The Sun. — London, England, 1832-06-15 00:00:00

be called to the bar, this answer to them might be—' you have 1) al t been in gaol"—(A laugh)—and yet these two Hon. Gentlemen were thought good enough to repre sent Westminster, beside one of them being one of his Ma jesty', Ministers. In his opinion the law much wanted reforming, though he did not expect to see that Reform take place in the present Perliantent. The Hon. and Learned Member for Stafford seemed to think that all lawyers were ex-officio honourable ; but he (Mr. H.) very much douloed that. It was not, in his opinion, honour able that the sons of Judges always got on better iu West minster Hall than other young beginners ; it was not, in his opinion, honourable that the present Lord Ellenbo rough should receive a sum of money from every suitor that went into the Court of King's Bench. Mr. LENNARD thought that if the Benethers were a privat e society, it would be unfair to press any individual upon them ; but the execution of their official duty con cerned the public; and, therefore, the public had a right to inqui re. Mr. J. WILLIAMS did not think that the case stated call e d for any interference on the part of the House. Mr. HARVEY rose to reply. The Hon. Member expressed himself gratified at the opportunity which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (the Attorney-General) had afforded him of explaining his conduct. The distance of time that had elapsed since the cause of his complaint eccurred, which had been used as an argument against him, was, he was prepared to show, an arffument strongly in his favoer. It was true that the inquiry took place in 1 822, but it was likewise true that until 1826, he had no teat in the house, and was in no condition of prosecuting the matter satisfactorily. He conceived that evety Gen tleman who heard him would sympathize with him when avowing his sense of the difficulty of bringing forward personal statements, and those, too, against persons in authority. He would further acknowledge that, until the present Parliament, and until a late period of this Parlia silent, he was of opinion that to bring his motion forward would be to subject it to an instant negative. Yet he could assure the House that he had not slumbered. When the law commission was appointed, he wrote to its 'Mem bere, who had consulted him on certain legal subjects, and implored them to remedy the system by which he bad been aggrieved. The secretary replied, that the commis sioners did not consider the practice as coming within the scope and purpose of their appointment. An eminent !statesman, Mr. Canning, had expressed a wish for in quiry to the Attorney -General of the day, and the result of the inquiry vvas—that there was no remedy. The un generous manner of the present Attorney-General obliged him to touch upon some points on which he should other wise have declined to enter. He would ask for what place did he sit as a representative in that House? He had no mercenary seat, but had been returned by the spirit of affectionate kindness and hatred of oppression in defiance of great wealth and influence. For five successive times had he been so returned, and might he not be allowed to call this five vindications, being, as he was, a man ; of humble station —on e who not wish to throw his lowly fortunes into the shade, but was proud to stand by the section of the community to which he belonged.— (Cheers.) He had not appealed to his constituents on politi cal grounds—he had appealed to them on the persecutions to which he had been exposed, and he had been elected, not as the delegate of any party, but as art honest repre sentative of the people, determined fearlessly to do his duty. He would say that the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had on this occasion acted a part unbecoming himself. He had stated that he had been one of his counsel, and he was now his enemy.—(Hear.) Who, he would ask, was the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's colleague in the case ? Why, the present Lord Chancellor, who had not been _twenty-four hours on the woolsack until he had appointed h Comm (llr. Harvey) to the S ecretarys hi p o f t h e Ch ar ity , ission. Thus had the abler of hie two advocates testified his opinion of his conduct, and he would rest upon that testimony. He would now advert to the two cases iis n which he had been concerned. These cases were tried 181 0, and in 1813 he was admitted as a law student in the face of a full knowledge of the facts. In ISIS he I jwas admitted to enter into fellowship. Why were not ob ections made at either of these periods ? But no ; his money Was taken, his bond was received, he dined in the same hall with the Benchers for three years, and not an opposing word was advanced until his title was perfected, and until h e h all abandoned lucrative profession. He was an attorney, and attorneys were amenable to the rules of the Court of King's Bench, yet no intimation had been made to that Court to exercise its summary jurisdiction against him. No charge had been preferred there, because it was known that he must be called upon to speak to facts upon oath. He would maintain that the opposition he had experienced was entirely a political and party proceeding —the triumph of on inquisitorial and irresponsible body over individual character and for tune. 'With respect to the two cases. The first was a case in which he (Mr. Harvey) was plaintiff, and a Mr. Andrews defendant, in which a charge had been brought against him (Mr. Harvey) that he had purloined papers, and he brought his action for slander. The circum stances of that case were such as to entitle him to applause instead of calumny ; but they were not mentioned at the t ime. A n act i on b ad b een brought by Andrews against poor man for money. He (Mr. Harvey) defended the than, and went to Mr. Andrews, on behalf of the man, to try to settl e it. Ile did so, and a day was appointed far carrying the terms of the settlement into effect. He (Mr. Harvey) and his client went to the office of Andrews, and then round that he refused to conclude the agreement. This did not affect him (Mr. Harvey), but Andrews said that he (Mr. Harvey) had taken away the agreement. He thereup on (and lie was a fool for doing so) brought an action against him in the Court of King's Bench ; for Andrew s put his brother into the box, who swore that he saw him take away the paper. The second case was simply this. He could trust his recollection of the circum stances, though twenty years had elapsed, for it had exerted such influence upon his happiness that he could not forget him. A person named Frost, who was older than him, though they were both young men at the time, was entitled jointly with his sister to a small copyhold estate. He asked hint (Mr. Harvey) it he was disposed to buy it of him. He replied he bad no objection, provided his sister would sell her part, and the father would also part with his inte rest. He asked 5001. for it, which he agreed to give. lie mentioned it to his father and sister, and the old man fixed 3001. for his daughter's interest and 1501. for his "In making 4501. for what the son asked 5001. for his part. He agreed to give it, and paid the money. Some time after, a person applied to him (Mr. Harvey) to sell it to him ; and as he had bought it to sell, and as the purchaser was the only person to whom the estate could be valuable, from the contiguity to his own, he (Mr. Harvey) offered