The Sun. — London, England, 1847-03-10 00:00:00

ipttrri Stittton SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock INSURRECTION IN PORTUGAL. SOUTHAMPTON, MA.ucu 10. The Madrid steamer has arrived with the Portuguese mail of the 3d instant. Nothing cleciive had taken place at Oporto w hen the Madrid left. Saldanha was still at his head-quar ters, about ten miles from Oporto, but no movement had been made towards attacking the city. The rebels were still mustering in strong numbers, and seemed to be sanguine of success. The city itself was very tranquil. The startling information that the Spanish troops had absolutely entered Portugal was received in Lisbon on the 27th. It, however, soon after transpired that such was not the case, although some 5,000 troops had halted on the frontiers. The Oporto, a large war steamer, belonging to the Junta, was totally lost on the Bar of Oporto, and all the crew, consisting of IS persons, lost. Immediately it was reported at Lisbon that the Spanish army were on the frontiers, Sir William Par ker sent the Superb to cruise off Vigo. The Thetis and America were also dispatched to cruise off Oporto, to prevent any interference on the part of the Spanish Go vernmen t.—Herald. CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.) (Sittings in Lincoln's Inn.) YHA BUNGERFOAD I.IARKET COMPANY V. THE CHARING CROSS BRIDGE COMPANY. This important case, the facts of which have from time to time appeared in The Sun, came before the Lord Chancellor this morning, on an appeal from the decision of the Vice-Chancellor, who directed that the differences be tween the two companies should be submitted to a jury. Mr. BETHEL (who, with Mr. Gifford, appeared for the Market Company) proceeded to address his Lordship in support of the appeal. He said he had hoped that some arrangement would have been come to between the parties, which would have put an end to legal proceedings, but unfortunately the conduct of the Bridge Company had prevented any amicable understanding being come to be tween them, as the proposal which they had made, and from which they refused to depart, was of the most objectionable kind. What they proposed was, that each pas senger disembarking at the float, should be under the obliga tion to receive from the collector of the Bridge Company a ticket to entitle him to go over the bridge to the market; so that the hunireds who thus disembarked—and some times three hundred disembarked at the same time— would only be permitted to have egress by producing this ticket at the iron gates on the Middlesex side, so that, in fact, but one person could pass out at once. Now, this was a mode of egress which was open to the greatest objection, as, on long days, half an hour or three-quarters of an hour might not untrequently elapse from the time of a passenger leaving the steam-boat to the time of his obtaining egress at the gates. Fortunately the Market Company had the means of showing the utter futility of such a plan by the affidavit of Mr. Hawes, the Deputy Chairman of the Bridge Company. He stated that the railing off of six feet would be attended with most serious consequences to the great crowds continually embarking and disembarking at the float, particularly on Sundays, when several thousands passed to and fro, and as the number was increasing, greater inconvenience could not fail, to be the result. In short, he stated that it would be quite impossible that such an immense number of passengers could pass on and off by a passage only six feet wide. It was clear, how ever, that the market company had no right to demand snore space, and there're they must be content with it. The LORD CHANCELLOR inquired the nature of the pro vision which gave the Market Company the right they claimed. . ---- Mr. — BETHEL said a covenant in the lease gave the Market Company "free and uninterrupted access " over the bridge to the float. The Bridge Company reserved to themselves the right of railing off a compartment of six feet fur this purpose. Mr. Rom., who appeared for the Bridge Company, denied that the Market Company were to have an " nninterrupteu" right of way. Mr. BETHEL went on to urge, on the faith of this affidavit, that it would be quite impossible for the whole of the steam boat passengers to pass to and fro in this way owing to the obstructions. Not only would the greatest confusion be created by the toll-gates, as the parties would have to pass out and in one at a time, but a continual series of squabbles would be the natural result of the confusion which they would engender, and in addition would destroy the value of the accommodation which the bridge itself professed to afl;)rd. Mr. Hawes stated, that frequently during the summer Sundays, 10,000 persons passed over the bridge in a few hours, and that a gate which was kept closed during the week, was obliged to be kept open on those days. They should, in fact, state that the bridge itself, wirhout the addition of the steam-boat passengers, was insufficient for their own passengers. He went on to state that the width of the bridge between the chains was only 13 feet, and that for some parrs it was only 12 feet 2 inches; or that if 6 feet were taken, little more than 6 feet 2 inches would be left for the ordinary passage of the bri , !ge ; and that a person might say he was going to the steam boats, and be allowed to pass; but there was nothing to pre vent him from going to the float. getting a ticket there, and so being enabled to cheat the bridge. The Loan CHANCELLOR wished to know how persons simply passing across the bridge to the other side were to be dealt with. Mr. ROLT said they would have to pay at the Lambeth side, and rice verse. Mr. BETHEL contended that even that plan would be most inconvenient, and would enable persons to use the bridge, and to incommode the steam-boat passengers, without paying the toll ; and, consequently, without having any right on the bridge at all. The Learned Gentleman then read a list of various objections, which had been made to the offers of the Bridge Company. It was simply set forth that the mode of access by turnstiles was not such an one as the Market Company was entitled to, that the bridge passengers would be pressed upon the steam-boat passengers, and that great ,inconve nience would be the result, and an evasion of the toll rendered extremely easy, so much so, that thou sands would adopt it, and that therefore the interests of both companies would be injured; besides, a con- ' tinual squabble would be going on as to whether the pedestrians had or had not landed from the steam-boats; the place would obtain an unenviable notoriety and offered an excellent field for pickpockets. The advan tage of this bridge consisted not only in its cheapness, but in the saving of time; but if these turn-tables were placed as proposed, loss of time to passengers would be the re sult. and the advantage of the bridge materially deteriorated, as to many the lora of five or six minutes was often of serious consequence. It had been proved that 2,000,000 had landed at the float in one year, four fifths of whom landed in the summer months alone; but what delay would take place if they were compelled to pass off in" single'file." When tie cause came first betore his Lordship the Bridge Company contended that the obligation of distin guishing the steam .boat passengers from the public rested with the Market Company, who stated in reply that every ob struction had been offered to prevent the free ingress and egress of the passengers. They contended further that they were not entitled to the full benefit of the covenant, in con scepter:cc of not having",devised any proper plan by which the passengers might be distieguished, tt gore. s the Market Com pany contended that the covenant dal not impose any such obligation upon them. The Vice-Chancellor having decided in the way mentioned, they now cone before the Court in the same condition as on the former occasion, with the ex ception of the Ai-las-it of Mr. Hawes, and that the company bad c msented to remove the liana they had erected. No object would be gained by raising the question before a jury, as the facts were not in dispute between the parties, as the right of the Market Company was admitted. It mast be looked at simply as a question of constriction; besides, the delay of an action would be a clear obstruction of justice, because the Market Company had the undoubted right oa free access over the bridge to the pier without obstruction. There was no pea-on why the toll-gates and turnstiles should not be removed to the first pier, so that Abe passenger traffic would not interfere with the bridge traffic, and, what was meet important, would not be impeded. He trusted his Lordship would decide against the decision of the Vice- Chancellor, and order the removal of everything preventing the free ingress and egress of the steam-boat passengers. Mr. GIFFARD followed briefly on the same side. Mr. RoeT then proceeded to address his Lordship on behalf of the Bridge Company. He contended, if his Lordship acceded to the injunction prayed for, that the toil-gates and turnstiles would, in contravention of the Ac:, have to be removed to the pier next the Mid dlesex side, and that part of the bridge thrown open to the whole world, or else the bridge would have to be shorn of half its dimensions, to the great injury of its legitimate pur pose, for a great portion of its length. But tee Bridge Com pany had always beer, and were most willing to listen to any suggestion from the Market Company, by which their own objects might be promoted without injury to the inte rests of the Bridge Company. To throw open the bridge to the first pier would be utterly destructive of its int rests; bUt, in reply to all the propositions of the Bridge Company, they had received a reply, " You can't do that—we claim a free way of 6 feet, or some other free access t" the float; but we shall accept no other terms than these." Tne Acts ofbeth com panies simply gave th m power to enter into contracts with each other. Tnis was evident from the fact that they were not to be permitted to take merchandise over the bridge to the float without the permission in writing of the Bridge Company. The Market Company had no power over the bridge; it could do nothing in connexion with it without the sanction of the proprietors. By the lease it was expressly stipulated that the Bridge Company were to be empowered to build their toll-houses on the Middlesex side, "south of the tavern," and they had done so in pursuance of that right. The Bridge Company were also to have an uninterrupted right of way through the market to the bridge; but to say that the Market Company were to have " uninterrupted and un restricted" way was incorrect, as the