The Sun. — London, England, 1853-05-11 00:00:00

1,000 nuns. Now, at the present moment, the law of England stood helpless at the porch of a nunnery just as much as centuries ago the Emperors stood help less at the gate of Rome. It could not enter, and to a party who once got within the walls of a nunnery, there was no prospect of liberty ever being again regained but through the instrumentality of the law. Having narrated the instances of cruelty, imprisonment, and total seclusion which were mentioned in the House of Lords by the Archbishop of Dublin and the Bishop of Norwich on the previous evening, the hon. gentleman added another instance which had occurred in Paris, where the superior of a convent and six or eight nuns, who had renounced the Roman Catholic religion, were suddenly, and without the knowledge of their friends and relatives, sent away from the city to some distant asylum, where they were now suffering confinement. These in stances were facts, and could not be controverted ; and it would be far more candid if hon. gentlemen would ad mit and justify them. To use a legal phrase, they could no longer plead the general issue—they must " confess and avoid . " It would be urged against his motion that it was as an invasion of religious liberty. He was at a loss to know on what grounds that objection could be maintained ; he was not going to compel Roman Catho lic ladies to abandon their vows or to break up any ar rangements or observances practised in these convents. What he wanted was an inquiry into a power, a civil -tyranny, a despotism over mind and body, against which -there was no redress or relief. (Hear.) This was not even interference with the ecclesiastical authority, be cause these convents were not part of the Church of Rome. Everybody knew that they had been punished at times, and at others taken into favour—at one mo ment anathematised, and at the next patronised by the clerical authorities. It might be said, too, that his pro position would be an insult to the feelings of ladies of high rank and station, and an unjustifiable interference with their rights. He hoped hon. members who might be ready to urge that argument would bear in mind that there was no footing for it in law. It would be a frivo lous and absurd objection. If there was no wrong done, there could be no reason why they should resist the ap pearance once in seven years of a gentleman whose only object would be to make inquiries, and, if wrong was done, the delicate feelings of ladies of high rank and station were not to be placed in opposition to the means of doing justice to helpless and unpro tected women in the power of irresponsible and despotic authorities, and perhaps of saving their lives. It might be said that the bill was a breach of the great maxim of the British constitution, that "an Englishmen's house was his castle," but that had been broken through over and over again, and he hoped they would go on doing so rather than sacrifice the substance for the shadow of liberty. The Englishman's castle was liable to be broken into by any Custom -house offier who might smell a box of cigars or a pound of pigtail—(laughter)—through the keyhole. The most sacred personal rights of the sub ject were liable to be invaded for the same cause and by the same parties to save a few shillings to the Imperial Exchequer. The merest cobler who received a parish apprentice was not safe in his stall if the parish officers thought fit to present themselves to inquire after his charge. It was too late to press the argument that an Englishman's house was his castle, and that it ought not to be invaded, unless, indeed, they meant to say that it was not to hold good when a trifling fraud was com mitted on the Excise or the Customs, and that it was to prevail when the liberties and lives of helpless women were concerned. (Cheers.) He had stated the evil, and he would now state the remedy. His first anxiety was to do as little as might be necessary to accomplish the purpose, and to satisfy the public mind on this ques tion with as little sacrifice of private feeling as possible. What he proposed was, that the Secretary of State for the Home Department should have the power of ap pointing one or two persons, and that those persons, having reasonable grounds to believe—it was the phrase used in a great many acts of Parliament in reference to similar objects—that improper coercion was exercised against any women in any house or building, should have power to go down to the county in which it was situate, there to select a justice of the peace, and in his company to proceed to the place, to ascertain the circum stances, and to see the persons with reference to whom complaint was made. All that was wanted was, that they should have an opportunity of ascertaining the facts. What the public complained of was the secrecy, the im penetrable mystery, which prevented any certain know ledge being obtained, and which, undoubtedly, caused all suspicions against these institutions to be much mag nified. (Hear, hear.) If any man of high character, responsible to the Home Secretary, who was responsible to the house, in company with a respectable magistrate of the county, were to inquire into the facts, and if the facts were found to be different from what had been stated or suspected, then the utmost inconvenience that would be inflicted would be that the ladies, unaccustomed to see any gentleman except their priest, would be re quired to see these gentlemen and to answer their questions. If these gentlemen should be of opinion that the facts which had been brought under their notice were well founded, they would return to town and sue out a writ of habeas corpus, to give the party suffering the means of obtaining freedom. In conclusion, he ap pealed to the house to give these persons, who were helpless, the benefit of legal inspection. Parliament ought to give it even for the sake of the institutions themselves, that, they might be relieved from the odium with which the popular impression visited them. If it were denied that there was any ground for that popular imprestsion, then let it be disproved by assenting to an inspection. If they refused inspection it warranted persons in saying that there was a foundation for the suspicions entertained, otherwise investigation would not be resisted. (Hear, hear.) How could these sus• picions be negatived t It was by putting conventual institutions within the radius of the law. .Let them not be suspected of wrong—vindicate them, and let the Legislature put them beyond reproach. The hon. and learned gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill to facilitate the recovery of personal liberty in certain cases. Mr. C. BERKELEY seconded the motion. He was at a loss to conceive why this country should stand almost alone, with the exception of Spain and Italy, in respect to the law upon this subject. The law remained the same in this country as it stood at the time of the Council of Trent. The hen, and learned gentleman had omitted to mention that in Mexico, where the whole population was Roman Catholic, a law was established for the frequent visitation of nunneries. Ladies having taken the veil were excluded from seeing their friends unless in the presence of the Lady Abbess. (No, no.) Whatever contradiction the hon. gentleman who cried " No" might give him, he (Mr. Berkeley) could tell the hon. gentleman that it had happened to him (Mr. Berkeley) to be refused an interview with one of the nearest and dearest friends he had in the world—(hear, itear,)—unless it were in the presence of the lady of the convent. (Hear, hear.) A postulant was a lady who for a year previous to taking the black veil as sumed the habit of the white veil ; and even a postulant was refused permission to see her friends or anybody who might wish to have an interview with her. If hon. gen tlemen knew as much as he did of the sort of education that went on in the convents they would not resist this motion. They were places were young, unsuspecting, and confiding persons entered, who, if entitled to a fortune, the moment they took tho veil, forfeited their property, which became the possession of the convent. The poor victims might repine and wish for liberty, but having once taken the black veil, no matter how much they might repine, they must remain coerced, and there was nothing bat death to relieve them from their situation. (Hear,) Mr. BOWYER said he understood the condition im possd in the case mentioned by the last speaker had been so at the request of the hon. gentleman's relative herself. In some countries there was legal authority to detain nuns in their convents, and there inspection, though perhaps not necessary, was at least reasonable ; but in Eng land there was no such authority. The arguments ad duced were merely founded on popular suspicion, and car ried no weight. The machinery proposed by the bill was not satisfactory, as there was no guarantee for the character or opinions of the inspectors to be appointed. The fact was that the interior of convents was better known than that of any private houses, so that the strange stories brought up by the advocates of legislative interference were utterly incredible. Mr. Sergeant MURPHY denied emphatically that ladies who were inmates of religious houses wanted say liberty. He took pride in saying that three of his own nearest relatives were members of such com munities, and that he had at all times the readiest ac cess to see them, whether with or without notice. As the law stood at present, the bill was clearly unneces sary, because such persons were exactly in the same posi tion as any other subjects of the Crown ; and if a system of meddling espionage were to be adopted, the inevit able consequence must be to banish them from the cottntry. The Roman Catholics of the lower and middle classes, both in Ireland and England, derived most mate rial benefits from the monastic bodies ; and if they were put to flight, the consequence would be that the amount of spiritual destitution would be fearfully increased. Mr. FREWEN stated some facts which had come to his knowledge, which made it appear to him that it was not only desirable, but essential, that these establishments should be from time to time inspected. Mr. NEWDEGATE said, that the arguments of those who opposed this measure appeared to resolve themselves into a flat denial of every fact adduced in its support, and a broad assertion of the precise reverse of that fact. It was simply preposterous to say that no young women were kept in these institutions against their will, and that no compul sion was practised upon them, seeing that established facts proved that compulsion was practised upon both the bodies and minds of many of these nuns. With such of them as wished to remain shut up, and were satisfied with their ' condition, no one desired to interfere, but it was the duty of Englishmen to see that none of them were shut up againSt their will or otherwise subject to ill-treatment in these places. The hon. and learned member for Cork coolly asserted that no sufferings were endured in these