to take 5001. for his bargain. Ile agreed to give it, and a regular agreement was preferred. Ther e wer e three agreements between himself and the other parties respecting the estate. This was in 1810. He received the 5001., and the other parties their propor tions. In 1813, there being a running account with this gentleman and himself (Mr. Harvey,) the former went to the very Mr. Andrews whom lie (Mr. Harvey) had pro ,Secuted, to proceed against hint (Mr. Harvey). He brough t his action, and in the course of conversation, 'Peaking of this transaction, Andrews said, " Mr. Harvey g°Ca considerable sum of money for that estate ; you may get h back : no attorney can buy of his client ;" and he a dvised him to get back the 5001. Time action was tried at Chelmsford ; he (Mr. Harvey) applied to have the trial P u t off on account of the absence of a witness, but the Judge refused. The Counsel for the plaintiff chose to cha racterise t hi s transaction as a fraud, stating that he (Mr. Hat eY) had b een emp l oye d to se ll t h e estate f or t h e part i es , , that he had put the SOO/. into his pocket kept it. fraluied.had d one so, be confessed it would have been a gross te e t But was not the ca se . Th e J u d ge would not allow he t o b e put off unless the 500/. was paid into Court hi e and as he had not at that time 500/. in thet,,Poeket, and as nothing would satisfy the plaintiff but called ter"' a verdi c t went aga i nst hi m. Wh en b e w a s the upon to explain this transaction before the Benchers Y had taken the fa c t s from the statement of Counsel, as if be (Mr. of had really been employed to sell the estate for the oth e 3') book, hi, cier , r party. He offered to produce the day- Committee of Comm ie ' K the stamp agent, and the report of the ling that conduct had n Council of Bishopsgate Ward, sta that a man should be taus fitting been strictly upright. Was t . t b The Hon. and Learnedus condemned by a secret tribunal? un sa al i, l l there had been a committee Attorney-General justice would r he second a of lOtbuetion for laying the result of l that inquiry on the table that It House? The Hon. Member concluded by affirming never bad done, and never would do, any thing to tarni s h DI es , the honour of the bar, or the character of a jif:toth_e Legislature. fession, eene K E R could not, in his view of the legal pro down by theytilnenthe gener a l p r i nc i p l es o f L eg i s l at i on l a i c trut vinced of th e hHor. Member. Though he were con his statement, that was not a suffi cient ground to further inquiry :' , l l 'e t a general rule of all cases, after no with in his own cas e e. alle than he had favoured the Houst In voting against his motion, ht gave no opinion on his ease ; he proceeded on the gener a l Principle. The House then divided—, Ayes ................................ 52 Noes ................................. .. .......................... Majority aesainst.iTlZ.;;Z.- ............. — l6 ~Mr.fib HARVEY then moved tit direct the Commissioner, of Inquiaddressry into the procee- of the Courts of Law, to examiue into the rules and pr ,:rice observed at the Innm of Court upon applications o• jytrsons to be called to the h ,r. The ATTORNEY GENERAL said, that after the decision of the House he could not support this to ti on. Mr. HARVEY then withdrew it. BRIBERY LAWS. Lord JOHN RUSSELL move,lforleave to bring in a Bill to repeal the Statutes relative to Bribery and Cor ruptin at the election of 'Members of Parliament, and to nd and render more effectual the liwt relating thereto. Mr. J. CAMPBELL inquired of the Noble Lord whether it was his intention to introduce into this Bill a el lose requiring a Member to take an oath against bribery f re he took his seat ; if not, he gave notice that he should move an instruction to the Committee to that effect. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it formed no part of his Sir R. PEEL observed, that the Noble Lord had told tlie House what the Bill did not contain, but it did not know what it did contain. He thought it would have boon more satisfactory for the House to have heard a short abstract of the contents of the Bill. Lord JOHN RUSSELL thought it more convenient to reserve the explanation till the second reading. Mew hers were generally aware of the previous enactments. Sir R. PEEL thought it ile,irable that the Bill should pass into a law before the next election. Mr. HUNT said that the only chance of preventing bribery at elections was by adopting the vote by ballot. Mr. H. GURNEY approved of the Hill of the Noble Lord, I.ut if the Hou. and Learned Gentleman (Mr. Campbell) persevered in his motion, he should strenuously oppose it. Leave was then given. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that it had been his intention to move for le we to bring in a bill to abolish the punishment of death for forgery, — but as he wished to s iy a few words in explanation, and as the night was far advanced, he thought it better t , ) defer his motion till Thursday. _ _ LOANS IN INDIA. Sir JOHN MALCOLM moved for copies of the corre spondence between the Board of Control and the Court of Directors of the East lodic Company, since May, 1831, on the subject of pecuniary claims of British subjects on the native princes of India. The Hon. and Gallant Of ficer took a view of the pernicious effects of loans, and pecuniary transactions between Europeans and the native princes of India. Mr. R. GRANT, in the absence of his Right Hon. relation, felt it necessary to offer a few words on the sub ject of the motion. There was no wish for any conceal ment on this subject, but he thought that after what he should briefly state, his Hon. Friend would not press the motion. There were only five eases included in the cor respondence to which the motion referred. Of these, the correspondence relating to the first was already before the House, with probably the exception of one letter, written since the correspondence was printed. The second case was under revision before a Committee up stairs, and the temainieg three were pending, and the subject of a curt espondence still going on. It was still unfinished, and not in a state to be submitted to the House. Mr. ASTELL thought that the House should be put in the possesion of all the correspondence, and he therefore would support the motion. Mr. R. GRANT repeated, that there would be no ob jection to lay the correspondence before the House when completed. Sir H. PEEL regretted that there was no tribunal be fore which such matters could could come, instead of a Committee of that House. He hoped that the Charter would not be renewed without having a provision made in this respect. Unl so there was an assurance that the correspondence should be given when complete, he should feel it necessary to support the motion. Lord ALTHORP said, there would be no objection to lay the correspondence before the House when complete. Sir R. PEEL said that, with this assurance from the Noble Lord, he would advise his Hon. Friend not to press the motion. After a desultory conversation, in which Sir C. Forbes, Sir G. Warrender, and Mr. H. Villiers joined, Sir J. Malcolm consented to withdraw his motion. PARTY PROCESSIONS IN IRELAND. Mr. STANLEY then rose, in pursuance of his notice, to move for leave to bring in a Bill to restrain, in certain cases, party processions in Ireland. He hoped that, at that late period of the Session, and with a knowledge of the near approach of one of those