toll-houses so erected could not but be considered to some extent obstructions. The LORD CHANCELLOR said it clearly appeared by the lease that a space of six feet was to be appropriated to the Market Company, and to be railed off. Mr. ROLT repsated that the company were willing to make all consistent and suitable provision for the accommodation of the Market Company. For instance, they might have au abutment of three feet on each side of the bridge; but if the bridge were opened in the way proposed it would be al fro m m os t t he im o p th os e s r i ,, blet distinguish the steam-boat passengers Certainly the Bridge Company bad never impugned the rightof re way without paying toll ; but they were not compell e d the hoarding at the stairs until the Market Company had remove the pier now used by them. They proposed to have three turnstiles, so that the fullest accommodation might be withve nthe steam-boat passengers, and if they were dissatisfied The servants they might ap p o int servants of their own.) turnstiles would not l e t a person come hack without imit so that they could not well use, inlaant authority to pass, without paying. The question, he thought,ease, the bridge came within the province of ajar., was one which trusted his Lordship would not grant the injutte otvii:ver, h e for, but leave the company to adopt one of the man prayed that had been proposed for the protection of their mutual interests. The Loan Ciieseseeeoa said the words in the covenant were perfectly clear — th e Market Company had an undoubte d right of way, free o f 9 toll, to the pier. He had heard n o thi ng to lead him to form an opposite conclusion. It was equally 1 I clear that the Bridge Company la d ply with at the time itd'd refused to comply was made t h econ ditionsof their lease. No dou st the passengers not enter the question of distingu ishin g alto its mwling into their cocsideration, but th at di not ate • rant the injunct e ion as Ito felt it his duty, therefore, to g prayed for,—namely, that the objectionable h oar d should be removed, and that free ingress and egress s h o uld be given y the Bridge Company for the steam-boat pas fingers. The removal cf the turustiles was a THE SUN question not before him, and therefore he could give no opinion upon it ; but it appeared to bim that both parties were injuring themselves by these proceedings. No doubt, if the parties could frame a proper question tor the decision of a jury, no objection might arise as to the adoption of such a course, but he could not recommend it. PETITIONS ON PRIVATE BILLS. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(THIS DAY). (Room 22, before Mr. Examiner SMITH.) MANCHESTER, LONDON, AND BIRMINGHAM RAILWAY. In this case the Examiner decided that the standing orders had not been complied with. There was no other case on the list to-day. REGISTRY of BIRTHS and DEATHS DURING THE WEEK ENDING MARCH 6. Deaths registered in the week. Births registered in the week. Males ... ... ... 526 Males ... ... ... 714 Females ... ... 482 Females ... ... 676 Total ... 1,008 Total ... 1,390 BRITISH COLONIAL BANK AND LOAN COMPANY.—(THIS DAY.) The annual general meeting of the proprietors of this company was held this day at their offices, 50, Moor gate street. After the usual preliminaries, The Secretary read the Report, which commenced by stating that the directors had much pleasure in inform ing the shareholders that the prospects of the company had kept p ,ce with the reviving prosperity of the colony of New South Wales. The report then stated that the directors had succeeded in making terms fart urable to the company with other shareholders to whom deben tures had been granted, under which shares to the ex tent of 18,2001. had been cancelled, as the result of which transaction they had been able to write off 3,5001. in part liquidation of the preliminary ex penses. A further amount of shares, to the extent of 12,3501 had also been surrendered to the company aed cancelled. On the other hand, loans to the extent of 14,101/. ss. 11d. had been paid off. From the money arising from the loans on the seventh call the liabilities had been reduced in the last year to the extent of 10,3001., of which 5,0001. had been paid since the last general meeting. The remaining liabilities of the com pany were in a train of liquidation. The report con cluded by stating, that in the opinion of the directors, the profits of the company would justify the declaration of a small dividend. From the financial statement it appeared that the profits of the past year were 8.000/. The CHAIRMAN said he did not think it would be ne cessary for him to occupy much of their time on the present occasion. He thought on the whole that they must admit that they were in a much more pleasant position than when they had met before. A reference to the accounts would prove this, and he would take the liberty of drawing the attention of the shareholders to some of the items of these ac counts. The capital stock of the company last year was 190,4651. Is. Bd. The present year it amounted to 165,210 L The difference had been caused by their having been able to cancel stock to the amount of 30,5501. The liabilities last year amounted to 8,9001., and they were now reduced to 8,6001. The loans had been reduced. They had a debt for preliminary expenses to the extent of 4,8001., of which 3,5501. had been written off. As to the immediate profit of the past year, it was much the same as that of preceding years,_ or rather less. One great item in the expenditure was the law expenses in Sydney. When he had met the shareholders last year, he told them that these expenses would be great, but there was some comfort to be derived from the fact, that the great expense which had been incurred was for fore closure of the property, and if they were able to sell that property for more than they had lent on it, they would get back a portion of those expenses. The estimate which had been submitted to the shareholders had turned out to be as nearly as possible true. He then stated that their receipts would be about 8,000/. It had been calculated at 7,5001. With respect to their position, it was one with which he thought the shareholders could not be dissatis fied, taking into consideration the circumstances under which they were placed. The interest on their loans was more easily obtained than before in the colony, and their rents were collected with less diffi culty than at former periods. There was every disposi tion to advance. He could not say the accounts were the most agreeable ; but when they con eidered the difficulties with which the colony was beset, it would be evident that they were in a safe posi tion. He did not wish to say a word more about the mat ter, but he could net refrain from expressing his belief that no shareholder would ultimately sustain any loss. He did not mean to say that all they might wish could be done immediately. He would read a few extracts from the dispatches which had been received from the colony, to show that if they only waited the proper time, they would be able to dispose of their property profitably. The Chairman here read the docu 'rsets io to. stion, from which it appeared that several of he properties belonging to the company had been s•eld, and realised a consideraole profit The last dispatch was dated the 7;h August, 1846 ; since then they had received further dispatches, from which it appears that the same results had been obtained, and that the com pany would not be losers. He was not enabled to say that they would be able to sell all their pro perties so favourably, but he had no hesitation in stating that in the course of time they would be able to get hack all their property. With respect to the 14,0001., the difference between their loans of the present and the past year, from the statement made by the dirt ctors it appeared that, although the loans had been reduced to that amount, they had in fact given up property to the extent of only 9,403/7 The directors were desirous that the shareholders should not think they were going on better than they really were. 8,080/. had been purchased for only 1,860/. These shares were not taken ovc r to the profit account but were appropriated to those particular debts which they did not think would realise the same sums that had been advanced. On the whole he had to congratulate the shareholders on the position of their affairs. Lord DEVON said that he was there as the repre sentative of his brother, who had always warmly parti cipated in the good opinion that existed as to the con duct of their affairs. He would move that the report then read should be adopted, printed, and circulated among the shareholders. He made that motion, because he thought it was a report which re flected great credit upon those who had brought it for ward, and which, together with the speech of his friend in the chair, presented " a plain, unvarnished tale." Mr. Cum:uric said he felt great pleasure in seconding the resoluti.m. The report they had heard was a satis factory and bond fide statement of their affairs. After some slight discussion, the resolution was carried unariimon,ly. The Chairman, sir Joseph De Courcey Laffan, Bart., and the Rw. John Howard Hintcn, were re elected directors. J. PERCIVAL, Esq., moved, and J. D. SMITH, Esq., seconded, the following resolution, which was unanimously carried—viz , " That a dividend of two per cent. per ennum, Colonial shares, free of income-tax, he declared on all the shares, and on the six calls paid up on the British shares, and upon the seven ca'ls from the date of payment." The Earl of DEVON moved a vote of thanks to the Chairman and the directors, upon whom he passed a high eulogium. The r•1-solution was unanimously agreed to. The CHAIRMAN having returned thanks, the meeting separated. house. He was hotly pursued, however, by Inspector An ders and officer 621, who apprehended and conveyed him to Bridewell, where he awaits the verdict of the Coroner's jury. The inquest on the body will be held to-day. The prisoner is only about 17 years of age, and the deceased 45. Liverpool Courier of this day. GLASGOW STOCK EXCHANGE, MARCH B.—The sales to-day were—Caledonian, New, 49s.—Caledonian and Dum bartonshire, 47s.—Dunblane, Doune, and Callender, 31s.— East Indian, Bs. 9d.—East Lothian Central, 475. Edinburgh and Glasgow, Halves, 211.—Edinburgh and Perth (New), 595. —Ditto, Halves, 23s.6d.—Glasgow,Kiltnarnock, and Ayr,3B% —Glasgow, Dumfries, and Carlisle, 61.—Glasgow, Airdrie, and Monkland Junction, 5 5 / A —Manchester and Southampton, 16s. 6d.—North British, Halves, 17/. —Wishaw and Coltness, 49/. —York and Newcastle, Preference, 8%. