] —An Extraordinary Cure of a Diseased Knee of Ten Years' Standing, by Holloway's Pills and Ointment !—Mr. Edward Perryns, residing. at No, 21, Fargate-street, Worcester, is now cured of an abscess on the knee and a stiff joint, which had been bad for ten years, indeed, ever since he was fJurteen. He had lost from the knee joint several pieces of bone, one being two incites in length. He had been under the most eminent of the faculty in Worcester, and at last was told that his leg must be amputated, as a cure was quite impossible! A perfect cure has been effected in this hopeless case by these wonderful medicines. Sold by all chemists and by the proprietor, 244, Strand, Londen. THE WHITE SLAVE AND THE RUSSIAN PRINCE. and remarkable w or k, " T he Revelations of Russia." —This novel seems to have excited as mu c h attent i on as the rd preceding the story as a fi c ti on merely, it is one of autho r's great excitement and power. Living characters are unsparingly introduced, and all the leading dramatis persona: are evidently designed as portraits. The sketches of Russian life and manners are eminently graphic and vivid. Originality is one of the grand features of the work, and, throughout, it abounds with the most spirited and striking adventure. SPORTING INFELLIGENCE. TATTERSALL'S.—YESTERDAY. Until near six o'clock, the attention of a very crowded roc! was wholly occupied in settling en the Goodwood races, which, owing t o th e num b er o f events , an d th e un precede briskness of speculation, the accounts were exceedingly h0.'2 0 It is a gratifyi ng p roo f o f t h e h ea l t h y sta t e o f the ring 0 , money was plentiful, an d th a t thi s i mpor t an t finde to a O w ; brilliant meeting passed off satisfactorily. The ! , t. Leger 4 0 touched upon la'e in th e even i ng , an d a few scores and . invested in the following prices ST. LEGER. 3 to 1 agst Mr. Gully's Weatherbit 7 to 1 agst Mr. St. Paul's Mentor—taken 10 to 1 agst Mr. Gully's Old England 10 to 1 agst Mr. Gratwicke's Merry Monarch 14 to 1 agst Mr. Johnstone's Annandale—taken 16 to 1 agst Mr. Mostyn's Pantasa—taken 25 to 1 agst Mr. Watts's The Baron—taken freely 25 to 1 agst Mr. Irwin's Connaught Ranger 25 to 1 agst Mr. Irwin's Ould Ireland 30 to I agst Major Yarburgh's Red Robin—taken 40 to 1 agst Mr. Painter's The Pacha—taken 40 to 1 agst Lord Exeter's Wood Pigeon—Cakes 1000 to 20 agst Lord Stradbroke's Ides—taken rd' s 1000 even between Old E ng l an d an d The Merry BD" DERBY. 10 to I agst Mr. Gill's Sting—taken 25 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's At kwright—taken ,_„ ( 11 We understand th a t hi s M a j esty t h e Ki ng of the N e therin, was so delighted with his visit to Goodwood, that belie s : t o pressed his i n t en ti on to t h e D u k e of Richmond to *e' " Orange Cup " run for next year. 0 Mr. Hibburd, we believe, will in future officiate as starte r Goodwood races. A serious accident befel Mr. Fagg, a subscribe r 0 11 , Tattersall's, en his return from Goodwood last Friday t y was first throw n f rom hi s g i g, an d l a id for some time 00ei road with a broken leg, was taken up by one of the extra co7 r from the rac e s, an d t hi s b e i ng i mmed i ately afterwards ° turned, the same leg was again fractured. POPLAR AND BLACKWALL REGATTA' r ill This regatta took place yesterday, in order to corm:per, the day on which the first meeting was held at Blackwim establish the Watermen's and Lightermen's Al ma bougt o Penge Common. Th e race was i n fi ve h eats, with six scuff for a very handsom e an d serv i cea bl e sk i ff, and other P oo (the boat, of course, being for the first man), liberallJ scribed by the residents of All Saints, Poplar, and Blaa,.1 0 ) First