periodical processions which it was the object of this Bill to restrain, no Hon. Member would object to his bringing forward his motion at that late hour of the evening. (It was half-past one o'clock.) He acknowledged that the title of his Bill was calculated to awaken constitutional jealousy ; at the same time he contended that in the provisions of the Bill itself, there was nothing to alarm the warmest advocate of the most extensive political liberty. The object of his Bill was not to fetter the manifestation of political opinion in any way whatever. His Bill was directed against those party processions which were connected with religious subjects, and which were calculated to maintain and pro long religious animosities. It would be for the House to decide, after it had made itself acquainted with the details of the measure, whether he had properly characterized its nature and extent. The object of it, he again repeated, was to place certain restrictions on those processions which for a series of years now past had taken place periodi cally,—which arose out of the former collision of religious opinions,—and which produced no other result than an increase of that mutual rancour, which for so long a time had animated the two great religious sects into which Ireland was unfortunately divided. His Majesty's present Government had hoped, and their predecessors in office had also hoped, thst the settlement of the Catholic question would have terminated these displays of religious animo sity; and any Government would have preferred waiting for the happy consummation of that healing measure, — for a healing measure be was certain it would still turn out to be,—to placing restrictions upon those ebulli tions of sectarian feeling which it was the object of this measure to restrain. But the experience of the last three years proved too clearly that no diminution of that ran corous feeling had yet taken place. Year after year the t le he tebullitionsr processions religious festivals eess i n of both p art i es h a d b een mar k e d b y vio nby yf whichreligious ey fee w feeling g distinguished, and scartte scarcely n initiated in Jr l an d w i t h out tumult and bloodshed. Former governments of ter minated governments had issued proclamations warning the people that these proces s i ons were illegal. T men of both parti es h a d exerte d themselv npectable instances had e x er t e d t h emse l ves succ essfeulo" ll Y---lt respectable s in o many instances order to prevent these displays of angry feelings. He knew that several magistrates, who, thought they were themselves enrolled among the Orangemen, had shown tine most marked anxiety to put an end to these processions, which terminated not only in bloodshed for the day, but in the continuation :of animosities for years, he might perhap s say, for generations to come. On the other hand, it was only an act of justice to the Catholic clergy to acknowledge, that they had endeavoured with the most praiseworthy zeal to prevent the display of Catholic feeling on the 17th of March. At the same time both the Orange magistrates and the Catholic clergy were placed by those processions in a situation of delicacy and of difficulty, from which it was the object of this Bid to relieve them. Every one of these processions, as they bad all a tendency to break the peace, was a misdemeanour by the common law ; hut the question which rendered the interference of a Magistrate so difficult, was the question as to the precise moment when these meetings became illegal, The Magistrate must have the oath of an informer, declaring his apprehen sion that a breach of the peace would ensue from them ; and even when that oath was obtained, the Magistrate had to exercise his discretion, lest he should interfere with an assembly that was perfectly legal, or should admit a meet ing to continue which was illegal. The object of his Bill was to define the cases in which these processions were illegal, and therefore punishable as a misdemeanour, and to lay down a line which would enable the Magistracy, by following it, to put an end to such processions when they were illegal. At that late hour of the night it was im possible far him to enter minutely into a description of the details of the Bill. He would merely say, that processions on days set apart for religious festivals, or on days set apart for celebrating party triumphs, arising out of reli gious events, accompanied by banners, badges, and fire arms, of which latter too many of these processions were even wantonly lavish, were circumstances which called for declaratory law rather than an enactment from the legis lature, as an assistance to the Magistracy in the perform ance of those duties, which, he was happy to say, most of the Magistrates were anxious to discharge. He would not enter at that moment into a further description of hiscan is Bill —he would only say t hat it w as a short Bill—but sh ort ly a y s as i s t o, was, n it t d h e e se l r im ve i d ts , he i a t d t at o it b t e ed fu , l t ly o i b n e ve t s h t o ig r a o t u e g d h . ing at the period of the year, and knowing that one of the days for the manifestation of religious feeling was rapidly approaching, he thought that nobody would deny, that it was expedient that Parliament should pronounce au opinion upon processions of this description. He there ore trusted that no objection would be made tot i l e re av mo- I tion with which he should conclude--narnelYr for bring in a Bill to restrain in certain cases party processions irr Ireland. ' Mr. MAXWELL objected to this measure, because it was partial in its application. It ought to extend England a , well as to Ireland ; it ought to apply to the Radicals well as to the Orangemen.—(Hear, from the Opposition.) e Radicals Were quite as much in the habit of marching ire procession as the Oran emen, but the object of they+.• to o parties was very different. The Radicals wished to tip et, the Orangemen to preserve, the institutions of their country.—(Hear.) Mr. RUTHVEN thought that if tl e Government of Ire'and would determine to carry the present law firmly in'o execution, it would be found sufficient to check the evil which the Right Hon. Gentleman had so properly de. flounced. So long, however, as magistrates were allowed to act as reviewing officers of these processions, so long w,uld these processions continue to disgrace and to harass the country. Lord INGESTRIE would not oppose the introduction Hof t`te Bill. He could wish, however, that its application ere extend, 41 in the triode suggested by his Hon. Friend e Member fur Cavan. Colonel PERCEVAL defended the Orangemen at some length, but, at the same time, was an enemy to these pr cessions. Let Ministers do their duty impartially to p rsons of all religions in Ireland ; and if they did that, they would find no difficulty in tranquillizing that country. V." en that was done, he should he happy to lend them his humble assistance to put down all party processions in I: eland. At present, however, he could not support this rn •asure. On the contrary, as it gave encouragement to the agitation and rebellion with which Ireland was so rife, he must meet it with his most strenuous opposition. Mr. SHAW looked upon this measure as a mere mockery of legislation.