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. (THIS DAY.) HOUSE OF COMMONS. ARREST FOR DEBT (IRELAND) BILL. (Continued from our Afternoon y.ditiono After a few words from Mr. MORE O'FERRAEL, Mr. M. ➢l I LNES said he would not have troubled the House, after the able explanation of the Learned Solicitor-General of Ireland, were it not that his name appeared on the back of the Bill introduced by his Hon. Friend. There were mon• strous evils committed with the present law of arrest in Ire land, which the country would not longer tolerate. The Hon. and Learned Recorder for Dublin said that the modifi cations in the law of arrest had not acted well in England; he (Mr. M.) could assure the Hon. and Learned Member that one principle the people of England had determined on was not to return to the incarceration of debtors for small sums. It was almost impossible to believe the enormous numbers who were incarcerated in the gaols of Ireland for sums so ridicu lously small, that it was, in fact, an amusement for English travellers to liberate them. Some of these persons had re mained in gaol for upwards of two or three years for sums not exceeding ten shillings, and many were for amounts beneath that.—(Hear.) There was another circumstance so truly disgusting that it would not be longer tolerated, and as he was not aware that the attention of the Learned Solicitor-General had been directed towards it, he would beg leave to mention it to the House. Owing to the ease with which suits were carried out in the civil courts, many.persons who wished to get rid of the expense of main taining their parents were in the habit of instituting ficti tious suits against them for small amounts alleged to be due for diet and lodging, and having obtained decrees, they procured their ;incarceration, thus throwing the burden of supporting the last years of the parents' lives upon the country.—(Cries of "Name an instance.") Why, they would find that parents were confined in Cork gaol under similar circumstances. The subject had been represented to the Irish Government, but there sere no means of remedying the evil while the present system of arrest was in force. The effect of the law of arrest for small amounts was, that the gaols of Ireland were crowded with debtors. The Bill brought for ward by his Friend was distinguished for a brevity which was exceediugly painful to legal minds—(Laughter) —and he (Mr. Monckton Milnes) had expressed his fears that it would in consequence meet with much opposition from the Learned Members in that House. lie supposed. therefore, that they, the introducers of the Bill, must rest contented with leaving the subject in the hands of the Learned Soliciter•General for Ireland, and he did hope that the Government and the Irish bar would no longer allow this abominable state of things to continue. Mr. S. CRAWFORD gave his unqualified approbation to the Bill brought in by the Hon. Baronet the Member 'for Waterford. He thought that the present system of small debt arrestments gave the power of inflicting immense cruelty on the poorer debtors of Ireland, and for that reason he should wish to see it to a considerable degree modified. They had heard from a very high authority that the fear of arrest had actually depopulated one county in Ireland, and atter what had occurred to-day he trusted the matter would have the serious and immediate consideration of her Majesty's Government. Mr. GROGAN said that the first announcement of this Bill spread the greatest alarm throughout Ireland, because, white it proposed at one " fell swoop" to abolish imprison ment for debt, it did not provide any substitute for that mode of recovering just and bona fide debts. Still he was glad the subject had been taken up by Government, and he trusted, after the pledge of the Hon. Gentleman, the Solici tor-General for Ireland, the Bill would be withdrawn. Mr. P. SCROPE said in many parts of Ireland the popula tion was being driven off the land through the medium of the civil bill process, which had been alluded to by an Honourable Member opposite, and he considered it was high time a stop was put to these proceedings. Under the law of distraint the landlord could not obtain pos session of his tenant's goods till some time after the rent bad become due, and the consequence was, that the civil bill pro cess system had been extensively resorted to for getting small holders off the land, and throwing them into prison. The result of all this had been, that the tenantry, from fear of arrest, were finding their way to the quays of Liverpool and other ports in England, and in this way many parts of Ireland were becoming depopulated. In one instance a clergyman had stated to him, that where a mor.th or two ago he had a population of upwards of 1,000 souls under his care, he now, in consequence of this hunting and driving from the land system, had only 500, and the clergy of Ireland, witnessing the sad effects of the system, were unanimous in calling upon the Government of Ireland to take steps to put a stop to it.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN suggested that power might be given to the assistant-barrister to stay execution in the cases alluded to by the Han. Gentleman who had just sat down, and then Government would have ample time to consider the subject of this Bill. Sir R. FERGUSON hoped the Holme would be cautious how it proceeded in this matter, for in their desire to benefit the poor of Ireland they might inflict the most serious injury upon the country. If the suggestion of the Hon. Gentleman opposite were adopted it might lead to the concealment of property and the defrauding of creditors of their just and legal claims. Sir G. GREY hoped the lion. Member would withdraw his motion for the second reading of the Bill, the subject being under the consideration of the law officers of the Crown. If the Hon. Member did not consent to withdraw it, it would be his duty to propose that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. Mr. B. ESCOTT hoped that his Hon. Friend would not press forward his Bill on the 'present occasion. The prin ciple contained in the Bill was one which he was sure would eventually be adopted by the Legislature. After a few words from Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN, Sir 11. W. BARRON consented to withdraw his motion ; in doing so, however, he wished to obtain a pledge from the Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland, that the Government would themselves bring in a Bill upon the subject. Mr. LABOUCHERE said, that in consequence of the great amount, and the pressing nature, of other Irish busi ness, he was not prepared to pledge himself to bring forward a measure on the subjeet dur►ng the present session; he would, however, pledge himself that the measure should re ceive the consideration of the Government. Sir 11. W. BARRON wished to know if the Government would have any objection to refer the Bill to a Committee up stairs. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he did not see any neces• sity for such a course of proceeding. Sir W. H. BARRON then wished to obtain leave to in introduce the Bill at some future period of the session. The subject was too important a one to be summarily disposed of, and wanted to know whether, if the Government were unprepared with any measure on the subject, they would give their support to the present Bill. Mr. LABOUCHERE declined to make any pledges upon the subject.—(Cries of " Divide, divide.") After a short consultation between Mr. LAnoucnzßl and Sir IL W. I3AnnoN, the Bill was withdrawn. STATE OF TRADE. MANCHESTER, MARCH 9.—The state of the Lyndon money market, coupled with the failure of a joint-stock bank at Newcastle, has had an injurious influence upon business here; and the improvement which bad taken place during the last fortnight in the demand for piece goods, has entirely disappeared since Thursday. Most descriptions of cloth, and especially 27-inch printers, have been much neglected to-day, and prices which would have been readily paid last week are nuw scarcely attainable. In yarn, there has been less business, ex cepting in counts suitable fin. India, which hare been is. pretty good demand, and had in some cases commanded a trifling advance, which, however, is not readily given to a -day. tv:Me(m) O rk eNl i Dy n A g yd c: u f short time continues to extend. MARCH not B.—Thema many tiu y mss ers ke h t a t v o e - d a a t y tended, and very few pieces hare been sold. Future pro-pr ets, at present, appear gloomy. Wool has under gone no change since last Mond a y. HALIFAX,SATURDAY, MARCH G.—Neither in plain nor in fancy goods is there any improvement, either as regards demand or price. The demand for yarn con tinues much below the productive power, although there is a little more doing for shipping ; but no advance in prices can be obtained. As to long wool, spinners buy from hand to mouth, with the turn in favour of the buyer. In short wool, there is a little more activity, but prices have rather a downward tendency. HUDEERSFIELD, MARCH 9.—Although we have a considerable number of buyers attending our market to day, there has not been the buoyancy which prevailed last week. A failure to a considerable amount with one of our woollen manufacturers, Las caused a great de pression during the week, and its effect has been felt during to-day's market. LEEDS, MARCH 9.—The transactions at our cloth halls to-day have been very trifling; they form, how ever, no just criterion of the state of our trade, which, upon the whole, is more satisfactory than for some time past, since many of our clothiers arc well employed to order, and on that account bring few goods to the market. The demand runs chiefly upon low woollens for the transatlantic trade, and upon Spanish stripes.— Manchester Guardian. ALLEGED MURDER IN WESTMOELAND.STREET.