places. The Case of the Misses Macarthy, which had been brought before the Privy Council, proved, on the contrary, that there was in these places not only suffer ing, physical and mental, inflicted on the inmates, but that there was isolation from their friends en forced,en and _ alienation of th e i r p ro p er ty e ff ec t e d, f or th e of the establishment or of the superior, a circum stance explaini ng h ow great were the pecuniary interests concerned in the maintenance of these e stablishm ents It appeared to him that if th ese nunneries were such imma culate establishments as they they admitted inspection the better Pilr theirfor dto be,the sooner character, for at present the most unfavourable ideas on r.evailed with re spect to them. This was the case nt here, as but in the United States, where not long since so evil was aacter which a particular convent acquired in thew opinion,putbleh that a body of 200 men, masked, broke open the doors b night, and, after compelling the a bbess and the nuns to quit the convent, burnt it to the ground. These places required to be brought within the reach of the law and the supervision of the State. At present, they seemed quite independent of the law, so much so in one important par ticular, that although, no doubt, sudden deaths must from them, the 3 deaths wore never the coroner, it being assured by a coroner, c walls upon any such tholic members of that ni the bill, lest they anathema denounced to exercise of his pri should lend himself ler convent. In con tpon this subject, how 4411011glit 001 1 0 thei had good grounds for action. They did it from no wish to annoy Roman Catholics, but from a sense of duty which they owed to those who were helpless without their assist ance, and because they were determined to have the Con stitution of England extended to nuns and every ne else. Lord J. RUSSELL said,—l greatly regret that this question has been brought before the house. (Hear, hear.) A bill on this same subject was introduced about two years ago, or more, I think, and the house, having then consi dered the subject, thought proper to reject the bill. It appears to me that there ought to be very strong grounds indeed for introducing a new bill on the same subject— (hear, hear)—for, in the first place, we must consider that this is a country in which we boast of our personal liberty —in which we believe that we have provisions by law by which that personal liberty is secured—and secured, not only against the Government, not only against those who by means of authority would attempt to confine persons illegally, but secured against those who by any means of force would detain a British subject against his will. Well, then, the question is whether there is a certain class of persons with respect to whom we should say that these securities of per sonal liberty are not sufficient—that the law of habeas corpus and the other acts which have been passed in order in to stackhectalslaest wlaewoueffgheetttouaihrethsetpansayntienlaedgeiscilliaatith and their that special benefit. I own I should be sorry to come to that conclusion, because I cannot but think that if such is the case our laws must be generally insufficient, and that we should be obliged to provide, not only for such cases as those which have been referred to, but, in other respects, greater securities for personal liberty than we at present enjoy. We should be obliged to admit that our boasted laws, upon which depends the liberty of the British subject, are insufficient for the purpose for which they were framed. (Hear.) Well, then, let us see the special case which the hon. gentleman has made out for the introduction of his bill. We are told that there are certain ladies of the Roman Catholic persuasion who have taken vows upon them, and who live in communities incertain private houses both in Great Britain and Ireland. It is confessed that there are no special laws in order to enforce their residence there; that there is no special protection given to the rules and canons of the Roman Catholic Church with regard to those establishments. Many of these ladies I believe have entered these houses from a spirit of sincere and deep devotion. They pass their lives in devout contemplation, soothing to them, and in performing what they believe to be their duty to God—if not in a way which we think wisely chosen, yet with great purity of intention, and with a spirit which no man ought to speak of without respect. And let me here say that it is more natural to females than to our sex to entertain deep feelings of devotion, and to believe that by retirement and contemplation, by prayer and self-denial, they are doing what is grateful to the Al mighty. There are others of those ladies who devote them selves to more active duties, and if we respect the pious intentions of the one class, we cannot but regard with ap probation the practical services performed to the human race by the other. I mean those ladies, ene part of whom devote themselves to the work of education, as has been stated by the hon. member for Cork, who preside over large institutions of young girls, and who take care to teach them not only their religious duties, but to instruct them in use ful arts, by which they become valuable members of society. I say that ladies who devote themselves to such a task can not but deserve approbation, and I should be sorry to think that there were any members of this house who would not express approbation of such conduct. (Hear.) There are other ladies who take vows, perhaps of a special nature, and who devote themselves to the most painful and sometimes to the most disgusting duties of attendance upon the sick, who watch night and day for the purpose of alleviating the pains of disease. Well, such being the case, I am asked, not whether I approve of these institutions, because upon that subject I should certainly exercise my Protestant judgment, but I am asked whether we should interfere by law in order to put special restrictions on and submit to special examina tion the houses in which those ladies have chosen to live. The hon. gentleman who last spoke has pointed out one great defect, and I, as a Protestant, agree with him—a de fect which not only attaches to, but which I say is inseparable from, institutions of this kind. It cannot but happen that young women who, in the enthusiasm of youth, from their own ardent and devotional dispositions, or perhaps the persuasions of their near relations (in other countries, I know, such persuasions have been used)—it cannot but happen, I say, that y oung women who have embraced a life of monastic retirement, should sometimes find that their dispositions are but ill suited to that life of monotony and restriction, and who have, consequently, many regrets after the world which they have left—who are discontented with the vocation which they have chosen, and who often wish that they had not bound themselves by the solemn vows which they have taken. We would wish, of course, that such persons had not taken such vows, and had not so' bound themselves, or that they did not remain dissatisfied with themselves and with all around them in the houses to which they belong. But when the hon. gentleman says that we ought not to permit, in a free country, such things to take place, he goes far beyond the remedy which is pro posed by the hon. gentleman who brings forward this bill, and, as I will presently show him, the remedy which he proposes is of a totally different nature ; because when he quotes from the writings of Alphonse Liguori, and from other works, the exhortations—almost the threats, which are used towards nuns who repent of their vocation, it is evident that such arguments are used, not for the purpose) of confining them by fetters and manacles, or by the dun geons to which he has alluded, under ground, but that they are addressed to the sensitive minds and feelings of those nuns, who are told that, having bound themselves by such solemn engagements, they have no right lightly to violate those engagements. (Hoar, hear.) I certainly agree with the hon. gentleman that those arguments aro hardly likely o reconcile such persons as he has described to the life with which they have become discontented, that the pangs of conscience and the mental struggles which are undergone in such cases must often be painful in the extreme and if he were to argue, as a general question, that these institu tions are often very injurious in their consequences, as a Protestant I could not but agree with him—(hear, hear) ; but when I am asked to assent to a new law upon this sub ject, and when he tells me that in a free country we ought not to permit such things existing, I must toll him that the only law which would prevent such things existing is a law forbidding the existence of con vents altogether— (hear, hear) because the chances are, that the persons who go to those convents are per sons who would, in the first place, refuse to give the inspectors any explanation ; that a lady having those feel ings to which I have referred would probably object to state her feelings and the struggles of her conscience to the inspector; and that if she was told, "The doors of the convent are thrown open to you; you may go into the world if you think proper; yoti may go to-morrow and live in the metropolis of England if you please ;" the pro bability is, she would answer, " You are mistaken in my case. It is not the doors of the convent ; it is not the bolts and the bars and the locks which confine me ; it is my sense of obligation ; it is the thought that I have taken a vow which I must keep, and that I will commit a great sin if I violate that vow. (Hear.) How would the hon. gentleman's bill apply to such a case as that ? In what way would it meet it ? (Hear, hear.) It must be evident that it would be utterly inefficient. (Hear, hear.) And it must be evident, further, that unless you cease to per mit the existence of convents altogether in this country, you cannot reach the evils which the hon. gentleman has pointed out. But we have hitherto agreed to allow of convents existing in this country; hitherto, the law has not forbidden the consolations which convents afford to one class of females, or the practical uses to which they are • applied in other cases, and I confess I am disposed to leave the question to the opinions and sense of the Roman Catho lics themselves, and not to forbid the existence of those institutions. (Hear, hear.) Well, then, we come to the more intelligible evil which the hon. gentleman who brought forward the motion has stated to the house, and that is the evil of persons being actually confined in con vents against their own will, and forced by physical means •to remain in convents. I must say, in the first place, that with respect to evidence of such cases we have none. The hon. gentleman who brought forward the motion stated some cases, and others have stated three or four, but these are all cases without positive names attached to them— without particulars being given —without those cross-exa minations without which cases of this kind are very