—( Hear, hear.) It was legislating against a p aticular class, and not for the benefit of the commo nly at large. Why should it not be directed against the r litical unions as well as against the Orange associations ? He would tell the House the reason why. We have seen Noble Lords corresponding, on the most friendly footing, with those unions, which have put down the independence of the House if Lords—(Hear, hear)—and have weakened tl•e stability of the throne itself. (Violent cheering from the Opposition.) We have had processions in Ireland, headed by Catholic priests, taking the most revolutionary course ; and yet we have not seen Government take any measure to put them down. This measure was avowedly brought forward on account of the proximity of the 14th of July. He could not help consi lering it as a measure intended to conciliate the Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry and his friends, and to neutralize the hostility which they felt against the Government, for the opposition which it had given to their plans of Reform. He be longed to no party in Ireland.—(Cheers and laughter.) Ile had never been a party to any procession ; he had ne ver attended any political meeting either in Ireland or else where, except ft r the purposes of his election.—(Cheers and a laugh.) [Mr. Shed, we believe, added, in an under tone, " You have been at Exeter-hall, at the meeting for the e weation of the pour in Ireland."] He admitted such to be the fact; but that was a religious, and not a political meeting.—(A laugh.) As to these religious processions, he had always set his face against them.—(Hear, bear.) Still, with that settled opinion operating on his mind, be could not help denouncing this measure as a partial, un just, and unnecessary measure.—(Cheers.) The Rig ht Hon. Secretary for Ireland had told them—and not many days ago,—that he would not call on the House to arm the Government of Ireland with any extraordinary powers, and now he came forward with an extraordinary measure, and without any case, to put down the Orange societes ; and yet, strange to say, the Right Hon. Secretary bad not taken any steps to put down other processions, which were equally injurious to the public peace.—(Cheers.) He had received a letter from a member of a noble family, who was distinguished for the liberality of his opinions, giving him a description of the seditious proceedings of a large meeting, which had taken place at Dungarvon, in the county of Cork, on the 4th of June, and which, if he might trust to appearances, had not yet attracted, nor was likely to attract, the notice of Government. At that meeting, a Catholic priest, the Rev. Mr. Connell, of Dun healy, near Castle Martyn, had used this language to the populace.--" They may send out the military, but don't be afraid of them, boys; for one half of them are Roman Catholics, and will bite the balls off their cartridges, or if they file upon you, will fire clean over your heads. In future you must pay no tithes, no taxes, no absentee rents. Whenever a distress takes place, you have all of you to attend. You will not do anything. You are even to help to drive the cattle ; but let me see, boys, who dare buy. You are to look on. You are to commit no breach of the law.—(Hear, from Mr. Ruthven.) The Hon. Gentleman was welcome to his cheer, but would he cheer what came next? " But if one beast is sold, then you know, boys, what you are to do."—(Opposition cheers.) He believed that the Hon. Gentleman knew enough of Ireland, to know what construction the hearers of this tirade would put upon it.—(Opposition cheers.) At the same time, 40,000 persons were assembled for the same obj 4'. at Carlow; and a Catholic priest there also told than that they were not to be guilty of any violation of the law,—a piece of advice which was too often given for the purpose of producing quite the contrary effect. But what said this priest afterwards ?—" We are come to take ven geance on our oppressors ;" and then he described the clergy of the Church of Ireland, as individuals who would as readily imbrue their hands in the blood of the people as they would in the blood of wolves.—(Opposition cheers.) This multitude, thus cautiously advised not to commit any breach of the peace, went from the place of their meeting to Dr. Doyle's house, and Dr. Doyle bestowed his blessing upon them. He had received a letter from a relation of his own, informing him, that on that same night 53 bon fires were lighted in the district, and cast a funereal blaze over a space of not less than 20 miles. Ought not Go vernment to put a stop to such meetings, as well as to Orange processions ?---(Hear, hear.) Mr. M. O'CONNELL thought the existing law was suffi cient to put down all illegal meetings, but at the same time he was desirous to see the Bill. Sir R. PEEL must see the Bill before he could pro. nounce any decided opinion upon the subject, and he be lieved that none of the gentlemen who had spoken would object to the Bill being laid on the table. It certainly was a most difficult matter to legislate upon. Mr. SHEIL contended that there was an important distinction between Orange processions and anti-tithe meetings. Blood had repeatedly been shed at the former, whilst at the latter only a passive resistance to the law was manifested. Mr. A. LEFROY adtnitted that there was a difference between the Orange and the anti-tithe meetings, but thought the latter were infinitely the worst. He thought it likely that the powers proposed to be given Government by the Bill would be tyrannically applied in some instances, and therefore he would vote against its introduction if a division should take place. After a few words from Mr. CRAMPTON and Mr. H. GRATTA N in favour of the Bill, Leave was given to bring in the Bill. On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the report on the Division of Counties Bill was taken into further considera. tion, and agreed to ; and the third reading of the Bill was fixed for Monday. The other orders of the day having been disposed of, the House adjourned at a quarter past three o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS, JUNI? 14. Lord DENBIGH presented two petitions, one from Hinckley, praying for the abolition of the punishment of death in cases of forgery, and the other from Chelsea, praying for measures for the better observance of the Lord's Day. Lord RADNOR presented two petitions from Ireland, praying for the abolition of the punishment of death in cesea of felony, where there was no personal violence. Lord KING presented a petition from Lincoln, pray ing for the abolition of punishment by death in cases of felony where there was no personal violence. The M irquess of LANSDOWNE presented a petition from Weymouth, in favour of the system of education in• troduced into Ireland by his Majesty's Government. The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition against that system of education. The Archbishop of CANTERBURY presented a peti tion from the Presbytery of Edinburgh to the same effect. Lord RADNOR presented a petition from a parish in the county of Mayo, in favour of the system. Lord RADNOR presented a petition from the Crawford street Political Union, Manchester, praying the House not to throw any obstacles in the way of his Majesty's Mi nisters carrying into effect the Irish system of education. Lord MELBOURNE presented a petition from Poole, praying for a revision of the Criminal Laws. Lord KING, in rising to present a petition which he held in his hand, had a few observations to make. The petition was on the subject of tithes. On the last occasion on which he presented a similar petition, he was