--- We regret to state that about half-past twelve o'clock, A.M., yesterday, an unfortunat man, named Thomas Kearns received two mortal stabs in Westmorland-street, of which he almost instantly died. The individual who inflicted the wounds is a sailer named John William Hines, who was pursued and taken into custody, and will, doubtless have to stand his trial at the approaching assizes for this most serious offence. The facts of the case are briefly told. Kearns, who was the father of five children, kept a house of ill-fame at 51, Westmorland-street, and at the hour we have mentioned (twelve o'clock at night) Him s came to the house with one of the female lodgers. A brief altercation took place, which ended in Hines stabbing Kearns t t w e ice with a knife. The Mit stab entered at the bottom of verypi 1 e ns ealrcyluc. after wha gashed.nd his e r e r e: I :a l: a l asysenv,c) Several atlhfeenl surgeon, e a f i t e ,N breast, )rfhtoh e shortly in immediate attendance, but Kearns died very s a sailor , be examined el as witnesses, so also will h house at the time will . William Brown,Nwe ere itchi Dis pensary, onVng to the ship Columbia, at present lying in the Waterloo ,mi rk, who was in the house before the cut was inflicted kni n f s e es n ran ll u l along hand. An alarm was instantly IAZ:eI thea nd Hi his t reeti where Leeds-street and Vauxhall -road into Denison loons. he attempted to effect a forcible ent rance inti. DRAINAGE OF LAND BILL. On the order of the day - being read for going into com mittee on the Drainage of Land Bill, Mr WILLIAMS objected to the rate of interest at which the loans were to be advanced under this Act. He consi dered that a higher rate of interest ought to be charged on the money to be lent under this Bill, as otherwise the Go vernment would sustain loss on the advances they made. If they did not do so, they would have to advance the in terest on Exchequer-bills. Sir G. GREY said that the Hon. Member was rather late in making his objection. Mr. H. BAILLIE thought that the faith of Parliament was pledges to the Bill last session, and they could not now withdraw from the terms then agreed to. Mr. HUME thought that his Hon. Friend (Mr. Wil liams) was misunderstood. All be wanted was that the finances of the country should sustain no loss by the ad vance. This Bill raised the question of advancing the in terest on Exchequer-bills, and he wished to know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Home Secretary, whe ther, in case they themselves should have to pay more interest than they did at present, they would have ary ob jection to permit a clause to be introduced into the Bill for the purpose of charging that increased rate on the advances to be made. Sir GEORGE GREY said that it was not intended that any alteration should be made in the rate of interest, as they had engaged last session to make the grants on the terms specified in the Bill, and thetefore he should not assent to the introduction of such a clause as that mentioned. After a few words from Mr. Aglionby, Sir Andrew Leith Hay, Mr. Finch, and Lord Duncan, the House went into Committee. On clause 1 being proposed, Mr. WILLIAMS said her Majesty's Government wer called upon to protect the public from any loss by the ad vancement of money. Rome clause ought to tie intro duced giving the security. Mr. FINCH did not consider there was any weight in wouldLo rLord prevent L IN c pne said o t n h f a r t ! t m h e b o rrow i tt introductiongatal the suggestion of the Hon. Memb er , a s if it were a d op t e d it ofOLV lL this mea sure was not by any means bent finial to the Highlands or Lowlands of Scotland. He considered that the principle of the measure should be confined to that of the general Act of last session, which the late Government introduced, and that was confining the loans to the purposes of chaining alone. Every Hon. Member who was conversant with agri culture would bear him out in saying that thorough drainage was the most beneficial improvement which could be made on an estate. He desired to know whether the Govern ment had made up their minds to carry out the Bill as soon as possible? If they had not, he would give notice of his intention of introducing a Bill very similar to that he in troduced last year. Sir GEORGE GREY said, that in many parts of Scotland the fencing and trenching, by which it was so necessary to make drainage available, would be of so expensive a character as to preclude a great number of persons from obtaining any benefit under the Bill. Such would be peculiarly the case with regard to those districts where distress existed, and thus the Act would be a dead letter. The Government were perfectly sensible of the importance of the subject, and they would give it their serious attention. They would introduce a Bill upon the subject. They would be most happy to give him their warmest assistance. Lord DUNCAN most entirely concurred in the sentiments expressed by the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Lincoln). It would be most proper to give a priority to the proprie tors of the Highlands over those of the Lowlands. This was not a small grant of public money, it was one of 2,000,000/. to Great Britain and 1,500,0001. to Ireland. The High. land proprietors deserved this precedence ; they had made great exertions to meet the distress, and that too without any grant from Parliament. There was, however, another and a stronger reason in favour of his supposition. At present in the Lowlands, with which he was connected, wages had risen fifty per cent. By the introduction a this money these wages would be most unnaturally increased in their amount, and in a very short time the labourers would be thrown out of employment in consequence of the influx of inhabitants from other parts of the country, who would flock thither in search of work. .. Lord MORPETH said, that with respect to the remark of bis Noble Friend opposite, that the Highlands were entitled to particular consideration under this Bill, he would see by looking at the Bill that the Scotch generally were the flr,t thought of by the Government, and particularly the High lands. It would be found that of this two millions two thirds would go to Scotland, or perhaps more than that sum. Very few applications had as yet been made from - - - - LONDON, WEDNESDAY EVENING, MARCH 10, 1847. England, and it did not appekr that the Government would be enabled to entertain any nore. With regard to the esti mated cost for fencing, it bort so large a proportion to the value of the land that, unless n very valuable land, it would not be worth while to undertake it all. Lord GEORGE BENTIX(N heard with great surprise a regret expressed by the Nobb Lord the Member for Bath, that the labourers' wages had rsen. It seemed to be the Noble Lord's wish that the labourere'wages should be ground down as much as possible. With rigard to any fear of exhausting the money market by borrowing two millions, the Chancellor of the Exchequer would tell thin that, in the competition for the loan of eight millions, a And time since, eighty millions had been brought forward, ant that was a pretty fair proof that the money market would not be injured by this loan. The cost of fencing would, however, be very considerable, as it would be necessary to erect stone fences to protect the sheep from the snow drift. tageonsly advanced for the purpose cf being em ployed in the permanent improvement of the estates of such infants, persons of unsound mind, or others under legal disability. Be it therefore enacted, that it shall be lawful for any such trustees (with the consent of any persons beneficially interested, in possession, if of full age) of guardians, or the committees of any per sons of unsound mind, and they are hereby authorised to apply to the High Court of Chancery in Ireland, by petition to the Lord High Chancellor, for leave to make any permanent improvements in such settled or other estates in Ireland aforesaid, in the manner and by any of the ways or means for which loans are hereby authorised to be made by the Commissioners of Public Works, and so applied, and in such petition to pray that the expenses of making any such permanent improvements may be defrayed by advances out of any such moneys in the hands of such trustees or guardians, or others, or otherwiss invested as aforesaid. And be it enacted, That upon the presentation of any such petition as aforesaid, it shall be lawful for the said court :to refer it to one of the masters of the said court to make all necessary and proper inquiries, and to consider all such estimates and valuations as shall be produced before him in relation to the matter of such petition, and thereupon to report whether, in his opinion, it would be beneficial, to all persons interested in the estates, that such permanent improvements should be made under the provisions of this Act. And be it en acted, that such report shall be filed according to the practice of the said Court, and that thereupon it shall be lawful for the said Court, upon the petition of the p rty obtaining the same, to confirm the said report absolutely and to make an order authorising or permitting such perma nent improvements to be made, and the expenses of making the same, together with the expenses of obtaining the au thority of the said Court, to be accordingly advanced out of such moneys respeetively aforesaid, and that thereupon it shall be lawful for such trustees or guardians, or others, to advance and lay out such moneys accord ingly. And be it enacted, that after such moneys shall have been so advanced and laid out as aforesaid, it shall be :lawful for such trustees or guardians, or others, to apply to the said Court by petition to the Lord High Chan cellor, for a reference to the said master, to ascertain that the amount thereof has been fully expended in or about the making of such improvements, and in paying or providing for the expenses incurred and to be incurred, of obtaining the authority of the said Court ; and that upon the said master making his said report, and thereby finding that the amount of such monies had been fully expended as aforesaid, and upon the said report being duly riled according to the practice of the said Court, that then it shall be lawful for the said Court to make an order to confirm the said report absolutely, and to fully indemnify such trustees, guardians, or others on account of such application of the said trust monies as aforesaid. And be it enacted, that in every case in which such advances shall be made as last herein before authorised, the lands intended to be improved by means thereof, shall, from the respective tin - .es of making such advances, become and be charged with the repayment to such trustees, guardians, or committees, or others, for the time being, making or entitled to be repaid such advances, the amount of such respective advances after the rate of not less than 4/. I Is. por centum per annum, until the whole of such advances shall have been repaid, and such charge shall have priority over other charges, except Tithe Commutation Rent Charges, and any quit or chief rents incident to tenure. And be it enactad, that tenants for life and others having only a li mited interest in the land charged shall be bound to pay the said instalments which shall become from time to time due and payable, during the continuance of their respectiv• estates or interests, and shall be bound to uphold and main tain in good order and condition the works on ac count of which the lands shall have been so charged as aforesaid, as if such persons respectively were tenants for life, subject to impeachment for waste. And be it enacted, that in every case of improvements effected under the power or authorities last here inbefore contained, the