little worth, and without those positive proofs which I think this house ought to require before they have any legislation on the subject. (Hear.) The hon. gentleman the member for Cheltenham (Mr. C. Berkeley) has stated that he was not allowed to see a near relation of his except in the pre sence of the superintendent. Now, as far as I can make out, that was not a ease depending on any general law with respect to those communities. That case, it seems to me, was entirely of a private and domestic nature ; and it might have happened that a young lady, being a Protest ant, had gone to her aunt or other friend, and that one of her nearest relations was not allowed to see her except in the presence of the lady in whose house she lived. It does not appear to me that that is a case which is inseparably connected with the institution of convents. But there is a further reason—and it appears to me an unanswerable one—why we ought not to come to the conclusion to which the hon. gentleman asks us to come. The hon. gentleman says that the ladies are confined by force—that their per sonal liberty is denied them—and that the whole power of the British Parliament is required in order to set them free from the bonds by which they are detained. Now, if it is true that we live in a free country, don't tell me that the Roman Catholic gentry of Great Britain and Ireland are utterly dead to those feelings of political freedom which animates the subjects of this kingdom in general. (Hear, hear.) Don't tell me, above all, that they are so destitute of the common affections of humanity that they would willingly see the laws of freedom set at nought, and the doctrine of slavery acted on towards their nearest rela tions, and that they have not the heart to stand up in this house and denounce that tyranny, and ask our assistance to take off their fetters. (Hear, hear.) I cannot believe that if the evil referred to had existed to any extent that the Roman Catholic gentlemen of this country would not themselves have come to this house and asked us to pass a law in order tcibestablish the freedom of their own near relations. (Hear, hear.) For these reasons I should be sorry to consent to the introduction of a bill on this sub ject. But, is that all the objection? Does the objection end with that statement ? No - I think the objection goes a great deal further than this. It is not only that the persons of the Roman Catholic persuasion do not come and ask us to interfere on behalf of their female relatives, said to be detained in prison, but it is evident that they would feel it as a serious injury, and somewhat of an insult, if we were to attempt the passing of such a law. (Hear, hear.) If we are to have any law on the u remedy is required, let it b e a r e medy that wil if any apply to the whole nation. (Hear.) Let the Habeas Corpus Act be made more complete—let there be fitter means for all persons, whether 'Roman Catholic or Protestant, who are confined against their will, obtaining the interposition of a court of justice • but such is not the remedy which this bill proposes. When such a remedy is proposed it will be time enough for the House of Com mons to consider its necessity. But it is proposed that application should be made to the executive Government of the country—that the authority of the Secretary of State should be interposed, and that he should be asked to send down to those houses containing nuns an inspector, armed with the power of investigation, if required. Well, I say that a remedy like this, differing from the ordinary laws of the land, and put in force by a Secretary of State, who may be called upon by the House to interfere in any case which may be got up by a popular gust of passion in the country—such Secretary of State belonging to a party who may possibly be favourable to Roman Catholics, but who, on the other hand, may possibly be hostile to them—l say, that such a power could hardly be used without exciting feelings of great indignation on the part of Roman Catho lics that their religious institutions were unduly interfered with, and that not for any purpose of public policy, still t z s:_l_f';r any purpose of public necessity. (Hear, hear.) You in spection were authorised byP t• have heard some symptoms of those feelings in the declare,- ion made by two hon. members t - • ht that if such in country and Ireland, and wo to those institutions would ai e m n g t, those who belonged countries where they would not be liable t t h o e ta r et nz a et.?.tely quit both this selyes in other cleciyanne the conceive lien an sit i l a i e that inspection. az r e t i t en ti t 9n4 haPPetking—l cannot con e/ the Roman Catholic gentry of these two countries leaving this country without exciting the strongest feelings of resentment on the part of the gentry and middle orders both of this country and of Ireland. (Hear, hear.) And I cannot conceive those who have conducted the education—those who have attended the hospitals and institutions for the sick—all at once going out as exiles from this country, without pro ducing in the minds of the lower classes who have received the benefit of thei r m i n i s t ra ti on th e s t ronges t f ee li ng that they are suffering a grievance from the Parliament of this country. (Hear, hear.) Sir, I believe that our interfer ence on this subject is likely to produce bad effects. I can see no sufficient reason for saying that the general law of this country is not ample for the protection of the, personal liberty of all the subjects of this country. I see no reason to think so ill of our Roman Catholic fellow-countrymen as to believe that they would behold without complaint their near relations immured against their will, or confined in contravention of the law, and to the destruction of their health and comfort. (Hear, hear.) So feeling, sir, upon this subject, having had before in this house a bill upon this subject, seeing no likelihood that the present bill would be at all more satisfactory to me than the bill against which I voted two years ago, I must refuse my assent to the introduction of this bill. (Cheers from the Irish members.) Lord E. HOWARD doubted if any, except those who were in the secret, could have imagined, from the terms of the notice upon the paper, that a bill of this nature was to have been introduced. He was led into this discussion, however, in consequence of an allusion which had been made by several hon. gentlemen. One said it was a case of a near and dear relation of his. " Sir," said the noble lord, " a far nearer and dearer relation of my own." (Loud cheers.) Upon this subject he should meet the first the satement of the hon. member for Cheltenham. He had had no time to ask, and he did not know that he should have asked the lady in question if he had had time, whether she had been prevented seeing the hon. gentleman alone when she was a member of the convent ; but this he could say, that she would have had no wish to see him alone. (Hear, hear.) His hon. friends the members for Cork and Dundalk had adverted very kindly to this. The hon. member for North Warwickshire, however, had taken upon himself to say that the person to whom he alluded had been confined against her will, and he spoke first as if he had her own authority for saying so, — Mr. NEWDEGATE said, he had merely stated that he relied upOn the testimony of the hon. member for Chelten ham, and he then quoted the correspondence which had appeared in the newspapers. Lord E. HOWARD was not aware that any such state ment had been made in the newspapers. He could only say, the lady had since told him that during the time she was in the convent she had been completely happy. He considered it disgraceful to bring forward his private affairs before the house. With regard to the other cases which had been metioned, hon. members should take care to in vestigate the truth of what was told them. The hon. member for North Warwickshire began his speech by a conversation very much resembling one of Landor's. With regard to the iron bars, it was just possible that they might be for the purpose of keeping people out as well as in. (Laughter.) He must thank the noble lord the member for the city of London, for the speech which he had made, which was free from the bigotry of which the house had that night heard so much. With respect to the confine ment of ladies in these establishments, he would ask the hon. member if he had never seen the sisters of charity walking about in the performance of their duties ? He con fessed that he felt warmly on the subject, but he thought that the efforts to bring the question into false lights might to some extent be his excuse. He had spoken without preparation, and should regret it if he had uttered a word that might be unnecessarily offensive ; at the same time, he did not retract the sense of what he bad said—it was only the manner of it for which he could offer any apology. Mr. DRUMMOND said that he disliked the former bill which had been introduced upon this subject, and he had great difficulties with respect to the present, because he thought it would be utterly inefficacious. He did not be lieve it was within the power of the legislation of the house to separate that which was good from that which was bad in monastic institutions. He never went the length that some gentlemen did in blaming them, for he had seen the advantages of sisters of charity abroad, and knew how much the recovery of the sick and wounded in foreign hos pitals was owing to them. The case was full of difficulty. For instance, they had passed bills as strong as they could against Jesuits and monasteries ; yet there they were, in creasing every hour, and laughing in their face. By what means could they possibly insure the efficiency of this bill? His objection to these institutions applied as much to Pro testants as to Roman Catholics; for he laid down this ab stract doctrine, that it never could be right or lawful, under any circumstances to lock up a number of women in a house with bolts and bars, and give the key of it to any one man. He didn't care whether he were a Protestant or a Papist, or whether he were a layman or a priest, that was the thing he objected to. It was said there were no bolts or bars in this country, but that was simply because here they had not their own way. Cases took place abroad daily, which would occur in this country if the priesthood were predo minant. He could state things which had come under his own eyes, but if he did, they would straightway be denied, for the power of denial possessed by hon. gentlemen was perfectly wonderful. (Hear.) He did not think it right that there should be anywhere a number of the Queen's subjects who could not appeal to her for protection through the ordinary means of the police, constables, magistrates, and judges of the country. (Hear.) That which he had seen. abroad might occur here. He had seen abroad parents force their daughters into convents in order that other fa vourite daughters might have larger jointures ; and he believed there were many such instances. He objected very much to ladies who had taken vows