asked a question by a Rev. Prelate on the subject. He would now take the liberty of putting the question to the Right Rev. Prelate—" Was the Church and tithe property originally the gift of pious persons for the support of religious worship ?" if it was, the use of it had been grossly perverted. If it was not, but an impost laid on property by the State for the support of the public ser vants, thin it was a tax imposed by the Crown, and liable to be interfered with by the Crown, or by the Legislature at pleasure. It bad been interfered with on various occasions. It was a tax not on the land itself, but on the produce of the land—a tax of the worst nature; and suppose the Bishops were to forsake their religious duti es , an d b ecome p o liti ca l p re lates, anti suppose upon some great question, they were to render themselves in the vote they gave so odious to the public as be unable to show themselves in the street— , u pose that his Majesty's Government might 11 .1 it expedient to deprive the Bishops of a seat in that ll , use—nay, even to alter the Church, and convert it into a Presbyterian institution altogether.—would the Bishops not either have to alter their princi ples, or to give up their claims entirely to tithes ? His Lordship then laid upon the table a petition from Beaminster against tithes. The Bishop of LONDON thought it inconvenient to raise incidental discussions upon the presentment of peti tions when the whole subject of tithes would probably sn-n come before them. He should, therefore, simply eon tent himself with denying that he ever asserted that Legislature had not a right to interfere for the regula t;oii of Church property, or to take care that the holders it did their duty. SENTENCE OF DEATH BILL. At the earnest request of Lord TENTERDEN, the second rr.iding of the Sentence of Death Bill was postponed till this day se'nnight. NORWICH ASSIZES. Lord SUFFIELD moved the second reading of the Norwich Assizes Bill. The Duke of GRAFTON observed, that if the removal of the Assizes was requisite, the Judges had the power to remove them, as they had done from Horsham to Lewes. An Act of Parliament for the purpose, therefore, was un ne,.essary ; and he concluded by moving, as an amend ment, that the Bill be read a second time this day six months. The Earl of ROSEBERY supported the Bill. Lord TENTERDEN stated, tbat one of the arguments fur the Bill was _without foundation. That argument was, th it capital felonies could not be tried at Norwich, except by the Judges of Assize. That was a mistake ; for it had b en decided by all the Judges, that by the charter of the city of Norwich, the magistrates there had the power to by capital felonies ; and if prisoners remained long without trial, that was the fault of the magistrates. It was much better, however, if the removal was to take place, that it should be effected by the Legislature, instead of by the Judges. The House divided on the question that the word " now" stand part of the question. Content Not content Majority . The Bill was then read a second time. GRAVESEND PIER BILL. Lord WYNFORD moved that the Committee up stairs on the Gravesend Pier Bill should be postponed from to morrow till the day following. BILL FOR RENDERING UNNECESSARY THE VACATING OF SEATS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS BY MEMBERS ON THEIR AP POINTMENT TO CERTAIN MINISTERIAL OF FICES. The Marquess of NORTHAMPTON moved the second reading of the Bill for repealing so much of the Act of Settlement passed in the reign of Queen Anne, as rendered _ _ it necessary for Members of the House of Commons to vacate their seats on being appointed to certain Ministerial offices under the Crown. This measure was intimately connected with the great measure of Reform which had lately become the law of the land. This measure was certainly one of very considerable importance, and he felt the weight of the consideration, that it, to a certain extent, interfered with the Act of Settlement. But he thought that such a measure as this became highly expedient since the settlement of the great question of Reform, and he was happy that that question had been settled by the Government which had brought in the measure. It was certainly much better that the question should have bee❑ settled by the authors of the Reform Bill, who deemed the measure expedient and necessary, than by others who were adverse to it. At the same time, lie intended to have pro posed some Amendments in the Reform Bill, and this was one of them, and he had been induced to postpone it only on the understanding that it would be carried into effect by a specific Bill. The arguments which bad been urged in support of the expediency of Members vacating their seats on their appointment to office appeared to him to have very little weight, and then the inconvenience was often very great. When a Member of the other House of Parliament was appointed to a high Ministerial office, he must often be in some degree ignorant of the details of the office, and it might be of very great importance that h e should not be prevented, by attending a distant elec tion, from directing his immediate attention to these de tails. This inconvenience was often great even in the event of the appointment of an individual to office, but the in convenience must be greatly increased on the change of an entire administration. Then it might often happen that matters of the very highest importance might require im mediate attention at the very moment when, by vacating his seat and attending to his reelection, the newly-elected Minister could not attend to these matters. Suppose, for instance, that business of the utmost importance, in re spect of the foreign relations of the country, were depend ing at the time of the appointment of a new Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs—suppose that - matters of the greatest importance in relation to our Colonial affairs were depending at the time of the appointment of a new Colonial Secretary ; and suppose that the Home Secretary were changed at a moment of great excitement, such as took place about three weeks ago—in all these cases it was obvious that the necessity for vacating their seats, and having themselves reelected, must be attended not merely with inconvenience, but with serious danger. This necessity might also interfere with the free choice of the Crown, since some Members of the House of Conn• mons, the most fit for office, might be induced to decline accepting office on account of the necessity for vacating their seats. The inconvenience to the public might also be very great—more particularly at a period of dangerous excitement. Suppose a new Administratio❑ were ap pointed, and that they should not be able to keep their seats for a week after the reelection of those of the House of Commons which formed part, then another Adminis tration must be appointed, and another vacating of seats and reelection must take place. In this manner delay after delay would take place, and the business of Govern ment might be suspended for weeks, even when an im portant measure like the Reform Bill was depending._. Such was the mischief and inconvenience of the present system, and that mischief and inconvenience would be greatly increased under the operation of the Reform Bill. As to the arguments against this alteration, it had been said that this was a great constitutional provision, and that it ought not to be infringed. But a great change in the Constitutio❑ had been already made. Then it was said that it was important that Members of the House of Commons should be returned to their constituents on taking office, because they became less independent. In his opinion they not only did not become less indepen dent, but they became more independent, for instead of followers of parties, they became leaders. Besides, when the Members were originally elected, the electors must be retty well aware whether their chosen representative was likely to take a prominent part in the public councils. Then it was said that vacating and reelection was a good test and criterion of popularity. But the criterion was absurd and fallacious, for popularity and unpopularity with a particular set of electors was no criterion of general popularity. This was already manifested in the case of the President of the Board of Trade, and several other cases which happened in the course of the last election. That could never be a good criterion which so often led to erroneous conclusions. The Bill was meant to apply to certain great offices of State, and to the principal law Offices, all which were set out in the Bill. There was another office—that of the Secretary at War (or the Se cretary for Ireland), which had not been included in the Bill, but which might be inserted in it in case it should be deemed expedient. The Duke of WELLINGTON admitted that it became necessary to adopt some measure of this kind in conse quence of the passing of the Reform Bill. But this was not the only measure that must be adopted, and it went only half way towards effecting its own object. There were a variety of points in reference to which new measures must be adopted in consequence of the passing of the Re form Bill, but then they ought to be proposed as measures of Government instead of being brought forward by in dividuals. The necessity for such measures arose from the passing of the Reform Bill, and, therefore, they ought to be introduced by the proposers of that measure, who ought to be responsible for them. He admitted that the Noble Marquess was right in his statement of the inconvenience that attended the present system ; but then they ought to proceedGnmoverweintht ; p caution and considerable deliberation before they alter e d i t; more espec i ally w h en t h e a l terat i on was proposed t o t h em b y an individual unconnected with the and art it , ou th g e Acthttoboef c s o e n t s t i l t e le tn re e c u L t. that n t e hi r s e ßj ly ll went to r epea l thought that the Noble Marquess ought not to have pro posed the second reading of this Bill at a time when the Minister was not in the House, and be hoped that Bill, He he would still consent to postpon e the second reading till there s h ould b e a full House, unless b e s h ou ld think proper to a b an d on i t altogether, and leave i t to th e Govern ment,was a dm responsible itted t for at the mea sures consequences were ne necesthesary ry in this and many other po i nts, i n conseq uence of the pass ing Refoßeform of the Reform Bill ; but they ought to be left to the Government. The Earl of RADNOR did not see the force of the Noble Duk e ' s argument, as to l eav i ng this measure to the Government, an d as to t h e i mpropr i e ty of proposing th e second reading in the absence of the Minister. But he agreed with the Nuble Duke in the expediency of post i aing it, ; and, for his part, he thought it would be inconvenience to w ithd raw th e Bill f o r the present. No great mt , onvenienee had as yet been felt from the present system, and it might be better to wait till inconvenience should arise before they proceeded to Ni T ly remedies. Sufficient foe the day was the evil thereof. Ile admitted that this xv , s a measure of great importance, as interfering with the Act of Settlement, and, therefore, it ou;ht to be narrrowly and maturely considered He hoped the Noble Marquess woald consent to postpone the second reading, if he did not p‘;stpone it altogether. No great inconvenience had as yet resulted from the present system ; and as to the instances re erred to by the Noble Marquess, these had occurred at a general election, to which the present measure had no application. The Marquess of LANSDOWNE—This topic had un 4r.one considerable discussion in the Committee on the 11. firm Bill, while the Noble Duke was absent, and it al !'eared to be the general opinion on both sides that it era: expedient some such measure as the present ought to he adopted. It had been suggested in the Committee by tlr Noble Marquess, and he must do him the justice to say that several Noble Lords had expressed an opinion that a remedy should be applied, although not as part of the Refirm Bill, but by a separate Bill. He at present gave na opinion on the subject, but certainly this was a matter of considerable delicacy and importance, as being con nected with a great constitutional question. The incon vcnience of the present system, however, appeared to him to be considerable, and therefore they would have to ba lance between the advantage of altering the system and the danger of interfering with a great constitutional enactment. In the mean time, he thought that it would be expedient to postpone the second reading. The Marquess of NORTHAMPTON said, that the case of the election for Preston supported the view which be had taken. As to the inconvenience of the time and form in which he had brought forward the present pro position, he explained that he did himself think that it might have been more conveniently made part of the Re form Bill, into which lie had intended to move the intro duction of a clause to the same effect as the Bill before their Lordships. But in consequence of indisposition he had been unable to give timely notice of that intention ; and, therefore yielding to suggestions from both sides of the House, he determined to bring forward his proposi- tion in a separate Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR must acknowledge that nothing could be more fair or candid than the course which the Noble Marquess had followed. At the same time he could not help thinking that, although the principle of the Bill might conveniently enough be discussed at a future stage, and although the object of the Noble Marquess, at present, was only to advance the Bill a step further, leav ing the discussion open for the Committee, yet he thought that it would be the better course, in the present state of the House, there being so few of their Lordships present, to postpone the second reading to a future day. The ob ject of the Statute of Anne, which it was the wish of the Noble Marquess to repeal, was to secure that the persons whom, being Members of the other House of Parliament, the Crown should choose for its servants or responsible advisers, should be such that, on going again for the suf lc ages of their constituents, they would be found to retain their confidence. Now, he (the Lord Chancellor) must confess. that lie had not been able to give the subject so much consideration that he could have formed a distinct opinion as to the expediency or the inconvenience of that Statute. He should hope, therefore, that the Noble Mar quess would consent to postpone his motion until after the next week, as a great part of the intermediate time would niost probably be occupied by the discussion of the Irish Reform Bill. _ _ . The Marquess of NORTHAMPTON said that it was not his fault that so many Members of their Lordships' House