said Commissioners of Public Works shall have the like power of determin ing and signifying the amount of increased rent or rents, if any, which the occupiers of such lands ought immediately or prospectively to pay, by reason of such im provements, and which increased rent or rents shall be paid and may be recovered in like manner, as respectively here inbefore provided in respect of improvements made by means of loans from the said Commissioners. Sir GEORGE GREY said that the clause did not encourage fencing so much as draining. Lord DUNCAN said that be had no wish, as stated by the Noble Lord, to grind down the labourers' wages. He wished to see every man obtaic a fair day's wages tor a fair day's work. W hat he did say was, that at the present rate of wages in that part of the country, it would be injudicious for the Govornment to encourage the landlords to undertake drainage, for at the present rite of wages it would not repay the cost which they would beat. After a few words from Mr. BAILLIE and Mr. HENLEY, Mr. AGLIONBY thought some protection should be afforded to the outgoing tenaits, else all the improvements that might be made would be lost. While on this sub.;ect he would suggest to the Howe the importance of measures, not only for subsoiling and hedging, but for the removal of the feudal tenures of the north of Ingland. Until they removed no tenant would undertake the improvement of the soil. The practice of ecclesiastical finis, which prevailed in certain parts, should also be grappled with, as well as the manorial rights of the north: There ought to be but one general tenure for the whole country, stool he trusted the Government would take up the whole question, so as to provide a remedy. Mr. G. W. HOPE wished toknow whether any improve ment or alteration was comtenplated in the Act commonly called " Montgomery's Act ?" The LORD ADVOCATE slid the present Bill was not for the purpose of adding to the burdens of the land, but for the purpose of disencumbering it, and enabling its capabili ties to be more fully ddiveloped After a few words from Captain HARRIS, Mr. B. ESCOTT thought that this was a Bill of which the landlords ought te.be justly ashamed ; but as he believed there was not the slightest chince of throwing it out, he would not take up the time of the House by discussing it. The principle of the Bill seemed to ie to give loans of money to landlords because they did not rquire it. Now he thought that that principle could be greatly improved by extending it to those parties who reatv required and deserved such loans. The Bill seemed to be intended as a compensation for something, what he did not know, nor .was he aware of the arrangements that had been entered into on the withdrawal of the Bill which preceded this, and the introduction of the present measure. Lord LINCOLN explained. The clause was then agreed to. On clause 2 being proposed, Mr. FOSTER moved that the words "provided always, that correct plans or tracings of the drainage as finally effected be deposited with and preserved for public use and inspection by the Commissioners" be introduced after the word "proposed." Lord MORPETH said that the proviso of the Hon. Gen tleman would subject proprietors of land to much inconve nience, and very considerable expense, particularly in some of the districts of Scotland, and would in many instances be altogether impracticable. For instance, Mr. .I.'Leod, of M'Leod, had an estate of some 10,000 acre., which had never been surveyed.land the probability would be, that even in the event of such plans being taken and deposited, lit would be found absolutely necessary to depart from them. Mc. ELLICE said that - , in corroboration of what bad fallen from his Noble Friend, he had only to say that when he was in Scotland he was obliged, in:conseitence of thelgreat expense to which proprietors would be stbjected for these specifica tions and plans, and the uncertainly that existed—that after all, when the plans were furnished, they might not be able to proceed with them—he was obliged to request the Commis sioners to place considerable discretion.in the hands of the land lords, in order that the works fright be proceeded with. Ile trusted that the Hon. Member would not press his motion. Lord DU.NCAN wished to kiow in what order the appli cation for loans would be considered? _ _ On the questiou being put for the second reading of the clause, Lord MORPETH said, in tte order of arrival. Mr. AGLIONBY suggested the withdrawal of the amend ment. If, however, the plans were prepared, it ought to be done at the expense of the geteral fund. After a few words from Lord GEORGE BENTINCK and Mr. HUME, Mr. FORSTER said:he would consent to amend his proviso, so that the plans and surveys should only be made in cases where the Commissioners deerred it expedient, but he must decline withdrawing it altogether. Mr. AGLIONBY would support the proviso as amended, upon the understanding that the expense was to be defrayed out of the general drainage fund. Lord LINCOLN opposed the amendment. The money ought to be:general and not partial; but, nevertheless, he:con sidered it altogether unnecessary, and he hoped therefore Government would resist the amendment. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER took the same objection to it that he did when the Noble Lord pro posed it on a former occasion. He must, therefore, resist the introduction of the clause. Viscount NEWRY said it was not fair to refuse trustees the power of improving the estates placed in their hands as trust property Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL urged upon Government the necessity of reconsidering their decision upon this clause. A good deal of land would remain unimproved if they did not. After a few words from Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN, Mr HUME said, it appeared to him that it private indi viduals could be found to advance money to improve pro perty in Ireland, it would be much better to take it from them than from the public purse. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the Hon. Member for Montrose misunderstood the meaning of the clause. It was not to enable trustees to advance their trust money under this Bill, but to expend it in the improvement of their own land. After a few words from Lord MoftrEm and Mr. AG LIONBY, ➢ir. FORSTER protested that the discussion had not changed his opinion upon the subject. Nevertheless, as there appeared so much opposition to it, he would witildraw the amendment. Mr. lItJME thought that the present was not a fitting op portunity to go into the subject. The Earl of LINCOLN hoped that the Government would consider the subject at the present time. He thought it desirable that some provision should be intro duced into the me•tsure as speedily as possible, and that those Acts introduced a few years since by the Duke of Richmond and the Hon. Member for Berkshire, might be taken as a basis for those provisions. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD wished to express his dissent against clauses 34 and 44 of the Bill, the fountr clause giving the Commissioners power to enter on the lands of any person against their wishes, and the second clause gave them power to increase the amount of the rents, and he wouLl give notice that upon the third reading of the Bill he would move that those two clauses should be expunged. Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL thought it of great importance that capital should be set as free as possible for employment at the present time in Ireland. The amendment was accordingly withdrawn and the clause agreed to. Clauses 3,4, and 5, were agreed to. On Clause 6 being proposed, Sir GEO. GREY said, with reference to what had been recently stated by the Hon. Member for Falkirk, with regard to the limitation as to the completion of the works, he wished to observe that the abject was to diffuse the benefits of the Bill as extensively as possible. It was considered, therefore, moat advantageous for this purpose if the loan to each pro prietor was limited to 15,000/., and if the period should be extended to five years instead of three. A discretionary power was given to the Lords of the Treasury to enlari.e that amount in special cases where it could be shown that the landlords could beneficially apply it, and that the works could be com pleted in three years. The Right Hon. Gentleman proposed an amendment to that effect—" That there should be no grant exceeding 15,0001., and that the period for the com pletion of the works should be extended to five years." Sir J. GRAHAM was of opinion that with regard to the Highlands of Scotland a discretionary power as to the loan was properly lodged with the Treasury, and he highly ap proved of the extensio g n ra o n ft d thelormeiata etch individualtionastotimpe,robpuntetlorer thought the amount granted was too large. The primary object to be considered was, the advantage of the great bulk of the people, and the pro duction of the greatest quantity of food ; the interest of the proprietor was a secondary matter. / ow those who wanted the assistance were not the large proprietors, but the farmer and yeoman. Ile wished the benefit to be diffused as widely as possible, and if 15,000/. were to be advanced to each individual, it would greatly fetter them, and prevent them from being able to diffuse the beeetits of the Bill as widely as they could do if they limited the loan to 10,000/. 1 to each applicant. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK thought, as the object of the Bill was to increase the production of food, and to advantage the country generally, and if this could be affected by the Bill, it did not matter whether the loans were large or small, or to what class of proprietors they were given. He thought they should not diminish the amount, but in case there were more applications than they had money to lend, the Government should borrow a few millions more to enable them to do so. Lord DUNCAN said that the interest of the additional money which the Noble Lord ( Bentinck) proposed to raise would have to be paid by the working classes, and, therefore, he deprecated such a course. Ile agreed with the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham) that the loans to each individual should belimited to 10,030/. Lord GEORGE BENTINCK said, the Noble Lord who had just sat clown could not have read theißlil just snow,otr he as would to not have made the statement made b y him the working classes paying the interest of the money. The Bill imposed the payment of both principal and interest on the landed proprietors. Mr. AGLIONBY disagreed with the Noble Lord. The money would have to be borrowed by Government, and i! the statement which had been made by the Hon. Member eased Government ratrate oi for Montrone o n b e e y c o o n r r c x t , c h a e s q t u o e r t - l b re i n l s ec a e t s a s i n t3 i - n o c f r borrowing interest, he could not see that the interest would be paid by the landed proprietors. Sir GEORGE CLERK considered that 10,000/. would be a sufficient limitation to the amount to be granted to a proprietor; 10/. an acre would be a large sum to allow for drainage, and that would permit ten thousand acres to be improved. Mr. HENLEY considered the suggestion of the Right Hon. Baronet as most valuable, and he hoped the Govern ment would adopt it. After some further discussion, The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that it appeared to him that the majority of the House was in favour of the reduction proposed by the Right Hon. Ba ronet.