being encouraged to break them ; but he must tell the house some few things that had happened, notwithstanding the vigilance of Pro testant eyes. This was a statement which had been made to him by a priest who had left the Roman Catholic faith. (Oh, oh !) He had been a curate officiating at --. His niece was a boarder and pensioner at the school of a nunnery at so and so, with boarders from the ages of 4 to 18. It then became his duty as her guardian to consult her wishes relative to entering the nunnery. "Nunneries" she replied, " are not such good places as you imagine. I would not pass my life among them for anything you could offer. As to the nuns, they are in a state of continual , strife among each other, and the crimes committed among the ladies who are boarders are too shocking to mention." (Oh, oh, and cries of " Name the nunnery.") These convents were, in fact, one of the means by which the Popish treasury was filled, and that was one great reason why they were patronised. It was not a bit that ladies malt pa - ss their s time their in private devotion—not a bit of it. There was no grist behind that mill. Here was another case : " Some time after the death of our young friend in Mar tinique, we received a. letter from our old and esteemed cor respondent there, informing us that be had received a letter from the lady in the convent, expressing her gratitude to him for all that he had done for her and various members of his deceased partner's family, and further stating that there was a sum of 300/. due by that gentleman, her departed rela tive, to a family in Cork, who had suffered a great reverse of cir cumstances; adding, that she was sure if he had lived it would not have been allowed to remain unpaid; that if she had not dis posed herself of all her property, she would gladly discharge the debt, and entreating him, as an act of the greatest charity, to pay the amount. Our friend reminded us of the many sums he had previously paid, and of the fact of his having no assets of his late partner's applicable to the purpose ; but he added, that such was his respect for the family and for the lady in the convent, that provided we felt satisfied, after an interview with her, that the facts were as she supposed, he would authorise our paying the money. On receipt of this letter my brother wcat to the convent and saw the lady. He stated that our friend had requested us to make inquiries touching the family she had named to him. She expressed her great surprise, and declared she knew nothing whatever of any such family. My brother then told her all the cir cumstances mentioned in our friends letter, when she seemed confused, but still declared she knew nothing of the family nor of the circumstances. My brother, on his return to our counting-house, told all this with very great surprise to us, and we wrote off at once to our friend, supposing that for gery and fraud had been practised upon him. In a few days after, or it may be the next day, we received a note from the convent in the same handwriting as usual, requesting that Mr. C- would call upon the writer, which my brother did, and found the lady alone, waiting to receive him, in a state of considerable agitation. The first question was, Mr. C-, did you write to Martinique ?' My brother replied, I did.' The lady then said in almost an agony, which astonished my brother, What shall Ido ? Pray write off at once and say that the facts are all true, and that it was a silly mistake on my part.' My brother replied, How can this be, Miss ? Is it true that you wrote the letter you told me you did not write ; or is it possible that you knew the family of whom you told me you knew nothing 7' This seemed to throw her into almost a state of frenzy, and she replied, I suppose I must tell you all ; the fact is, I have never put pen to paper since I entered this convent ; one of our sisters manages all corres pondence, who is appointed for that purpose. She knows all the facts, and that is quite the same as my knowing them ; so do pray write and tell our friend that it is all true.' It was in vain that my brother told her thy* such an explanation would never satisfy our friends. She only repeated, It is all true, and pray write to tell him so.' My brother left her in this state, and on his return repeated the conversation in utter astonishment to us, and we wrote the whole as it occurred to our friend, who, in _ _ reply, thanked us for the course we had taken to protect him from the fraud intended, and stated, that as he was then be coming an old man, it had been his intention to give up all his business affairs, and to return to his native country to end his days there, but that he was so shocked at what he had thus discovered, that he resolved to return to Europe and eud his days without returning to Ireland, which ho accordingly .did, and we corresponded with him in Paris until his death." Now, this was the sort of instruction given in these insti tutions, and these were not the things that were looked into as they ought to be. Ho thought the country was not pre pared.for the only course that was proper and necessary, and that was for the suppression of monastic institutions altogether. (Hear, hear.) Those who maintained this system were determined, if they could, to establish the canon law, with all its consequences ; and there was just as strong a determination that they should not do so. (Hear, hear.) With regard to this bill, he confessed that he did not think it would effect the object with which it was brought forward. Mr. LUCAS wished to express his acknowledgments to the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) for the extremely generous and able speech which he had made, and which must have perfectly settled the question in the mind of every impartial and rational member of the house. The case had com pletely fallen through. The house had been asked to legis late, 'but no groutid had been laid for legislation. The hon. and learned gentleman who had brought forward the mo tion had admitted that he was destitute of proof ; and therefore he wished commissioners to be appointed to visit convents, and obtain evidence. The hon. member for Sus sex, it was trae, had mentioned the case of a lady who had been placed in a convent-school by her father, and who ran away. Well, such circumstances sometimes happened when young ladies were placed at school by their fathers— (a laugh)—and he was not aware that they required any special legislation. (Hear, hear.) Other cases had been mentioned. One was the case of a boy ; another that of a young lady living in the world ; and a third case referred to by the Bishop of Norwich, which, he thought, had no relation whatever to this bill. As to the extraordinary statements read by the hon. member for Surrey (Mr. Drummond), every one must feel that they required no notice. He (Mr. Lucas's) feelings on this subject was exactly what it would be if he were a Protestant. If they made out a case—if they showed him that abuses existed, that tyranny was practised, that breaches of the law were committed, Catholic as he was, he would join them in ap plying any national remedy they chose to adopt ; but if there was no better groundwork for exceptional and insult ing legislation than the cock-and-bull stories they had heard, he must declare himself entirely opposed to such measures as that of the hon. and learned member for Hertford. For 12 ozl4 years past he had watched the course which had been pursued with regard to these Catholic institutions. Not a year had passed without some case of alleged cruelty, mismanagement, or hardship being dragged before the world ; but the moment it was investigated it was found there was nothing in it, that it was a tissue of falsehood, and that the parties to the nar rative WOO degraded and climatal° uapoutors. (Hear, hear.) A crop of these facts came up every year. (A laugh.) Persons of degraded and debased imaginations lived upon the filthy and abominable suspicions which formed the stock in trade of a certain class of so-called religious agita tors, who made up a kind of spurious public opinion, which endeavoured to thrust itself upon that house. He had great respect for anything in the shape of English pub lic opinion; but for that monstrous, and unnatural, and debased opinion which was represented out of doors by the motions made on these subjects in the house, he had no respect whatever, but he regarded it with the greatest contempt. (Hear, hear) The hon. member for War wickshire had expressed his wish to protect the Roman Catholics from Lynch-law, but he (Mr. Lucas) would meet any proposal to protect them against Lynch-law by legisla tion of this kind with the regard which its obvious serious ness demanded. (A laugh.) He was sure that candid, rational, calm judging members on both sides would unite in putting an extinguisher upon an attempt at legislation which, if it were successful, would do no credit to the cha racter of that assembly. Mr. WHITESIDE objected to this bill, because it treated a very large subject in a very narrow way. Two questions must be considered with reference to what took place in conventual establishments,—one was a question of property, and the other was a question of personal liberty. He admitted with the hon. member for Meath (Mr. Lucas) that no strong case of abuse within the walls of conventual establishments had been made out ; but it might be in the recollection of hon. gentlemen that some time ago the predecessor of the hon. and learned member for Cork in the representation of that city brought before the Court of Chancery in Ireland the whole history of the interior of a convent in Cork. In that case a deed was obtained from Miss Trlacarthy against her will and for the advantage of the convent, although she wished to bestow a portion of her property upon her brother and sister ; and he (Mr. Whiteside) must say he conceived that a greater act of tyranny than was exposed in that case could not be practised upon a young and innocent woman. Four or five cases were reported in the records of the Irish courts in which influence of this kind had been brought to bear upon persons possessed of property. He admitted, however, that the presont bill did not affect this very important point. He (Mr. Whiteside) must say that when ho heard the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) refer to the law of other European countries on this subject, he had felt some sur prise. He (Mr. Whiteside) would not quote the law of Russia, and he would not act upon the laws of Austria, of Spain, or of Portugal, because he believed that in those countries bigotry and tyranny prevailed ; but he might state with regard to Italy, that Leopold of Tuscany —who, before the name of Hominy was known, or the Code Napoleon was adopted, enacted the most merciful code of criminal law that existed in Europe—had ordained that no girls within his dominions should be placed in pub lic schools until they were ten years of age ; that they should not be clothed in the dress of a convent until they were 20 ; and that they should not be professed until