neat—J. Gud ge ( ye ll ow ), I; J . T yler (light ''' 2; and C. Presman (red), 3. It was a very good heat. The men went away well tog e i t :l l , at the same moment, and then Tyler drew away but before they h a d p rocee d e d h a lf a m il e the winner 0120 and passed hi m , an d won b y two l engths. ?)' Second He a t—J. C orey (d ar k bl ue), I ; J. Wheldon. ( 2; G. Linch (green), 3. with th: 4 ol Corey took the lead, held it, and won easily. s Dd Third Heat—Tyler, 1 ; Wheldon, 2 ; Pressman, 3 ; Linch, 4. the r A well-contested heat, in which they were nearly a ll tog ibe l , Fourth Heat—Corey, I ; Tyler, 2 ; Gudge, 3 ; and v don, 4. CAr /l i All four scull and scu ll f or some di stance, and then nitv took the lead, and kept it, w i nn i ng eas il y. I t was app race for second place. Grand Heat—Corey, 1 ; Tyler 2. ft° lll The distance in thi s , as i n the preceding heats, wa s er Blackwall-stairs, and go twice round in each heat, the rare or tending from the Folly House to the East India Dock buq vi i t li posits the Brunswick Wharf. The winner drove away the lead, and kept it, winning easily. FOOT RACING AT WALWORTH. ger Yesterday some interesting foot races came off at *he t he hive grounds at Walworth, and from the great celebrity of t , contending parties, the a ff a i r a tt racte d upwards of 3,0°,(4,44 sons. The first priz e was f or a s il ver tankard, ,whieuyoril, walked for over a ten miles distance, and the follewinf, „ li ef known pedestrians conte n d e d : —E ast o f Westminster, 11.4,f, of Hammersmith, Olive r o f Pi m li co , P owe ll of Hampto n, Jijo. risen of Hounslow, Penfold of Tooting, and Blackwell, the ee l known Bee, and Howe of London. At the signal they off at a smart pace. Wh en s i x m il es h a d b een covered, sett of the men had relinquished the contest, and finally the o ttf was won by East, who accomplished the ten miles in one o ll and thirty.:five minutes, fair toe and heel walking, and re or s came in second. 'I he next conte s t was f or a h an d s ome ' a te cup, to be run for over a quarter of a mile of ground, e l lo t t leap teu hurdles. The following men formed the fee starting:—Smith, th e L on d on c h amp i on, J enk i nson , the ti don Stag, Warwi c k o f E psom , E. S m i th and Patterson of f don, and Handley of Nottingham. The competitors botiwe off at locomotive speed, and cleared the hurdles with great lerity, and after a very admirably contested race Smith . , 1 0 in the winner, and won the cup; Jenkinson was seeenut g to Warwick third. Subsequently the day's sport was brouP st ed a conclusion by the race for a silver snuff-box, ever 44 9,1 e p of ground and fift een h ur dl es placed equidistant. 1 -1 3 0), Makpiece, Bung, R ea d, an d Willi ams ( country pro f e ssny i.to and E. Smith and Fibbins, of London, were the calich;,,ed At the start Smith wen t away w i t h the lead, closely f°, fi ' is _ by his adversaries, w h en , a f ter a sp i rited race, Smith • the winner. WRECK of the JOHN HENDRI C DUTCH EAST INDIAMAN. 00 We are happy t o s t a t e t h at t h e e l even men, left bY, j obs R. W. H ec k e lb ury, of the Dutch East Indiamo to , t he Hendrick, o n th e 30 t h M ay l ast, upon a rock near, frightf ul as was reported in The Sun, were rescued from tbe j „ CsP taill situation, aft er h av i ng b een on the rock 15 days, h d iove a" Snell, of the merchant ship Eliza, of Liverpoel, ev, t h e Car rived in London. It w ill b e recollected that, ug'' ves sel, 011 tain, with seven of the crew, being taken off, tu l days V l ' board of which they were received, was for sclera' to log vented, by a violent storm and adverse winds, from, of to ile. head towards the rock, and was carried some hundre d ~a t the