—( Hear, hear.) He was not prepared to say what course the Government would take, but .he would promise that the subject should be taken into consideration. Sir J. GRAHAM said that the statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman was satisfactory. The Government would find that the limit of 15,0001. would compel the Government to reject many applications, but the limit of 10,0001., would enable them to meet all the requests for loans under the Act. After a few observations from Mr. A. OSWALD, which did not reach the gallery, Mr. S. HERBERT said that, if a maximum was at all made, it should be fixed as high as possible. Mr. AGLIONBY arid the money proposed was not merely to be lent to the landowners, but for the higher purpose of bringing a larger area of land into cultivation, and finding employment for the poorer classes. If it were a mere land lords' Bill he would never have supported it. Mr. CAYLEY:submitted that the Bill could not avoid benefiting the landlords, while at the same time it extended the field of employment for the people. Whether the large proprietors or the small ones borrowed the money was a matter of indifference so long as the object of finding the people employment was realised. He could not, therefore, agree to limiting the sum to 10,0001. Mr. B. DENISON, differed altogether from the last Hon. Member. He could not agree that the smaller landed pro prietors should be shut out of the benefit of loans, because the large proprietors had made extensive application for sums, and were to be allowed to borrow to the amount of 15,0001. each. The clause, as amended, was then agreed to. The remaining clauses were then agreed to, and the Bill was ordered to be reported on Friday. The House then resumed. LANDED PROPERTY (IRELAND) BILL. Oa the motion for bringing up the report on this Bill, Mr. WILLIAMS said, that the House would see that there was an additional grant of half a million given by this Bill to the landlords of Ireland. He believed that the amount of money applied for had been very limited, and he should wish to know what those precise amounts bad been. Viscount NE WRY then moved the following clauses:— And whereas it may happen that there are now, or hereafter may be, in the hands of trustees or a trustee of a settlement, or will, or codicil, moneys produced by the sale, or received for equality of exchange of settled estates or hereditaments in Ireland, under a power of sale and exchange, or under trust for sale, in such settlement, or will, or codicil contained, and which moneys are liable to be laid out in the purchase cf I other estates or hereditamems to be settled to the same or the like uses, or upon and, for the same or the like trusts and purposes as the estates or hereditaments, from the sale or exchange of which such moneys were produced, and there , may be now or hereafter moneys in the hands of trustees, or a trustee, of a settlement, will, or codicil, produced by a sale or sales of settled lands or hereditaments, in Ire land, compulsorily or otherwise, made to or for the purposes of a railway or other public company, or other moneys liable to be laid °et in the purchase of lands or hereditaments, and which moneys may be I advantageously advanced for the purpose of being laid out in the permanent improvement of such settled estates, and there may be now or hereafter moneys in the hands of trustees or guardians for infants or others under legal disability, or moneys of persons of unsound mind, which may be advan- Mr. AGLIONBY thought that it was the duty of the Government to bring in a Bill upon the subject, and not allow the expense and trouble of doing so to be borne by any individual Member of the House. %ir. LABOUCHERE said, he agreed in the observation that this was a measure with which the Government could more easily deal than any individual Member. He hoped sincerely that the Government would be able to introduce a measure upon that subject, but he would entreat the House to remember that the Government could not pledge itself to bring in any other measures than those which they had introduced until they had been able to see what progress they could make with those which they had undertaken. The Government had been asked dcring the course of the day, to bring in no less than three Irish measures. Mr. MORE O'FERRALL said that if such a measure WAS brought in, it ought to be done so by her Majesty's Go vernment. Property in Ireland was under such restrictions that the proprietors were prevented from raising money to improve their estates. After some further discussion, the amendment vas negatived. Lord COURTENAY moved that the following clause be added to the Bill :—lncorporated Companies for im provement of Land in Ireland, empowered to borrow money for the purposes of this Acl.—And whereas so cieties or companies incorporated by. Act of Parliament, or established by charter, in Ireland or in England, for the im provement of land in Ireland, or for reclaiming land in Ire land, may be desirous of applying for advances of money under the provisions of this Act, but doubts may arise whether such societies or companies are within the provisions of this Act, and whether they are authorised to borrow money, by reason of the ab sence of special authority in their Acts or Charters of In corporation or being applicable t o thi s Act. ; be it there fore enacted, that it shall and may be lawful for the trustees or directors of any such society or company, incor porated by Act of Parliament or by Royal charter, solely for the improvement of land in Ireland, or for reclaiming land in Ireland, and which society or company shall be en titled to any such lands proposed to be improved under this Act for an estate in fee, or under and by virtue of any lease for lives renewable for ever, or for a term of years whereof forty years or more miy be unexpired at the time of applica tion for a loan under this Act, to convene a special general meeting of the shareholders, with such notice as may be required by the respective Act, or charter of incorporation, and specifying in such notice the object of such meeting, and to submit to such meeting a proposition for borrowing money under the provisions of this Act; and, if the majority of the shareholders present at such meeting shall authorise the directors to borrow a sum of money under the provisions of this Act, it shall and may be lawful for the said Commis sioners of public works, it they shall think fit, upon the appli cation by memorial of the trustees or directors for the time being of such society or company, to advance any sum of money not exceeding the sum by such resolution of the special meeting authorised, upon the security of a rent-charge, or rent-charges, under this Act, although such society or company may not have powers independently of this Act to borrow money, or may have special powers of borrowing which shall not have arisen; and in any such case such trustees or directors for the time being shall or may be considered as owners; under the provisions of this Act, and they are hereby authorised to do all acts which any owner ot land, as defined in this Act, is authorised and em powered to do in relation to loans to be made, or rent-charges to be created, under this Act, or any works of improvement to be executed under the same, or other the purposes of this Act ; and upon any advance being made to the trustees or directors for the time being, of any such society or company, under the provisions of this• Act, tie lands belonging to any such society or company, and mentioned in the order ot the said Commissioners, shall be charged and chargeable with such rent charge, or rent-charges, as by this Act provided in respect of any loan or advance thereunder, and subject and liable to the like provisions and regulations as in this Act contained in relation to such rent-charges and the priority of the same. On the motion for the second reading of the clause. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that the objects contemplated in the Noble Lord's clause had been so nearly provided for in the Bill that he really did not see a necessity for adding to its general provisions. LordCOURTENAYsaid the professed object of the Bill was to give employment to the poor, and he never looked upon it as calculated to benefit property in Ire land. It was with the former view that he had proposed this clause, but as he was not disposed to throw any impediment in the way of the Bill, he woald,-with the permission of the House withdraw the clause. The clause was accordingly withdrawn. An amended clause, proposed by the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, was then agreed to. The further consideration of the report was then post poned till Friday next. LOAN BILL. The Loan Bill was then read a third time and passed. REPORT OF THE RAILWAY COMMISSIONERS. STRUTT said he was unable to lay the report of the Railway Commissioners upon tl►e table of the house, in con sequence of a great number of inaccuracies in the informa• tion furnished by the railway companies themselves. He very much regretted that such was the f►ct, but the fault did not lie with the Commissioners but the railway com panies themselves. The House then adjourned at Six o'clock. TUESDAY NIGHT'S GAZETTE. DIVIDENDS DECLARED. W. Looney, cooper, Whitehaven—third and final dir. of 3t/ d. in the pound (in addition to 4s. 3d. in the pound pre- viously declared), on any Saturday, at the office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne. J. Ramsden, li en., cloth manufacturer, Armley, Y or k s hi re —a first and final div. of Is. in the pound, on any Friday, at the office of Mr. Kynaston, Leeds. J. Ramsden and J. Ramsden, jun., cloth manufacturers, Armley, Yorkshire—first div. of 9%c1. in the pound, on any Friday, at the office of Mr. Kynaston, Leeds. E. Lilly, timber merchant, Hull—first div. of Bs. in the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Kvnaston, Leeds. W. Baldock, grocer, Nottingham—first