they had been liberated from convents for six months, and even then not until after a strict examination with the view of ascertaining their real intentions. Leopold further pro vided that a female was not thenceforward to be allowed to take the veil until she had reached 30 years of age. Now, that was a fair age in Italy for a lady to take the veil. (Laughter.) Provision was further made by Leopold for subjecting the conventual establishments of Tuscany to inspection. He (Mr. Whiteside) admitted that there was a difference between appointing Roman Catholic inspectors to make investigations with regard to institutions of that kind and appointing Protestant inspectors to perform the duty. He did not think the bill now before the house would be effectual ; but, although he would be averse to the enactment of any law which might be offensive to the feelings of Roman Cathollcs, he was satisfied that the en tire subject of the relations of these conventual establish ments to the State must, with due respect to the feelings and rights of the Roman Catholic gentry of Ireland and England, be seriously and comprehensively regarded by the Legislature of this country. Lord J. RUSSELL said the hon. and learned gentleman was mistaken in supposing that he had referred to the laws of other European countries With regard to conventual establishments. Mr. FAGAN alluded to the Macarthy case, with which he had been intimately acquainted, and denied that there had been any coercion used towards the daughters of Mr. Macarthy to compel them to take measures to obtain their share of their father's property. The transaction had given great pain to the ladies in question, who intended to have employed the money which they thought they had a right to in charitable and religious purposes. He regretted that the hon. member of Hertford should have commenced his career in that house by bringing forward a motion insult ing to communities of ladies who were respected by all who knew them ; but he was gratified to find that the noble lord had shown so determined a spirit of opposition to the bill which he considered an encroachment on civil liberty. The only argument which had been brought for ward t was d l i r e a in spectionwno of what were really private houses. He should the h memberthe i n people, support w o h f the bill demanded g ive the bill his most decided opposition. from wa r d tbhye h prejudices on of Lord C. HAMILTON regretted that the noble lord at the head of the Government did not feel it his duty to al low the bill to pass even its earliest stage, because it dealt with a subject which had taken a deep hold on the public mind, and had created an impression which would not be removed until it had been shown to be unfounded. It was said that monastic institutions were without the pale of the law ; that statement might be a libel, but it was no an swer to the public to tell them so. The noble lord had told the house that it would be better to imitate the pa triotism and self-denial of their Roman Catholic fellow countrymen ; but the noble lord would excuse him if he declined to put faith in their aspirations for civil and reli gious liberty, more especially when they were under the guidance of a master spirit like that of the hon. member for Meath (Mr. Lucas). With regard to the proposed bill, ho would remind the house that its mover did not ask that Protestant inspectors should be appointed for the purpose of visiting the convents, but proposed to leave the appoint ments to the judgment and responsibility of tho Home Secretary. He hoped the house would give the hon. mem ber the opportunity to explain the details of the measure. (" Divide, divide.") Sir It. INGLIS complimented the hon. member for Hert ford on the tact, ability, and judgment displayed in his speech, and expressed his opinion that as powers were given by the law in Catholic countries to the civil authorities to visit institutions analogous to those in England, there was no measure which the house ought to find less difficulty in supporting. It was a question of the civil liberty of the subject of the realm, and ought not to be dealt with as a religious question. The hon. and learned member for En niskillen had argued that the bill ought not to be adopted because it would not meet all emergencies. Ho should have preferred a bolder and more comprehensive measure ; but when a measure which was before them was good, they ought not to say " No" to it because it did not go far enough, and he was prepared to accept it as a means of getting more hereafter. He hoped the house would agree to the measure of the hon. gentleman. Mr. T. CHAMBERS replied, and complained of the manner in which the purport and contents of his speech had been evaded. The noble lord had omitted to speak on the main question at all, and had confined his remarks chiefly to compliments on the devout nuns, who spent the greater part of their time in prayer and contemplation, and on the active nuns who spent their time in walking the Government should see his bill, but the noble lord had. about the streets. (Laughter.) He was very anxious that refused to give him tho opportunity of explaining its de tails, and he trusted the house would therefore assist him in bringing it forward. (Hear.) Sir J. 'T YRELL, who spoke amid general impatience for a division, commented on the inflated panegyric pro nounced by the noble lord at the head of the Government on the Roman Catholic ministers in general, and intimated his opinion that it was perhaps intended as a set-off to the conduct of the Government on the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) Perhaps, too, in the present critical state of the house, the noble lord desired to take steps for working well with those hon. members on that side of the house who had been dealt hardly with by the budget, and thus to make things square. (Laughter.) The house divided. The numbers were : - For the motion 138 Against it ... 115 Majority in favour of the motion... 23 TRANSFER OF LAND IN IRELAND. Mr. V. SCULLY obtained leave to bring in a bill to facilitate the transfer of land in Ireland. BALLOT. Mr. C. BERKELEY, in consequence of the lateness of the hour (half -past ten), postponed his motion with refe rence to the ballot. We did not collect to what day. CHICORY AND COFFEE. Mr. GREGSON moved for a return, up to the present time, of the number of seizures or prosecutions made or authorised by the Commissioners of Excise for the adulte ration of tea, tobacco, pepper, and coffee ; distinguishing the seizures or prosecutions for adulteration of coffee under the Treasury order of the 3d day of August, 1852 ; and any seizures or prosecutions under the Treasury order of the 25th day of February, 1853, for sales of mixtures of chicory and coffee without the required labels (in continuation of Parliamentary paper No. 647, of session 1851). Mr. WILSON, in expressing his readiness to give the returns, said that it seemed in some quarters to be sup posed that the Government had had no intention of put ting the order into effect, whereas, in the two months since the order was issued there had been 1,684 inspections by the officers of various stocks, attended by 94 convictions and fines, by 135 punishments of a minor description. The Excise, he would add, had hitherto confined the fines to Si. and 61., but notice had now been given that for future offences the extreme penalty would be inflicted. It had been suggested that since the order the consumption of coffee had decreased, whereas, in point of fact, it had largely increased, the amount of coffee which paid duty in the two months since the order was issued having been 6,221,0001b5., whereas the quantity in the two correspond ing months of last year was only 5,540,000 lbs., and in the two months of the preceding year 3,850,0001b5. (Hear.' The motion was then agreed to. BOROUGH OF BARNSTAPLE. Mr. 0. STANLEY moved a n address to her Ma j est y , praying that her Majesty wou ld b e g raciousl y p leased to issue a commission to inquire into corrupt practices which took place at the late election for the borough of Barnstaple :—Commissioners' na mes—Michael Prender gast, Escl:, Q.C., Sir John Eardley Eardley Wilmot, Bart., and Leofric Temple, Esq.—Agreed to. DURHAM ELECTION. Mr. BENTINCK moved the appointment of a select committee to inquire into the circumstances under which the petitions against the return of William Atherton, Esq., and Thomas Colpitts Granger, Esq., for the city of Dur ham, have been withdrawn, and that the petition to this house on the 20th day of April, be referred to the said committee. At the last general election, in July 1852, Mr. Granger and Mr. Atherton were returned for the borough of Durham, Lord A. Vane being the unsuccessful candidate. Upon the sth of August following Mr. Granger died. On the 23d of November, two electors, in the interest of Lord A. Vane , p resented a petition com plaining of the return of Mr. Atherton, and praying a void election against him. At a late hour, upon the 25th olia f November, which was the last day for presenting Par mentary petitions, one was presented from two electors of Durham, resident in: London, named Lumley and Grlnst well, who who had voted for Granger and Atherton, agai the return of Mr. Granger, then dead. Upon the 26th, Mr. Coppock, the agent for the petitioners, gave notice that. it was not intended to proceed. From these circum stances it was clear that the petition was not of a bona.ficle nature, but was intended to attain som e tortuous obrct, which was in fact, the withdrawal of the petition against Mr. Atherton. He looked upon the withdrawal of the pe tition of the 25th of December as an unjuhtifiable abuse of the right of petitioning, and, as such, a breach of the pri vile of that house. He begged, therefore, to submit the motion which he had read. Mr. M. CHAMBERS opposed the motion. Nothing had been done between the 26th of November and the 2d of December, when the new election at which Lord A. Vane was returned, took place ; and now that it was found that thePetitiosa that 11010 lord Wttgi to prmoded with, and on the very eve of the appointment of the select ' committee to inquire into the merits of that petition, this motion was made for the very purpose of inducing a com promise between the pai Lies, and the withdrawal of the petition against the noble lord. If the house assented to this course. they would be lending themselves to the com mission of a great breach of their own privileges. Mr. MILES said that the conduct of the agents on both sides required to be looked into. Petitions had been pre sented without the slightest grounds by agents, and then withdrawn and paired in a shameful manner. This was mere playing and trifling with the house. The whole system was wrong and wanted revision. • Sir J. TROLLOPE had seen with pain the privilege of petitioning abused in the present session in a grosser man ner than he ever remembered before. The committee over which he had presided had been made a complete stalking horse for every kind of abuse. (Hear, hear.) Petitions had been withdrawn or paired off, and