away from it, when, it being supposed by the captai n w ed e poor fellows wo u ld h ave b een starved to deat h, as the re a P their fee . to be no mean s o f o bt a i n i ng f oo d , t h ey were l e ft to sa fer" Fortunately, however, after enduring the most dread v iu ente l ings and privations, the Eliza hove of P th e e Jobe that calamity which was looked for by the captain Hendrick. n by P. L. ZeensseP The following accou n t has been give left the second mate of the John Hendrick, one who was J the rock, of the dreadful visitation of his companions, one °f in sight, and whom was the surgeon of the vessel. It was expected tliP „ after the captai n h ad left, every effort would be made return and take them off ; but, when it was found that tr,/ wind was so long in. a direction that would carry the le!: away from them, they took st e p s , un d er t h e direction of surgeon, to provide for extremiti es . Th e roc k was di sc o/ to be about half a mile in c i rcum f erence, an d upon Inakio, survey of it there was found to be a plentiful supply of ; i ll but no fresh water was anywhere to be met with. The oj a meat they had was a little pork : with this they made bsit , ,,ed attached to nails, which were made in the form of ho?. the by them caught fish, which abounded there. They ars time fowls, a sort of duck, d ur i ng th e n i g h t , an d i n the a" ton gathered their eggs. There was a description of crab s c bioli the rock, the legs of which were serviceable in gee! t heir their thirst. For some days they were able to 000 k p as food by burnin g pi eces o f t h e wrec k of the vessel till that is exhausted, and by p oun di ng t h e c h arcoal and rniziag rife with the sea wate r th e y th oug ht t h ey s h ou l d b e able to de p t it of its saline p ro p er ti es; b ut in this they were 11°, 3 _ 1 , 11 ea ful. Duri ng th e d ay , b etween eleven and three o'ou'les• account of the extreme heat, they waded into the s oy In this situation they continued for eight days, when the whole of them were seized with a swelling of th, e t beo and tongue and a ver ti go , t h at for two days rendere d T he almost insensible. This arose from the want of water. O surgeon for some days previous had been in that situation s ip, the tenth day th e y were v i s i ted with occasional showers o f da to collect which the sail they had was expanded, a hole 0 ,; 6 in the centre , and a cask plac e d un d erneat h i n wh i c h t he rri r , water was collected. This, which w as very sparingly distate buted, assisted to restore the strength of all. In this ° t ie they remained till the 15th of June, when th e Eliza, Cap tain Snell, belonging to Liverpool, and trading to Sydney, b°" see sight. A flag was wave d w hi c h was h app i ly observed by god of the Eliza's crew, up on w hi c h two b oats were lowere d , b y the whole were take n off. Th ey were most kindly treatee4 the captain ; but for t en d ays t h ey en d ured the greatest barer, sufferings, several of them not being expecte d t o reee' be Shortly after being on board, as the captain expected t i. .„ ° short of water, upon the Lenters, Captain Gelmon, en Bombay to Liverpool, appearing in sight five of the r or . were put on board that vesse l. Th e L enters reached LLetl pool last Friday, when the men brought by her prae,„„7% to the residence of th e D u t c h C onsu l , who, upon '-the made acquainted by theta that they belonged to k, John Hendrick, and were the men abandoned upon the with gave them immediate assistance. He provided each no°,jd a jacket, a pair of sho es , and a pair of stocki ngs . He alsa_t p ro, i" their passage up to London, and gave them a l e tt er of duction to the Dut c h C onsu l i n L on d on. The