div. of 6s. 3d. in the pound, on any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Christie, Birmingham. Tring, Reading, and Basingstoke Railway Company, New Broad-street, City—first div. of 20s. and four per cent. interest in the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Graham, Coleman-street, City. R. A. F. Kingscote, merchant, Sandgate, Kent—first div. of 235. In the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Graham, Coleman-street, City. J. Wilcex, tailor, Little 8011-alley, Moorgate-street—first div. of 2s. in the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Graham, Coleman-street, City. W. Vann, upholsterer, Old-street, St. Luke's—a div. of 7 1 4 d. in the pound, on Thursday, March 11, and three fol lowing Thursdays, at the office of Mr. Belcher, King's Arms yard, Moorgate-street. W. Smith, timber-merchant, Curtain-road, Shoreditch— a div. of 1 3 / 4 d. in the pound, on Thursday, March 11, and three following Thursdays; at the office of Mr. Belcher, King's Arms-yard, Moorgate-street. J. Wragg, iron merchant, idelina-place ' Westminster bridge-road—a div. of 6s. Bd. in the pound, on Thursday, March 11, and three following Thursdays, at the office of Mr. Belcher, King's Arms-yard, Moorgate- street. T. Wilson, T. K. Wilson, and W. Wilson, linendrapers, Liverpool—a div. of 7d. in the pound, on Thursday, March 25, or any subsequent Thursday, at the office of Turner, Liverpool C. K. Wilson and Brother—first of Os. 6d. in the pound, on Thursday, March 25, or any subsequent Thursday, at the office of Mr. Turner, Liverpool. R. Hamilton and W. Graham, merchants, Liverpool— second div. of 6 1 4 d. in the pound, on Thursday, March is, or any subsequent Thursday, at the office of Mr. Turner, Liverpool. J. C. Kemp, merchant, Liverpool —a div. of is. 3d. in the pound. on account of the first div. of 3s. 6d. in the pound, on any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Turner, Liverpool. G. C. Crofts, corn merchant, Liverpool—first div. of Is. 3d. in the pound, on any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Turner, Liverpool. H. Williams, apothecary, Llanrwst, Denbighshire—a div. of 3d. in the pound, on any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Turner, Liverpool. DIVIDENDS. At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street. G. Park, tailor, Bury-street, St. James's, March 30, at two —W. Hambly, msrchant, Great Bell-alley, Coleman-street, City, March 31. at half-past twelve—F. Bozon, Critchett place, Hortou New-town, March 31, at half past eleven—J. Frost, jun., groccr, Bury St. Edmund's, March 30, at eleven. In the Country. J. H. Bedford, artists'• colourman, Bristol, April 6, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court—R. Nayler, licensed victualler, Marlborough, Wiltshire, April 6, at twelve, at the Bristol District Court—H. Leonard, ironmonger, Cheltenham, March 30, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court—B. Breedon, tailor, Wellesbourne Mountford, March 31, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court—E. D. Hall, currier, Walsall, Staffordshire, March 30, at twelve, at the Birmingham District Court—R. Harris, glass manufacturer, Birmingham. March 30, at twelve, at the Birmingham Dis trict Court—J. Lawley, cooper, Stafford, April 13, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court—S. Brothers, currier, Newcastle-under-Lyme, April 13, at eleven, at the Birming ham District Court—F. A. Wheeler, percussion cap manu facturer, Birmingham, March 30, at twelve, at the Birming ham District Court—J. P. Horton, engine boiler maker, West Bromwich, April 13, at twelve, at the Birmingham District Court—J. Payne, draper, Weymouth, April 1, at one, at the Birmingham District Court—T. Rudd, provision merchant, Braugh, Westmorland, March 30, at one, at the Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court—W. H. Fitzhugh, merchant, Liverpool, April 2, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court—W. Lancaster, ship owner, Liverpool, April 2, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court—J. Adamson, grocer, Stockport, April 1, at one, at the Manchester District Court—G. H. Openshaw, power-loom cloth manufacturer, Over Darn en, Lancashire, April 8, at twelve, at the Man chester District Court. CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the contrary, on the day herein mentioned. T. Bowyer, bookseller, Strand, April I—C. Ashby, tailor Bishop's Stortlbrd, Hertfordshire, April I—T. Melton, inn keeper, Lincoln, March 31—J. Leipold, music seller, Birming ham, March 31—T. Hulse, bootseller, Birmingham, April 3, —J. Timmis, wine merchant, Newcastle-under-Lyme March 30—J. Taylor, rope manufacturer, Manchester, March 31—J. B. Morris, boot maker, hull, March 30—W. Jones and J. Clay, boiler makers, Liverpool, March 30—W. L. Prattman, timber merchant, But terknowle-lodge, Durham, ,larch 30-11. Cowie and J. Clarke, merchants, Liverpool, March 30-11. Parratt, coach builder, Clifton, March 30—J. Walton, tailor, Leeds. Marsh 30—J. and J. Boyd, seed mer chants, Wellington-chambers, Southwark, March 30. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE. OF COMMONS, March 9. ABOLITION OF PUNISHMENT OF DEATH. Mr. EW ART rose to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice—namely, the total Isbell-- 6°n of the punishment of death. He said that it was now seven years since he had the honour of bringing this subject before the attention, or rather before the patience, of the House. In these years this subject ex cited a deep interest, but it had now assumed a far deeper and greater interest. He thought this was shown partly in the number of petitions on the table, and partly by the numerous - meetings which had been held throughout the country. At that time few of the clergymen of the Established Church had given in their adherence to the principle of the total abolition of the punishment of death, but now they had vast num hers who thought as they did, and who had not only appended their names to petitions, but also appeared at public meetings held for the purpose of advo cating the doing away with that punishment. There was also a great difficulty in obtaining verdicts from juries which involved the punishment of death. Many instances had occurred of this kind—instances in which the guilt of the criminal had been clearly esta blished, but in which the juries refused to return a verdict of guilty. He would not enter into the theological or theoretical view of the question. He contended that .nothing but necessity could justify punishment by death. One of the most eminent of Italian writers had written upon this subject, he re erred to the Marquis Becarria: the ground of his argument was, that it was impossible to justify the in fliction of capital punishment, except upon the ground of absolute necessity.—( Hear, hear.) Another person who had also denoted considerable attention to the subject of criminal jurisprudence—no less a personage than the King of Sweden—had also written upon the subject to the same effect.—(Hear, hear.) The question he put before the House and the country was, whether the infliction of capital punishment was any longer necessary for the execution of justice. First of all, he would prove that it was not necessary, and. secondly, that it was positively injurious. It was quite evident that punishment of death was unnecessary, from what took place under the reign of Leopold of Tuscany, while he need not remind the House of what occurred under the administration of Sir James Mackintosh in India, who abolished capital punishment, nor need he remind them what happened when Lord Minto was in power in India, who also abolished capital punishment. In both cases capital crimes diminished, and the same result had followed the abandonment of capital punishment on the part of the present Emperor of Austria. Why, when it was moved to abolish capital punishment in cases of cattle stealing and forgery, it was urged that it would be dangerous to the country. (Hear.) But how erroneous had this proved to be ! The semi argument would apply with equal force when used in reference to other crimes, which were formerly punished icy death, as a diminution rather than an increase in their number had taken place, bui virtually they only retained the punishment of death for murder. It was true, there were two or three crimes which, ttectrding to the statute book, were punishable by death ; but the punishment was a dead letter—its living spirit only survived, for capital punishment was only inflicted for the com mission of murder. But on what grounds did they abolish capital punishment for other crimes and retain it only for murder ? The only argu ment was that there was some proportion between the crime of murder and its punishment by death—that a man who had killed another ought to be killed by the law in return ; but, atter all, this was nothing better than the law of retaliation, and would apply with equal force to other crimes with respect to which they had abolished the extreme punishment. The punishment of " an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth," had been abolished with respect to many crimes; therefore there was no tenable reason that it should be retained with respect to murder. Lord Bacon described such a punishment as " that sort of retalia tory justice which is nothing more than civilised and deliberate revenge." He would next proceed to deal with statistics, the authenticity uf which were undoubted, in support of his argument, that the punishment ought to be abrogated. He proposed, first, to adduce statistics relating to the period when corporal punishment was abolished with respect to many crimes; next, the period following it, and then he should compare them together and show the result. Periods of distress frequently en gendered violent crimes, so that they could not all be attributed to the violent passions of mankind. lie merely made these statements to show Hon. Mem bers who were opposed to him on this question that the increase of crimes to which he bad referred was not to be ascribed to the abolition of capital punishments, but to the distress which prevailed. He should limit his observations on statistics to a few returns mainly bearing on the particular question involved in his motion. The first return he would read to the House was one made on the 22d of May, 1830. It showed that in 1830, the year when the abolition of capital punishments took place to a considerable extent, and for five years previous to it, the number of crimes for which this punishment had been awarded was greater than during the five years succeeding. Taking again the five years ending 1825, the five years ending 1830, the five years