the labours of the committee of selection had been set completely at naught. It would only be becoming the dignity of the house to take some notice of these transactions ; but he questioned whether the present was a very fitting opportunity, inas• much as a petition in it was now pending. He thought, however, that the house should take the first opportunity of marking its displeasure at these practices. (Hear.) Mr. HEADLAM said, if they appointed a select com mittee to inquire into the withdrawal of this petition, they must do so in every case in which a petition had been withdrawn. Mr. MALINS had no doubt that Parliamentary agents were a very necessary body of men. Mr. Brown and Mr. Coppock were equally indifferent to him ; but this he said, that these persons should be taught that the House of Commons was to be treated with respect and in good faith. The present was by no means a frivolous case, and he con tended that it was time the house took the matter into its own hands and taught these Parliamentary agents that it was not to be insulted with impunity. Sir C. WOOD quite agreed that the system of petition ing and counter petitioning with the view of pairing off was a gross abuse of the privilege, equally participated in by both sides of the house. The whole practice was ex tremely disgraceful; and he must say that the proceedings in the present case came very much within that category. But it appeared to him That if there were any complaint it ought to be not against the withdrawal, but against the presentation of the petition. (Hear, hear.) What he thought, however, was a little suspicious was the " time" at which the present motion was brought forward. He recommended, instead of appointing a committee in this special case, that a committee should inquire into tho whole system generally, of the practice of withdrawing petitions for the solo purpose of jobbery. (Hear, hear.) Mr. WALPOLE concurred in the propriety of appoint ing a committee to inquire into the circumstances of the withdrawal of election petitions generally, and regretted that the hon. member for East Surrey had withdrawn his notice of motion on the subject. If the whole matter were to be fully inquired into he should recommend his hon. friend behind him not to press his motion. (Hear.) Mr. L. KING said, he had not withdrawn his motion, but, on the contrary, was anxious to bring ,it forward as soon as possible. Sir J. TROLLOPE stated, for the information of the house, that the whole of the election petitions would be appointed by the end of this month. At present there were' only eightjremaining to be disposed of, but others might be presented in the interim, as there were a great many seats now vacant. _ _ Sir J. V. SHELLEY doubted the purity of motive of hon. gentlemen opposite. He disapproved of the present tribunals to which these matters were referred, and sug gested that there should be a different mode of taking votes at elections. _ _ Mr. WiIiTMORE instanced himself as having been pe. titioned against without there being the shadow of a case. In fact, he had been a Coppock " butt," but not a Coppock victim. _ Mr. W. 0. STANLEY deprecated the whole system as a mockery and delusion, and expressed a strong doubt whe ther the house was sincere in its intentions to put a check upon the gross practices which notoriously prevailed. After some further discussion, in which Mr. E. C. EGER TON, Mr. W. M. SMITH, Mr. S. HERBERT, Mr. T. DUN COMBE, and Colonel FORESTER took part, Lord PALMERSTON said he did not mean to deny that this might be a fit subject for inquiry, and it might be that the inquiry ought to be directed rather to the causes which led to the presentation of the petition than to its with drawal. He thought, however, that as an hon. gentleman (Mr. L. King) had given notice of a motion for the 31st of May for a general inquiry into cases of this kind, the better course would be to adjourn the debate for the purpose of including the inquiry into this particular case in the pro posed general inquiry. He moved that the debate be ad journed to Tuesday, the kst inst. The house then divided, when there were— For the adjournment Against it ~ 107 Majority 33 The debate was mem dingle adjourned to the 31st of May. On the motion of Mr. L. KING, a return was ordered of the election petitions presented during the present session, showing the names of the places, names of members peti tioned against, and in what manner such petitions may have been disposed of ; returns of all reports, special re ports, and determinations or resolutions of any election committees reported to the house ; of the names of all mem bers who have been unseated, and for what causes they have been so unseated ; of the names of all places the writs for which have been suspended, and to what dates they have been so suspended ; and of the total number of select committees which have" sat on election petitions up to Whitsuntide. _ _ . On the motion of Mr. CORRY, an address was agreed to for a return of the number of persons employed in her Majesty's dockyards and gun wharves, and other civil esta blishments of the Admiralty and Ordnance, who are en titled to vote at the eleCtions of members to serve in. Parliament for each of the following boroughs :—Green wich, Chatham, Rochester, Harwich, Sandwich, Ports mouth, Plymouth, Devonport, and Pembroke. Lord HOTHAM obtained leave to bring in a bill to en able the justices of counties to contract in certain cases for the maintenance and confinement of convicted prisoners in the gaols of adjoining counties. The \Vhichwood Forest Bill went through committee. DOCKYARD APPOINTMENTS COMMITTEE. On the motion of Mr. J. WILSON, it was agreed that a message be sent to the House of Lords, requesting their lordships to permit the Earl of Derby to attend the com mittee on dockyard appointments. The house adjourned at one o'clock. time to time occur in them, those brought - • _....- ognizance of t u ite ':, iV 6 : • . aad been at q 'l ' • to coil: • 41.17,evi en , I, n their 111 an Cath circu.... .: Q ,„,, : ,. 1 to. ::, ho • • t, :I ,Vr.i. notir - . supper ' - - " dful a sho I. ' •i• . t. . , :v2 e ~ .>!,.. ea . by their c• 4 1 7 ! . 1 A , '.;'P. 77. ; :, . , in the vate '.., . „ - ,4 •4ri , ' 'T ,, t..;• , esrulgs, • , -ii,rox . r...• h to al. . 0 ' / :.-. -,. . :-.-. .t_ om e elusion he ..'..r.` l ' fit )"/!` upo ‘. .): • - ' ever del ,•• ) V . ' f -kit:_zat PARLIAMENTARY DIVISION. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—MAY 10. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons. ) INSPECTION OF NUNNERIES. Motion made and question put, " That leave be given to bring in a bill to facilitate the,recovery of personal liberty in certain cases."—The house divided—Ayes, 138 ; Noes, 115. MAJORITY-AYES, 138 Adderlcy, C. Fergus, John North, Colonel Aglionby, H. A. Ferguson, Joseph Oakes, J. H. Aleoek, , Thomas Filiner, Sir Edmund Pritchard, J. Anderson, Sir James Forbes, W. Pugh, D. Bailey, Sir J. Forester, Colonel Repton, G. WJ. Batley, C. Galway, Viscount Robartes, T. J. A. Baldock, E. H. George, John Robertson, P. F. Bateson, Thomas Gretnall; G. Sawle, C. B. G. BeQkett, W. Gwyn, Bowel Seobell, Capt. Bentinck, G. P. Raiford, sir H. Scrope, G. P. Biddulph, R. M. Mimilton, Lord C. Seahrun, Lord Blair, Colonel Harcourt, Colonel Smijth, Sir W. Bolder.). Colonel Hastie, Alexander Smith, Wm. M. Booker, T. W: Hastie, Archibald Smyth, R. Bouverie, E. Heywood, James Someriet, Captain Boyle, Colonel Hindley, Charles Soooner, Richard Brand, H. Hume, W.Fitzwilliam Stafford, A. Brisco, Musgrave Inglis, Sir R. H. Stafford, Marquis Broeklehurat, John Irton, Samuel 'Stanley, lin .W. 0. Fsrockman, E. D. Johnstone, James Stuart, Lord D. Burrell, Sir C. M. Jones, Captain Talbot, C. Burroughes, Hem yN. Kendall, Nicholas Thompson, G. Chambers, M. Ker, D. S. 'l'ollemache, J. Child, Smith King,P. J. Trollope, Sir J. Cholmondelcy, Ld. H King, James King Turner, C. Clive. R. Kingscote, R. N. F. Tyler, Sir George Cobbold, J. C. Kinuaird, Arthur F. Tyrell, Sir J. T. Codrington, Sir Win. Knight, F W. Vance, J. Collier, Robert P. Knox, W. S. Vane, Lord A. Col - vile, Charles R. Langton, H. G. Verner, Sir W. Compton, H. Combo Lew W. G. Vivian, J. Ennis Cowan, Charles isham, Visc. Vyvyan, Sir R. Cowper, W. F. Lockhart, A. E. Vyse, Capt. Craufurd, E. H. J. Loveen, P. . Walcott, Adm. Crossley, Frank Maeartney, G. Warner, E. I)ashwood, Sir G. H. Macgregor, James west, F. R. Day:e, Sir H. M'Taggart, Sir J. ibread, S. Davies, D. A. S. Malin% R. Woodd, B - Drummond, H. Mandeyille,•VLseount Wyndham, Gen. Duncan, G. Manic, Colonel Wynn, 11. Dunlop, A. Micbell, W. Wynn, Sir W. East, Sir J. B. Moore, R. S. Yorke, Eliot T. Elliot, John Moreton, Lord Emlyn, Viscount Morgan, 'Delaying Evans. William Morris, D. Evelyn, W. Muntz, G. F. Ewart, Wiliam Neeld, John Farrel', James Newdegate, C. N. TELLERS. Chambers, T. Berkeley, Craven F. BILNORITY-NOES, 115. Atherton, Wm. Greville, Col. Pechell, Sir G. Ball, John. Hadfield, George Peel Frederick Baring, Sir F. Brunner, Sir J. Phillimore, R. J. Beaumont. W. B. Hayter, W. G. Phinn, Thomas Bellew, Captain Headlam, T. E. Pilk ingtou, J. Berkeley, H. Heard. J I. Pollard-Urquhart, W. Bethell, Richard Heathy, D. O'Connor Portal, N. Bland, L. Herbert, H. A. Potter, R. Brady, John Herbert, Sidney Power, N. Bramston, T. W. Hervey, Lord Alfred Price, W. P. Bright, John Hey. orth, L. Ricardo, 0. Brotinn ton, Joseph Howard, Lord E. Rolt, P. Brown, H. Hume. Joseph Russell, Lord J. Browne, V. Hutchins, E. Russell, F. C. Byng, G. H. Charles Hutt, William Russell. F. W. Charteris, F. Keating, Robert Sadleir, J. Cobden, Richard Kennedy, Tristram Scholefleid, W. Cockburn, Sir Alez. Keogh, William Scully, Francis Cocks; Thomas S. Langston, J. 11. t-cully, V. Corbally, M. Lascellps, E. Seymour, W. D. Crook, J, Lawless, C. Shee, William Crowder, R. Lucas, F. Strutt, E. Devereux, J. T.. Mackie, J. Sullivan, N. Duffy, C. li`Cann, J. Swift, Richard Fagan, W. Massey, W. N. Thicknesse, R. A. Fitzgerald, Sir J. Meagher, Thomas Towneley, C. Forster, C. Miall, Edward Vernon.G. E. H. Fortescue, C. Mimer, W. M. E. Villiers, Hon. C. Fox, W. J. Molesworth, Sir W. Walmsley, Sir J. Freestun, Colonel Menai, Lord Wellesley, Lord C. French, Fitzsteptmn Monsell, W. Wickham. H. W. Gladstone, William Moore, G. 11. Wilcox, B. Glyn, George Carr Musgrave, Earl Williams, W. Gooderich, Vls. Murrongh, J. P. Wilson, Jmes Goodman, Sir G. O'Brien, C. Youug, Six P. • Grace, 0. O'Brien, P. Graham, Sir J. O'Brien, Sir T. Greene, J. O'Connell, Maurice Greg son. Samuel O'Flaherty, A. Bowyer, George Grenfell, C. Palmerston, Viscount Murphy, F. S. TILLERS. Cunious FREAK OF INSANITY.—John Rose, an in sane a died ta re rv ee e n d tly him at sel 7'o to she d n e , ath o . ran A ge p C os o t u a nt o y r. h t s e aa m nvei e n x gm am laint i e nation was held, when his stomach reveal e d the following contents : — One large silver tea-spoon, a pair of spectacles, nicely rolled up, and a key or crank used for winding up a clock.—Rochester Union. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —Holloway's Pills.