men are Per lodging at the Yorkshire Grey Tavern, in Lower TlOl l l4 street, and appear not to be in the least degree affected in their dreadful sufferings. The rock o n w hi c h t h e men weltbe supposed to be a volcanic eruption. The mate describe,,• composition of the material of it to be iron, stone, and g-i, ;5 There are three s pi res or p ill ars ar i s i ng Gut of it, on the of one of whi c h ( t hi s b e i ng a flat surface, a fe w f e et diame te r el a flag was placed du r i ng th e d ay, an d a man was also &twos° to watch for a vessel. It has been ascertained that the sweib• and five men, who were in the Eliza, have been landed at to Brazils, where they were taken under the protection of ten . Dutch Consul, a n d t reate d w i t h t h e utmost kindness an d al the tion. Nothing w as h ear d o f t h e mate,_ five seamen, an passenger, who wen t o ff prev i ous to Captain Heckelb ury „.., departure, and it i s suppose d t h at t h ey were lost in the Sriiy already spoken of. Th e capta i n of the Eliza bad placed ifilthe care two quadrants, t wo s p y g l asses, an d t h e l og b oo ks o f John Hendrick, which he retained possession of. BIRTHS. On the 2d inst., at Stafford House, the Duchess of Sa hel' , land, of a son. On the 28th ult., at P ar i s , R ue d e l a Madeleine, the ° if° of Gustave Masson, of a son. On the 30th ult., at H o lb roo k e H ouse, near Ipswich, the lady of Frederick D. Fryer, Esq., of a daughter. Sf • On the 14th ult., a t Al exan d r i a, i n Egypt, t h e l a dy Saunders, Esq., of a son. f r y, On the Ist inst., at Montague-place, Russell-square , S. 1. Joseph, of adaughter. r son. On the Ist inst., a t P ec kh am - rye, M rs. T . H. Frif,„°lford- On the Ist inst., M rs . Ai nger, o f John-street, -Da row, of a son. H of ' On the Ist inst., at L ee , K en t , M rs. T . B . S tow , o f a o f $ On the 2d inst., at Greenwich, Mrs. John Matthe w ' , daughter. 11-411.1ILED. On the 30th u lt., a t C o l erne, Wi lts, T homas A. L°l‘yelet)er; Esq., to Ma r y A nn , youngest daughter a th e late A Dreweli, Esq., of Cole rne . 1.) On the 31 s t u lt., C apta i n J en ki nson, of t h e Bth (I C- ' 11 '1 Hussars, eldest son of the late Bishop of St. Davids's, eldest daughter of A. Lyster, Esq., of Stillorgan• Par `Dram, g eor On the 31st u lt., a t Matlock, James Richard El., Coldstream G uar d s , eldest son of Vice -Chanc Ark' I N v V i i i g g r h a t n , i li , s t g o ., ll o l f ar l g v a ii r i e e t rs l i l e e y l , en D , eforub3r,tshhirdea.ughter o f Peter DIED. On the 4th inst., at her residence, Stamford -hill, Flit c tot L 2 3 en )za n t h •s ai t i l_i s e tre a c ff t, ec ag tio e n d a 4 t 6. e and beloved wife of Mr- e On the 31st tilt., at the Grove, Clapham, eldest son of Thomas Howell, Ni k 1 ne q., - a • t s on of On the 9 . -7th of July, at Hull, Frederick, infan Captain Frederick Cleaveland, R A. tenang On the 3d of June last, at Meerut, East Indies, Lieu ... • Richard B. Gwllts, of her Majesty's loth Regiment of Foot, Jeremi 7 On the 11th ult., Anne, relict of the late Rev. Watson, of Arnwood, Hates, aged 63. of the On the 26th ult., at Dawlish, Frances Isabella, wife • Rev. Hyde W. Beadon. On the 29th ult., at Hamstead, John Eaton, FS' Dins On the 30th tilt Pembroke fensington, ~ at-square, v „ N John Alliston, Elizabeth ~‘;pence, relict of Captain H. 11. Spence, , ,,"'„ijohn On the 30th ult., at Ludlow, Elizabeth, wile Hutchings, Esq., aged 68. ___..........---7, - -- , r iga of Longs , erilityd LaubPsher• by BITIRDO Y "'1,1%. 112, I , re i , - S r,;a . t ji PrecinctritLorf at I t ; e Th S e a. y ig o u y ' : C';'ll-itY o f. Middlesex, Tuesday, August 5, 1845. ____----------- m Gl day, at 7 B; 1 %, 4 %, s t . 01 U