considered the Bill of so little importance that they did not attend to discuss it. He bad given sufficient notice that it was his intention to bring on the discussio❑ that evening. However, in accordance with the sugges tion of the Noble Lord upon the Woolsack, he would move that the second reading of the Bill he postponed to Monday week. The motion haring been agreed to, the House adjourned at Half-past Seven o'clock. POST HORSE AND STAGE COACH DUTIES ACTS. From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons, Jovis, 14Q die Junii, 1832.] Resolution reported : " That the several Duties under the management of the Commissioners of Stamps, and now payable in Great Britain, in respect of Stage Carriages, and of Licenses to keep the same, shall respectively cease and determine, and that in lieu thereof there shall be raised, levied, collected, and paid, in Great Britain, the several Duties following (that is to say) : For and in respect of every License to be taken out by the person who shall keep, use, or employ any Stage Carriage in Great Britain, that is to say, for every such Stage Carriage £5 0 0 And for and in respect of every mile which any such Stage Carriage shall'be licensed to travel, the several sums following respectively (that is to say) : Duty per mile. If such Stage Carriage shall be licensed to carry more than four passengers £0 0 1 More than four and not more than six passengers 0 0 la More than six and not more than eight passengers 0 0 2 More than eight and not more than eleven passengers 0 0 21 More than eleven and not more than fourteen passengers 0 0 3 More than fourteen and not more than seventeen pas sengers 0 0 :3-a More than seventeen and not more than twenty pas sengers And if such Stage Carriages shall be licensed to carry more than twenty passengers, then for every three additional passengers exceeding twenty which such Stage Carriage shall be licensed to carry, the addi , tional Duty of And where such excess above Twen'y shall not be ex actly three or a multiple of three, then such additional Duty of one halfpenny shall be payable also for any number of such excess being less than three, or progressively less than any multiple of three which such Stage Carriage shall be licensed to carry. _ . . . On Horses let for Hire and on Licenses to let the same. Duty. For and in respect of every License to be taken out yearly by every Person who shall let any Horse for hire in Great Britain £0 7 6 And for and in respect of every Horse let for hire by the mile, at the usual rate charged for Horses travel ling post, at the place at which such horse shall be let for hire, (that is to say) for every mile such Horse shall be hired or used to travel or go 0 0 li lone fifth part of And for and in respect of every Horse let for the sum charged hire to go no greater distance than eighth for such letting, miles from the place of letting I or in lieu thereof L... ...... 0 1 9 And for and in respect of every Horse let for' hire or used for any period of time less than 28 successive days, or in any other manner than as aforesaid And also for and in respect of every Horse let for hire for 28 successive days, or for any longer period of time where any such Horse shall be returned in a less period of time than 28 successive days, and shall not be ex changed for another Horse in continuation of the same hiring Or in lieu of such last-mentioned one fifth part of sucl sum, the following Duties for every day such Horse that be let for hire or used, or shall (by virtue of any such letting) have been under the direction of the person to whom the satne shall be hired (that is to say) : Duty per day, For every day not exceeding three days £0 2 6 And for every day exceeding three days, and not ex ceeding thirteen days 0 1 9 And for every day exceeding thirteen days and less than twenty-eight days 0 1 3" Resolution agreed to ; Bill ordered to be brought in by Mr. Rice and Lord Viscount Altborp. One fifth part of the sum charged or received, or agreed to be re ceived on every such letting for hire or using. It was rumoured yesterday evening in this city that several houses had been burned by the Whitefeet, in the county of Kilkenny, on Monday night. We could not, however, trace the rumour to any authentic source.— Dublin Morning Register Tuesday. MACKEREL.—Within the last few days the quantity of mackerel for the London market has been im mense ; but by the method which the dealers have of keeping back the supply, the prices have been kept up. On Monday morning no less than seven boat-loads of mackerel, which had been kept back, were condemned at Billingsgate-market by Mr. GOLDHAM, as unfit for human food, and they were taken down the river to be destroyed. Each boat would probably contain, on an average, about 50,000 mackerel. AMERICAN DRUNKARDS.—The Chan cellor of the State of New York has made an order re straining all persons who should he served with a copy of that order from selling or delivering to any habitual drunkard, who had been declared such by a decree of the Chancellor's Court, any spirituous liquors whatever, un der pain of incurring a contempt of the Court. This de cision will enable the Committees of all habitual drunk ards, to obtain similar orders, and by this means to pre vent all tavern-keepers and others from selling them liquors. —New York Journal of Commerce. The Jews in Germany are allowed to con tract thirteen marriages, and no more. A very rich Jew solicited in vain an auto, isation to marry a fourteenth time ; and not being willing to lay out, in such a specula tion, the whole of his property, be purchased of a tailor of his nation the permission the latter had obtained to re-enter the marriage state. The tailor congratulates hinisel: doubly upon his bargain ; he has received 1000 florins, and has found out that the wife he was going to take wa, a termagant.— The Parrot. THE QUEEN'S DRAWING-ROOM. aterday the Queen held a Drawing-room at the K “z's Palace, St. James's, which was announced as being th I Ist which her Majesty will hold this season. The Duchess of Kent came in state, attended by Lady lotte St. Maur and Sir John Conroy, in two car- es, escorted by a party of the Life Guards. e Duke of Gloucester came in state, attended by Co- 1,, el Higgins and four other attendants. Prince Albert of Prussia, with his suite, cline in one of tb King's carriages. Rus.ina Ambassador and the Speaker of the House of C Hilinons came in state. The Ihnourable Corps of Gentlemen Pensioners lined th, Pre,ence Cli.imber and the Picture Gallery, under the co ,unand of Sir George Pocock, the standard bearer, and Wikon, the King's harbinger. . . The Yeomen Guard lined the Guard Chamber and the G ileries, under the command of Messrs. Charles Hancock an I Curti, the Exons in Waiting. TVVO of the tallest Life Guardsmen were stationed on the grand staircase. Lietachinent of the Life Guards mounted as a Guard of Honour, with their band of twenty-six performers in stt.te-dresses : they performed various fashionable pieces during the time the Court was held. Their Majesties entered the State Rooms soon after two' o'c ock, and appeared in excellent health. The King was attended by the Great Officers of State; L.trd Lifford, the Lord in Waitit,g ; and Admiral Sir R. o:way, the Groom in Waiting. Mr. Dobell and Mr. Hulse, the State Pages, were in attendance on his Majesty. The Queen stood in front of the Throne to the left of th, King. Her Majesty was attended by— Lady Clinton (in Waiting), the Marchioness of West meath, Countess Brownlow, Lady William Russell, Lady Pedingfield, Lady Isabella Weanyms, Mrs. Hope, Mrs. B. P 'get, Miss Bagot, Miss De Roos, Miss Hope Johnston, Aliss Bayle (in Waiting), and Mr. Shoemack, Principal Page to her Majesty. The Princess Augusta, the Duchess of Kent, and the Duchess of Cumberland stood near the Queen. Their Majesties kept up an animated conver , atipn with their Royal relatives, attendants, and some of the company, during the afternoon. Baron Falck, the Netherlands Ambassador; and Prince Talley rand, the French Ambassador, lad private audiences of her Majesty to take leave. Lieutenant Annesley, of the Prussian Cuirassier Guards, was presented to the Queen by Baron Bulow, the Prussian M in iste r. Captain Finch, of the American Navy, and the Rev. C. S. Stewart, Chaplain in the United States Naval Service, were presented to her Majesty by Mr. Vail, the American Cliargé d'Affaires. The Chevalier de Lisboa, Secretary of Legation, was presented to her Majesty by the Chevalier de Mattos, the Brazilian Minister. Colonel le Schamhoort and Count Groeben, of the suite of Prince Adalbert, and Count Louis Donhoff, Captain of the Prussian Garde du Corps, were presented to the Queen by Baron Bulow, the Prussian Minister. The above official persons were conducted by Sir Robert Chester, the Master of the Ceremonies. The following were in the Entrée circle : Prince Adalbert of Prussia (attended by two Aids-de- Camp,) the Russian Ambassador and Princess Lieven, the Netherlands and French Ambassadors, the Neapolitan Minister and Countess Ludolf, the Bavarian Minister, the Prussian Minister and Baroness Bul,w, Madame Bermu dez, (the Lady of the Spanish Minister) the Wirtemburg Minister, the Mexican Minister and Madame and M idlle. Gorostiza, the Hanoverian, Saxon, and Brazilian Alinistert, the Dan'sh, Swedish, Sardinian, Austrian, and United States Charges d'Affaires; the Baron de Wesseuburg, the Austrian Minister on a special mission ; Count Matusze vie, the Russian Minister on a special mission ; General G-iblet, on a special mission from Belgium ; Prince Paul Lieven, the Secretary to the NetLeilands Embassy ; the Secretaries to the Neapolitan and Prussian Missions, Count Michel Woronzow, Count di Auto, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Worcester, Cerk of the Clo et ; the Lord President, the First Lord of the Treasury, the Secretaries of State for the Home, Foreign, and Co lonial Departments ; the First Lord of the Admiralty, the Secretary of State for Ireland, the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, the Groom of the Stole, the Captain of the Honourable Gorps of Gentlemen Pen sioners, the Captain of the Yeomen Guard, the Master- General of the Ordnance, Viscount Combermere (Gold Stick in Waiting) the Speaker of the House of Commons, the Treasurer of the Household, the Comptroller of the Household, the Master of the Buck Hounds, Mr. Under Foreign Secretary Backhouse, the King's Harbinger, Mr. Sergeant Taddy (her Majesty's Attorney. General), Mr. Sergeant Merewether (her Majesty's Solicitor-General), th e Mister of the Ceremonies, Sir Philip Sidney, (Equery in Waiting), Sir Wathen Waller (Extra Groom in Wait ing), the Rev. Dr. Blomberg (Deputy Clerk of the Coset), and the Rev. Dr. Russell (Head Master of the Charter- House.) ♦mong the company were.... DUKES—Portland, Northumberland, Buccleuell, Gor don, Montrose, Duchess Northumberland. Marquess Conyngham. MA RctuoxssEs—Londonderry, Conyngbaw, Lans downe. EARLS—Macclesfield, Caledon, Brownlow, Leitram, Orkney, Selkirk, Bandon, Normanton, Stanhope. Coormsgs—Mountcharles, Amherst, Romney, Linn - - ick, Dorothy of Newburgh, Verulaw, Balearnt., Selkirk, Orkney, Stanhope, Caledon, Le Pelletier de Molande Lei trim, Bandon, Albermarle. ViscooNTS—Ashbtook, Clive, Sidmouth, Hereford, Cole, Boringdon, Bernard, Eastnor, Encombe. VISCOUNTESSES—Andover, Eastnor. Loans.—Suffield, Stafford, St. Helens, Lilford, Don- Boyne, Albert Conynghatn, Frederick Fitzclarence, Stan ley, Petre, Oakley, Skelmersdale, Godolphin, Hotham, Howard Mahon, Berners, Dynevor, Mostyn, Dunalley, A. Lennox, Alvanley, Churchill. LABlES...—Hervey Bathurst, Harriet Bentinck, Suffield, Harriet Baring, Pynn, Mildmav, Hawkins Whitshed, Fisher, Lucy Clive, Charlotte St. Maur, Beckett, Mary borough, Isabella Wemyss, Caroline Mot ant, Graham, Dorothy Eyre, Barbara Eyre, Bellew, Charlotte Marsham, Gordon, S. Cust, Caroline Russell, Godolphin, Grey Egerton, Petre, Gibney, Augusta Paulett, Gordon Cum ming, Teynham, G. North, Weller, Dowager Blackett, Clarke, Dowager Langford, Blanche Somerset, Jemima Eliot, Emma Portman, Nicols, Nugent, Donkin, Scott, Anne Cruikshank, Scott, S. North, C. Underwood, Mos ryn, Sophia Marsham, C. Cavendish, J. Douglas, Mont fort, Montresor, R. Stewart, Walsingham, Graham, Al :t -clean, Brenton, Keats, Harriet Bernard, Sutton, Montagu, G. Vandeleur, Willoughby, Burnet, Warburton, Martin, Mary Dondas, Alexander Campbell, Mary Ross, H. P. Galloway, Dowager Arundel, Isabella Blachford, Adam, Bateson, Paget, Dunalley, Smith, Harriet Hoste, W. Anson, S. Smith, Churchill, Chapman, F. Beauclerk, Cullum. Bishop of Hereford—Governor Penn. HONOURABLES—Mrs. Mundy, Harvey, Major Deve reux, Mrs. Hawkins Whitsbed, Mrs. Frances Stanhope, Mrs. Fane, the Dean of Norwich, Miss.ll. Rowley, Mrs. E. Hobhouse, Mrs. Fitzgerald, Miss Georgiana Jerning ham, Essex Lloyd, Elizabeth Lloyd, Robert Smith, Mrs. Leigh, E. Stewart, T. F. W. Butler, Captain Pellew, R.N., Mrs. J.jßroderick, Mrs. Bootle Wilbraham, Augus tus Moreton, Mrs. Dyneley, Richard Bootle Wilbraham, E. S. Jerningham, Mrs. Pellew, Miss Bootle Wilbraham, Lady Harvey, Lady Borough, T. H. Jolly, Mrs. Port man, Mr. Harris, Lady Edmonstone, Miss Spencer, H. Spencer Law, Mrs. A. Thelluson, Mrs. Hanbury Tracey, Mrs. George Disbrowe, Mrs. Trevor, John Henniker, Mrs. Fleetwood Pellew. Srns—H. Turner, H. Penn, J. Whatley, J. Conroy, B. Taylor, J. Gibney, P. Grey Egerton, P. Bellew, 11. Willoughby, A. Hood, Bart. G. W. Cumming, George Chetwynd, E. Smythe, G. Noel, M.P. C. Clarke, F. Burdett, W. Blizaid, J. S. Lillie, W. Burnett, W. Guise, R. Sutton, T. Gooch, R. Bateson, C. Aldis, J. M,Gregor, B. Codrington, J. Macdonald, R. Inglis, G. Shee. REVEREND DOCTORS-Wahnsley, Blomberg, Russell, Nolan, Sleeth. DocTogs—Spurgin, Aldis, Runny, Grenville. ALDERMAN—Birch. RXVEItEND MESSIEUUS.--C. S. Steward, W. Cooper Sir T. Cullum, Bart., J. H. Sadler, Sir J. G. Thomas, Bert., G. W. St. John, C. Wodworth, W. Cooper, J. W. Mackie, E. L. Suttoon, R. B. Brpan, Mt R. Scott, A. B. Boatel', H. C Cast. Mrssas—W. Camac, F. Munday, Hawkins, Whitshed, Nash Edwards Vaughan, Edwards Vaughan, Brigstoek, Conroy, Herries, Vandeleur, Fyler, Thomas Fairfax, 'I, Estcourt, R. Dundns, W. Everett, D. 11. Morier, H. Hughes, M.P., Henry Earle, Duncan Campbell, Bertia Mathew, Stratton Marsham, John Rolls, E. Ellice, John Tyndale, Metcalfe, Janer, Francis Pigott, Howard, Buller, Norton, Edward Pearson, Yarde Buller, Spicer, natio, Charles Cochrane, George Cochrance, Boyce, Russell, Hasings, Dent, Anthony C. King, Stratford Dugeale, James Hall, J. M. Phillipps, Thomas R.A., William Paynter, Henry Irvine, Meek, William C Cooper, Gerald Fitzgerald, Aubi e y ) E. J. Jones, Caxton, ALP., J. E. Baillie, A. Drummond, Walrond. R. S. 1-loilorri, Dloyd, D. Chisholm, Vigors, Beaumont, 1) S. Clarke Jervoise, Welby, M.P., Poeklington, Maenabb, Littledale, G. L. Russell, Sinclair, J. I. Briggs,