—The wonder ful regenerating effects produced by these invaluable pills are truly astonishing. They act in so pecu liar a manner on the system that by following the directions affixed to each box as to the mode of using them, nervous irritability is allayed, the tone of the stomach strengthened, the digestion improved, freedom of circulation given to •the blood, and a robust state of health attained. Persons of studious and sedentary habits, being more especially liable to the class of dis orders here alluded to, should take Holloway's pills to insure a pod state of health. Sold by all druggists, and at Professor Holloway's Establishment, 244, Strand, London. FROM THE LapON GAZETTE of Y.D 3TERDAY. FOREIGN-OFFICE, MAT 7. The Queen has been pleased to approve i )f M. Pedro Nolasco Casis as Consul in Jamaica for the Republic of New Granada. WHITEHALL, MAY 5. The Right Hon. Sir John Jervis, Knt., Loz .dChief Jus- tice of hei: Majesty's Court of Common Pleas, at Westmin ster, has appointed Alfred Brodhurst, of Wor ksop, in the county of Nottingham, Gentleman, to be one of the Per petual Commissioners for taking the acknowledgments of deeds to be executed by married women, v niter the act passed for the abolition of fines and recoveno 3, and for the substitution of more simple modes of assurC n ce, iu and for the county of Nottingham. ADMIRALTY, MAY 5. Corps of Royal Marines—Second Lieutenant Frederick Herbert Ruel to be First Lieutenant, vice Francis Robert Newton, dismissed the service. COMMISSIONS SIGNED BY THE QI.7ITEN. Warwickshire Militia—Kenneth Mackenzie, Esq., late Captain in the 3d Regiment of Foot, to ba A djutant of the 2d Regiment, to serve with the rank of C. aptain, March 26. Artillery Battalion of the Royal Sussex .M. ilitia—Henry Thomas Settle, Gent., to be Adjutant, from. the 9th April. 4th or Royal South Midcllesex Regiment of Militia — James Prosser, Gent., to be Adjutant, April 26; BANSII,UPTCY ANNULLED Collingwood Tully, shipowner, Sunderlamil. BANKRUPTS. Pichard Peniatan, draper, Staverton-D9w ' Walworth, to surrender, May 20, at eleven, and July 2, at half-past one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Guildhall-chambers, Basinghall-street ; Scle, Turner, and Turner, Aldermanbury. Edward Theobald Blakely, shawl manufacturer, Nor wich, May 20, at twelve, and July 2, at hal f-past twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee, Guildhall-chambers Basinghall-street; Solo, Turner, and Turner, Aldermanbury. Thomas Matthew Bowden, basket maker, Old Brentford, Middlesex, May 21, at eleven, and June 17, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Ba singhall-street ; Laurence, Plows, and Boyer, Old Jewry chambers. George Hunter, chemist, Leeds, May 24, and June 20, at half-past eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Hope, official assignee, Leeds ; Middleton, Leeds. William Colman, horsedealer, Chesterford, May 19, at half-past twelve, and June 23, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Bell, official assignee, ileman-street buildings ; Pillans, Swaffham ; Lawrancc, Flews, and Boyer, Old Jewry Chambers. Benjamin Lamplough, woollen draper, Doncaster, May 28 and June 25, at ten, at the Leeds District Court. Brewin, official assignee, Sheffield ; Blackburn, Albion street, Leeds. William Alfred Spariow, metal broker, Liverpool, May 23 and June 13, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court. Cazenove, official assignee, Liverpool ; Tyndall, Liverpool. Joshua Taylor, loom cloth ma nufacturer, Manchester, May 23 and June 13, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court. Pott, official assignee, Manchester ; Heath, Man chester. Isaac Barnett, watchmaker, Napier-street, Ashley-ter race, City-road, May 19, at half-past eleven, and June 20, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Bell, official assignee, Coleman-street Buildings ; Stopher, Cheapside. DIVIDENDS. At the Court, Basinghall-street. A. Clark, Bear-garden, Southwark, plumber, May 31, at two—H. Ashton and S. Spriggs, otherwise S. S. Spriggs, Aldermanbury, warehousemen, May 31, at two—J. Gibbs, Jermyn-street, St. James's, scrivener, MaT 31, at one— J. Bell, Ludgate-hill, tailor, May 31, at one. In the Country. W. Donald, Hayton, Cumberland, cattle-dealer, at the Court, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, June 1, at twelve—R. H. Bell, South Shields, Durham, paper manufacturer, at the Court, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, June 1, at eleven— G. Town son, Church Whalley, Lancashire, plumber, at the Court, Manchester, June 3, at twelve. PAYMENT OF DIVIDENDS. L Orrell, Radcliffe, Lancashire, cotton manufacturer, 3s. 10d., any Tuesday, between ten and one, at the office of Mr. Lee, Manchester. A Chadwick, Burnedge, and Fair View, Lancashire, cotton-spinner, 7 1-16 d., any Tuesday, between ten and one, at the ofce of Mr. Lee, Manchester. J. Roberts, AberystwithCardiganshire, draper, ls. 6d., any Wednesday, between eleven and one, at the office of Mr. Miller, Bristol. A. Crossfield, Ty Mawr, GlamorganBhire coal-miner and merchant, Is. 3d., any Wednesday, between eleven and one, at the office of Mr. Miller, Bristol. W. Davison, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, mun-maker, 10s., any Saturday, between ten and three, at office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. J. Beaumont, Leman-street, Whitechapel, engineer, 3s. 4d, on Thursday, May 12, and three following Thurs days, between eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Stans feld, Basinghall-street. J. Keele and R. J. Bisdee, Riches-court, Lime-street, merchants, 21-,d., Thursday, May 12, and three following Thursdays, between eleven and two, at the office of Mr. Graham, Coleman-street. NOTICES OF CERTIFCATES. At the Court, Basinghall-street. F. R. Graham, Fleet-street, licensed victualler, June 2, at two. In the Country. J. Bottomley, Marton, Lincolnshire, corn-factor, at the Town-hall, Kingston-upon-Hull, June 22, at twelve— W. B,oyston, Manchester, builder, at the Court, Man chester, June 2, at twelve—N. Crook, Preston, Lancashire, tailor and woollen-draper, at the Court, Manchester. Juno 3, at twelve. CERTIFICATES GRANTED, W. Haslett, Ronson, Kent, dealer in hay and corn, cer tificate of the third class—S. J. Dean, Chelmsford, leather seller, certificate of the second class—L. England, Shep perton-street, New North-road, Islington, builder, certifi cate of the second class—D. Gibson, Newcastle-upon• Tyne, grocer, certificate of the third class—W. Davison, New castle-upon-Tyne, gun maker, certificate of the second class. _ PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. ' W. F. Ellis and J. Clare, Liverpool, builders—W. T. Scott and L. Rose, Philpot-lane, wholesale spirit mer chant— J. Michael and A. I. Marks, Sunderland, mer chants—J. Geiger and B. Morris, Half-moon-passage, Whitechapel, cigar and snuff manufacturers — W. Cowell and Adam Bullough, Charlesworth, Derbyshire, cotton spinners—J. Spottiswoode, David Robertson, and J. Mait land, Great George-street, Westminster, parliamentary agents—S. Garratt and E. Miley, Maley, Cheshire, brew ers—J. Hearne, sen., F. Jackson, F. Hearne, and F. Hearne, jun., Great Charlotte-street, Blackfriars-road, carpenters (so far as regards F. Hearne and F. Hearne, jun.)—F. Davies and E. S. Willett, Pershore Worcestershre, surgeons—W. Duckworth, sen., and W. Duckworth, jun., Liverpool, architects—J. and H. Pearce and S. Drew, Mount Tavy-road, Tavistock, Devonshire, iron and brass founders—C. R. Morehead and R. D. Morehead, Kingston-upon-Hull, painters—W. Goul stone and J. Seaman, and S. Garratt, Northside Colliery, Bedminster; Bristol, coal miners—R. Lewis and J. Dickin, Chester, and Wrexham, Denbighshire, brewers and tan ners—J. Gentle and J. Harrison, Bourn ' Lincolnshire, plumbers—T. Fletcher. J. Whewell, J. Clegg, and J. Morton, Low Crompton, Lancashire, coal proprietors—J. Shaw and S. Stead, Huddersfield and Morley, booksellers J. Clark and T. Young, Old Fish-street-hill, rag merchants and stationers—B. and J. L. Stinson, Brierly-hill, Staf fordshire, wine and spirit merchants. INSOLVENT PETITIONERS. Samuel C. Mellor, Uttoxeter, agent to a fire and life as surance office. David Kemp, Aldringham, Suffolk, blacksmith. Henry Bloomfield, Framlingham, Suffolk, innkeeper. John Smith, Southolt, Suffolk, innkeeper. Thomas Rodwell, Wetheringsett, Suffolk, bricklayer and carpenter. Robert Dykes, Eye, Suffolk, cooper. William Olding, South Stoneham, Hampshire, carpenter. Thomas Lusted, jun., Bletchingley, Surrey, shoemaker. George Goddard, Limpsfield, Surrey, grocer. Peter Cooley, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, fish-curer. John Tabberner, Hanbury, Staffordshire, blacksmith. SCOTCH SEQUESTRATIONS. A. Gardner, Clarkston, near Airdrie, Wright, to meet May 13, and June 3, at one, within the Globe Hotel, Glasgow. P. Levy, Edinburgh, furrier, to meet May 17, and June 7, at two, within Dowells and Lyon's Rooms, Edinburgh. S. Willet, Maxwelltown, Kirkcudbright, wood merchant, to meet May 16, and June 6, at one, within. the King's Arms, Maxwelltown. SHIPPING INTELLIGENCE. CUSTOM-HOUSE, MAY 10. ENTERED INWARDS.—The Kate, from Sydney , ' ; South ampton, Calcutta ; Caroline, Jamaica • Amicitia, De merara ; Orator, Mauritius ; Captain, Trinidad ; Neptune, Buenos Ayres ; Thomas Campbell, China ; Heen, Trini dad ; Akbar, China ; Bell, Mauritius ; Flora, Agger Canal ; Arrow, Sines ; Ysabel, St. Michael's ; Opgaande sol ; Jantina, Stettin ; Vercia, Stolpemunde ; Peger, Ithaca ; Osiris, Memel ; Petrel, Oporto ; Charlotte, Maran ham ; Georgiana, Smyrna ; Fortunatus, Dantzic ; Flora, Lisbon ; Emilia, Tarragona ; Jane Sawyer, Marseilles. ENTERED OUTWARDS FOR LOADING.—The Derwent, for Hobart Town ; Clara, Swan River ; Caroline, Ja maica ; Governor Maclean, Cape Coast Castle ; Helen, Trinidad ; Southampton, Calcutta ; Phoenix, Port Philip ; Amalia, Konigsberg ; Carlotta, Lagos (Africa) ; Caroline, Stettin; Rapid, Elsinore ; Venus, Drontheim. CLEARED OUTWARDS WITH CARGO.—The Magdalena, for Adelaide, South Australia • Niagara, Sydney ; Lady Valiant, do. ; Alice, Jamaica • Faithful, Geelon g ; Ph oen i x , Port Philip • Speedwell, Antwerp ; St. Maria, Memel. ; Admiral, Antwerp. LIVERPOOL, MAY 10. --- A waterlogged and abandoned vessel, apparently colonial built, painted blue, topgallant bulwarks black, and with a small red ribband round her, with only one stump of fore mast standing, and one anchor hanging to her bow, was passed, April 27, lat. 48 N., long. 18 W., by the William Peile, arrived here. The Leonard Dobbin was 'spoken, lat. 47 N. long. 25 W. The Sir Ri c h ar d J ackson, Clyde to Valparaiso, was spoken, March 17, l a t. 2 S ., l ong. 18 W. The Gomelza was spoken, lat. 1 N., long. 10 W. The Jane Sparks, Bombay •to Glasgow, was spoken, April 28, lat. 48 N., long. 17 W. The Standard, Liverpool to St. Andrew's, was spoken, April 28, lat. 48 N., long. 17 W. The Glencairn, St. Ives to Quebec, was spoken, April 30, lat. 51 N., long. 10 N. VESSELS SPOKEN WITH. The Marchmont, Bombay to Liverpool, March 26, off St. Helena. . The Oriental, Calcutta to Liverpool, April 4, lat. 2 S., long. W. The Catharina, Liverpool to Adelaide, S.A., April 2 6 , lat. 50 N., long. 8 W. The Arno, Dartmouth to Valparaiso, March 11. The Countess of Durham, Callao to Queenstown, April 12, lat. 25 N., long. 49 W. The Jamsetjee Cursetjee (English ship), Bombay to Liverpool, Feb. 24, lat. 15 S., long. 7 W. The Nimrod, Bristol to New York, April 24, lat. 42 N., long. 17 W. The Katandin, Cardiff to New Orleans, March 15, lat. 30, long. 39. The John Ritson, of London, bound S., Feb. 28, lat. 22 S., long. 29 W. The Childe Harold, London to Sydney, same day. The Edward Paget, London to Auckland, New Zealand, April 8, lat, J. 0,, 101 1 8* 2 8 W. ELECTION COMMITTEES. --May 10. PLYMOUTH. The Chairman announced that the committee Ira come to the following resolutions : That Robert Porret Collier Esq., is duly elected( a burgess to serve in Parliament , for the borough of Itr mouth. That Charles John Mare, Esq., is not duly elected. burgess to serve in the present Parliament for the seta borough. That the said election is a void election so far as no" gards the return of the said C. J. Mare, Esq. That it was proved to this committee that the s: ltf ;VI C. J. Mare, Esq., was by himself and his agents gui of bribery at the last election for the said borough, bf promising employment and situations to electors of lb ° said borough, with a view of influencing their votes. That it was proved to this committee that Geoi Kna man was bribed by the said C. John M are, Es q:y and Joseph George Churchward, by promising to lig their influence to obtain him a situation in the Excise.. That Robert Shiers was bribed by the said Geo rll° Churchward, by the promise of a situation in the C tty toms for his son-in-law, Wm. Henry Bromwich. That Wm. King was bribed by the said Joseph Geo - L' 3° Churchward, by the promise of employment. That Wm. Geach, being an elector for the said borou gli; was promised employment for his son by the said Cha tie John Mare, Esq., when the said Charles John Mare °'s • 1 • a candidate for the said borough. i na That an attempt was made by Geo. Men nie Nicholas Sumpter to influence the vote of Samuel Ile all_ Lewis Medlar, by the offer of an appointment for 10' son if he would vote for the said Chas. John Ma r!! Esq. ; and that the offer so made was communicated to and adopted by, the said Chas. John Mare, Esq. 01 • That on the second day of the sitting of th is cc 1. mittee the said Chas. John Mare, Esq., by his counr to d declared that he should no longer defend his s eat, that the counsel for the petitioners upon that did not p r, teed with the evidence, and that the reasons O gg , ' 6 :: by the counsel for taking that course appeared to this ° II mittee to be sufficiently justified. m ittee That there has been submitted to this coin list containing the names of 29 electors who were allee.:l to have been bribed at the last election for the saaa borough by promises of employment and situations; 3 which list only five cases have been investigated ; also a list of eleven persons who were charged 11 having made the same promises. l o re That considering the nature and extent of the allegations, this committee thi n k it th e i r d u ty to 7;.01 mend that a further investigation shall be mou e mg , regard to bribery at th e sa id e l ec ti on , i n the Ms" j :,/, prescribed by the sth and 6th Victoria, cap. 1 02, °e ,,i° l That this committee does no t see an y su fficient 1 % 03 - to offer any recommendation with regard to the sti s r sion of the issue of a new writ for the said borough: Ai -re An application was made by the petitioners to d7 v4 o, the opposition to the petition frivolous and vexatl°ecl but the committee refused it. They, however, decialla the petition against Mr. Collier's return frivolous al vexatious. COUNTRY MARKETS. LIVERPOOL—MAY 10. There was a large attendance of country miller s -; cNI dealers at our Corn-exchange this morning, who pur e te nt, of the general rims of American wheat to a fair ei paying fully last Tuesday's prices. Choice samP leg j white and red being scarce, could not be bought under d, c l per bushel advance. Flour sold readily, and corow a l o l, full prices. Oats Ad. per bushel, and oatmeal 9d. Pe r co al higher. Beans improved ls. per qr. White ludo° 6d. per qr. dearer. Yellow corn scarce, and held D l ' ;01 qr. higher. American white corn 30s. 6d. to 315 " this yellow 325. 6d. per 4801bs. The improved position °d to t market may be attributed to a large country demsl i small supply. IPSWICH-MAY 10. r e ' l ' s With a limited attendance at market, and a va ry Of V net supply of wheat, th e p r i ces l a t e l y rea li se d c ould 0. maintained t o -d a y, an d th ey gave way a b ou t ls• P n 0 The ungenial weather for the growing crops is much % ti t yd of, and it will be a trying y ear f or th e w h ea t plant t° 1 1 isg up against. The cold weather continuing e nable o s 1115 :101 still to be carried on ; hen ce a f ew sam ples f '5 realised 31s. to 355. per qr. g s• PER QUARTER.. l'E a Q U 't it r 3 ,0 06 Wheat, red (old) 4os to 43s B ar l e y, gr i n di ng ... " 6 -, c) P I Ditto (new) . 30 Ditto, white (new) 468 to 52s Peas Ditto (old) Barley, malting ... 30s to 35s Flour, per sack AVERAGES FOR THE WEER ENDING MAY 7, 18 53 . Wheat Barley Oath OO 00S OCI Beans Peas M HLL—AY 1. To-day's market was U ell a well attanded by farmers! o e showed little disposition to be influenced by Mark- Pa 3 reports, and we can report no alteration in the best ru sor they did not offer samples at all freely. A. fair sale ~ good foreign. The import of barley goes off sumption, without a concession of more than Is. Per .4. Oats a better sale. Beans ls. dearer. In peas little de 17 0 Not much business in linseed, but a fair consump demand for cakes. Rapeseed very firm, but cakes vm,, r turn lower. Arrivals of bones are short, and 2s. 6d. r well for 4 , 4. ton dearer. The following are th 3 present prices of grain s NI Peas, Di Linseed, tt gr a Y Black ala d S e black a. . . 3 4 3 6 ro , 2, 4 Il i Ditto nitto KPootnelig.s.bbue:gghan..d 40 to::: Riga and Arch- 44 a ngc a. Memel 3B t ‘ j. re r 'G o a Lins. c, Hull 7/ lOs to of Os 0 . Ditto fine for. 71 5 3 Od ° n i l es Ditto inf. for 6/ 150 to v i Of Rapeseed 261 105 to 0000• Rape cakes 'Tares, English ... 3 60 t° 4 00 Ditto foreign ..... 35a to 00 Guano . ii .91 to V l ,,ga B ones 1020 6d to Iv 4 °9; RP Meal .................. /1 s Wheat, English, red 46 to 48 Ditto white 47 to 49 Dautzic and Konigs berg Pomeranian and Ham- burgh Danish, Holstein, and FrieSland 42 to 44 Russian and Odessa 40 to 43 Oai,s, English Ditto Danish Ditto Friesland Ditto Russian lB to 19 Barley, malting Ditto grinding 27 to 28 Beans Ditto foreign Peas, white and yel 36 to 40 CORK-31.4.y 9. Brla. Curre 4o lici h ose, White wheat 00s Od to OOs Od Os Oci—' Red.wheat 00s Od to 00s 0:1 , 0 do. Ditto OOs Oct to OOs Od OOs o a -2 Ditto OOs Od to OOs Od 27 Barley l2s 3d to 13s 4d Ditto OGs Oct to 00s Od ON Od- -16d°. Ditto OOs Od t o OO s Od Bero OOs Od to 00s Od Os Oa 56 Oats ..... do. Ditto OOs Od to OOs Oil 00s Od Ditto 00s 03 to oos i r ClC t ‘ Pigs OF BUTTER. CANT. CIIIINNNOT. First quality lo4s First quality ............... F9O Second quality Third quality 9ss Third quality ......••• Fourth quality Fifth quality B4s Fifth quality ............... b/ Sixth quality 66s Sixth quality .............. Quantity sold at the highest prices here; 00 barrels white wheat ; 7 red ; 5 barley; ov oats ; 0 pigs. Quantity of grain and number of pigs sold last Nrs ei ‘"l,37 6 ' Wheat, 51. Barley, 341. Bere, 00. Oats , • Pigs, 00. Return of cattle sold for week ending May 7 Pigs, 204. Sheep, 341. Cows, 2 9 . t I o o ' P CORK.—Flour— Fi rs t, 15 s Od t o 16 s Od ; extra, t hir seconds, 14s Od to 14s 6d ; h ouse h o ld s , lO s to 13s " 80;3'%,t 7s Od to 10s per cwt. Meal—lndian meal, 7s ed °_, r 0 1 ;1 oatmeal, lOs 6d tolls ; w h ea t mea l , 9 s 6d to 10s 8 9 . 00 t Indian corn, 71 5s Od t o 71 17 s 6d per t on. Bran, 3 '. v erAir! to 4/ 15s Od per ton. H ay —F armers, 3 0s Od t o 42s Od; 40/1",, 355; dealers, 38s Od to 50s Od ; average, Os per ton. p ro s od Farmers, 16s Od to 26s Od ; average, 20s ; dealers , 00s Od ; average, Os. p er t on . B rea d—Wh ea ten low, 941 Oct ; household ditto, 6(1 to Oct per 41b.—Fresh but ild per lb. Eggs, 4s Od to 4s 23 per hundred. i1 e t.15 , ,i 4id to 8d ; mutton, sid t o 7d ; veal, 5d to 8d ; PZifo ro n. 6d ; bacon, 7d to 8d ; s ausages, 6d per v :ke: land, 111. Os to 121 Os per ton ; Scotch herrings , r, ra,6o Red, do., 30s per brl.—Potatoes white, 10d to l' a do,', / 12d to 15d.—Coals, Newport, 21 ' s ; Lydney, 215; galled Od per ton.—Whiskey, 25 0.p., 6s 10c1 per iroPe ria A. Hides, market, 30s to 36s ; Salted, 30s to 38s Pe r , r to' skins, 3dd per lb.—Bangor slates 21. 17s. 6d to 3 1 . ri; 011 . , Fleece wool, OOs to 00s per stone.—Hemp, 38/ ':„110/ :7 0 d, ton—Timber, Memel, 31. 158 ; red pine, 31. 1 5 s ; 's, ss. per ton ; deals, 191. to 20/. ;per hundred.-"':„..fior,, Si. to 101.10 s. per ton.—Tallow, 48s 6d to 49s per 01 1 1.00 1 71. lOs to 0/. per cwt.- Tar, Archangel, 19s. Per br Peruvian, 121. Os to 001. per ton. COURSE OF EXCHANGE—YEsT g3PAI. 5 09 6 Amsterdam....... • • .... 11 16% Gibraltar .. •• •• *• : 5 3 5 Ditto, three months .. 11 18 Leghorn .• •• •• •• . Rotterdam ...... •• 18% Genoa ...• •• •• •• •• • Antwerp .............. 25 27% Milan .. •••• •• " .• 4 1 Brussels .............. 25 273¢; Venice •• •• •• • 11 5 liamburgh ............ 13 8%; Naples .. •• •• •• •" •. .••• 1 15 ~ Altoua. ................ 5 74 Ditto, throe months • • 25 27 1 % Marseilles. .. • .... 25 30 Bourdeaux ............ Fra nktort-on•Maine .... 120% Vienna .. • • ............ 10 55 Trieste •• .. 10 57 Petersburgh.. • 37% Madrid ................ 51% Cadiz .................. 50% Barcelona.. .. Palermo •• •• •' ...• - 53)i Messina •• •• • ..•• 637. Lisbon „ ,„ ...• •• •• Oporto .. •• • • •• • • • Rto JAPOIrO • • • • • • • • • Buenos Ayres.• • • •,• New York, 6 0 daYs eigh t ••"' 0 1 Philadelphia •• • • ••_," i P RICES Or RULLIOP•at 11 0 F ore i g n Gold in Bars 0.0 0 Portugal Gold Cola '* 0 0 Mexican Dollars •• •• 0 0 I S New Dollars ••. " 0 Silver in bars ... 1 0 l Oaw ► e ILONDON Printed and Published by 30711 e. i• of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun otil Strand, in the Precinct of the Sa.y,cp t h. • Itaddlesess Wednooda, MAY 11l W. BIRTHS. '0" park, OF A BON. t On the Bth inst., at 5, Albany-terrace, 1 12, l r°);.• 1. the widow of F. H Medhurst, Esq., Kipp shire. * A. ' OF A DAUGHTER. E (jpa, On the Bth inst., the wife of the Rev- J. F.S.A., vicar of St. Helen's, Bishopsgate. ft' MARRIED. >to S e a le' On the 7th inst., at Brighton, George , son. o , f ,„i th d: 5° 0 1: Mackeson Esq., of Hythe, Kent, Esqcte:f COP° younger daughter of J. T. Clement, lodge, Westbourne-grove. ' DIED. 10-11" l On the Bth inst., at Laurel-house, ru tlie' t h• a o°' of Tinkler, Esq., aged 78 On the Bth inst., LI Bilighton, 1 3,01) ""' - ir r e Charles S. Butler, Esq., M.P., aged 12. Boberb So On the Bth inst., at Dover, William Esq., aged 74. —,,rflia -A THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MAY 11, 1853.