ending 1835, and the five years end ing 1840, in each of these successive periods, a gradual decrease of crimes, for which capi tal punishment had been inflicted, was shown. In proportion as executions had decreased, so had also the crimes for which this kind of punishment was inflicted decreased in extent. But there was after wards another return called for, at the sugges tion of an excellent friend of his who had written on this subject. It was dated the 29th day of August, 1843, and showed a decrease of the crime of murder, and a lessening of capital punish ments, from the year 1812 to the year 1843. In the first six years of this period, when capital punishments were more frequent than in the remaining years of the period, the number of cap;.tal punishments was 122, and the con victions for murder 144; while in the latter six years, when capital punishments had decreased from 122 to 50, the crimeof murder had also diminished from 144 to 121. But there was another return which showed the effect of those years in which all parties convicted of murder were exe -1 cuted as compared with those in which fewest executions took place. That return was made on the 24th August, 1843, and showed that in those years where all parties convicted of murder had been executed, the crime of murder had increased from 239 to 270, and in those years in which the punishment of death bad decreased, the crime of murder had also diminished from 268 to 222. Now he would not overburden the House with further sta tistics. But he would wish to refer to other countries, to France, Prussia, Germany, and Belgium; and he wished particularly to refer to Belgium, as in that country , capital punishment was altogether done away The punishment of death had been abolished on that country in 1834, but in 1835 some wise philosopher conceived that it was again necessary to label t he capital punishment for the sake of setting an example' capital punishments were , th ere f ore , rev ived, and wh at was the result ? Why, that the crimes which in the years 1830 to 1834 had been only committed by 60 persons, had risen in the years succeeding the revival of the punishment of death to 80 or somewhat like 23 per cent: tie therefore thought th a t thi s was a s t r ong argument to show that that punishme n t was no t necessary. Il e thought that the present improved system of Prier discipline, the larger army of police kept up, not onli 1P the towns but in th e rur a l di str i cts , an d the exten ded education which was granted to all classes, were the best securities fur the due observance of the I°Y ; It was incumbent on them to prove that the punishment of death was necessary, rather than for him to Pr e that it was unnecessary. Ile was. however, prepare° prove that the puni s h men t o f d eat h was not only necessary, but was positiv e ly i n j ur i ous t o the criintet: the jury who tried the c a se , an d t h e pu bli c who wit nessed the execution. Th e fi rs t o bj ec t of all Ple as t ment should be to insure its certainty. At Pre s , e g e there was no certainty in th e i n fli ct i on of the pue' s sa meat of death ; the c r i m i na l f e l t that it w b i e uncertain, and this uncertainty encouraged in mind a species of moral gam bli ng , an d induced hi:: to stake his existence against the severity of the I t Another cause of the un ce rt a i n ty attending t h e pre , a t _ law was, the badly defin e d l ega l acceptation of the c ello : of murder; it depended upon the proof of the erl b t ce , having been committed with malice prepense. whet the criminal was or was n o t conv i c t e d ; an d this rasp;rde prepense was judged o f accor di ng to var i ou s standt, e by the different judges who tried the case. consequence of all this was, to encourage uncertainty' and that uncertainly would not fail to encourage ° r il l s° The magnitude of the punishment created a left heroism, but its great objection was, that it le` t , criminal unreformed, and sent him to his last account "Unabsolved, unannealed, with all His imperfections on his head." 'gee The existence of this punish men t en f ee bles the dee l of their tribunals, for the magnitude of the punishrat threw the crime into the shade. The decistons of tr A jury ought to be clear and distinct, and not overshadel7 by the magnitude of the penalty imposed by tabusta But what was the effect upon the public—the p/ 0 r . whom they ought first of all to look—the public ere a, whose sake it was said th a t ca pi ta l pun i s h m ents `s• to be continued as an examp l e ? Why, it 1,-e pitai punishment was t o b e cont i nue d , should tme ti e not make it a solemn, a ser i ous ceremony? why ne t 1 ;1 vest it with all the di g nity o f d ecorum ? B u t, los' r if of that, it was carried out hurriedly, at an sect, hour of the morning, a nd h a d no sa l u tary eu s ;td But what was the glorious example it was he ir to inculcate ? Would th e y w i s h an y of be et relatives, any of their child ren , t o w i tness a n °scone ? with the view of inculcating a deep moral lose% What father would take his children to witness suc b . b i. , exhibition ? None. Yet they held that such elt iP „ie • tions were for the publi c goo d ; b ut wer e the Pe e , whom they ought t o d o a ll i n their power to elevates ifi • stead of debasing and d e m ora li z i ng , to be allowed le l l o , to witness such sanguinary spectacles, and to have 7:es . natures thereby perverted and hardened ? We e „"ed'- would ask,was the effect of an exhibition upon the who witnessed it ? It was expected, as he haa e - ee r to do good ; but they left it with au,,e rence and disgust. And more, it bad 11- ete proved—repeatedly proved—that the spectators W o e brutalised, that many had subsequently h e tet' criminals, and that a great majority of the n untheree, e had been executed had, a t some p er i o d o f their 11 ;4 witnessed an execution.—(Hear, hear.) If it eoe f ,,, st e e good upon the public —if i t i ncu l ca t e d a were moral lesson its infli c ti on oug ht t o be were dignified, instead of hur r yi ng it over as if theY bed ' ashamed of what they were doing. Its effect was p•" • in the extreme, for after th e cr i m i na l was rather: a cts sidered a hero than piti e d. A ttempts h a d been ni-rder to get the punishment infli c t e d i n p r i va t e , is it • that the public mind might not be brutalised; but f were made private wh a t would become of theexateP le „ tP ea e wished to inculcat e ?— t h ere was an en d o f it at "i e ri But further, if they est a bli s h e d p r i vate execu tions, ' f ide then was their gr ea t m ora l examp l e ? S u ch PI r r ments could not be infli c t e d i n a f ree coun t r y withee:end ceiving the full force and pressure of public opinie n : in a country like England, no punishment Ot t o, not fully combi ne t h e f ee li ng o f pu bli c apre" P r er could be long maintained it must have the full ext tbe i sion of this opinion in its favour. It might be sai d d• ae public opinion w e nt i n f avour o f t h e l aw, b u t the recta' tions which he h a d p resente d t h at n i g h t w ould bu s that this was not so. And not only these petitions , f t he daily experience and the annually growing feelieE ; iht country was again s t th e pun i s h ment o f deat h. p i t hsßutke f be asked, what w ou ld h e su b st i tute f or i t ? 1-111eue,:dten refinement of th e s y stem of punishment which hadfot place thep might fairly substitute inaprisonm ee ' as s-. 1 life. 1 his had be en t rie d i n ot h er countr i e s, and he " s ttr, no reason why it s h ou ld not b e t r i e d i n this. It N an hi his system of punishment was not severe enough; 1 ;0 opinion it was f a r mo r e severe on th e individual toe the punishment of death, whil e it held out 1 .4. Prospect of the reformation of the crier Iu shorter periods of imprisonment the prisoner el l • come out, if not altogether improved, at least colnP e ,. at t tively pure. This might be done by irepriserortee t tiel it' legislation could not accompli s h every t hi n g. it es/re do much towards alleviating the evils by which the P• n r sent system was beset. But it was not for the objel t punishment that the imprisonment should bo impoio", is t much as the reformation of the prisoner, and they le, strike deeper than that for the extirpation of aim . They must educate the people, and not leave them to conceive that punishment was to become a sor t of • verge. There were two sorts of the which was internal, and which arose f her which operations of the mind itself ; and the other d was external, derivable from the influence of extern _ objects. Those were the means by educatiom which they tee they toe ffect the improvement of the culprit, for 11 most looked to the periods when the punishments were that every, they would find that crime was a t doe time most frequent. They need not look to the wer e of Henry the Eighth, when 70,000 Pers ees e y e eld executed, but to contemporan e ous history theY " t hat find from the excellent book of the King of Sweden , ' one in Spain, where crime was most frequent there w as ha s execution to every 150,000 persons, but in Swed e l et ose was one only to every 170,000 of the poPel"b e re The Hon. Member then quoted certain statistic': to s wa s that in those countries where the punishment of death ei• less frequent, the crime of murder was proportionalcoe tninished. He was aware this subject required theexe...„. of great patience on the part of the House, as the a iet nests were neither very new nor very interesting; there was one point to which he must r efer, 0 meant the consideration of this questio in cOn e ltes with the doctrine of Christian repentance. Some death opponents of the abolition of the punishment of d e li had conceded that two or three, four, five, or tee or should be granted for repentance, but they the l , e ital, ceded the principle that the abolition of all 7, p ' r ion punishment was necessary, as who could tell what rbts' vas required for repentance. In all periods of 10 0 4 tory of the world, when civilisation had ad v a eilt to the highest point, and the greatest 00 0 was shown to avoid the infliction of the punieb.l the, of death, in the high and palmy days of Rome, f lea close of her Republic, when she had attained the P e t i o le of her highest grandeur, and her greatest civilise they found in the fourth oration of Cicero Wine esie line, that there were many among them wh o .„ ego Mortem a diis immo r t u lib us non supp li c ii canisaw id ert datum; itaque cum sapienlis nunquim inviti feria " - p libenter oppetiverunt," Th ey f oun d that th i s avers' o v iol inflict the punishment of death was admirably der ee re in a speech of Mous. De Lamartine some bri,S , ago in the Chamber of Deputies ;„ re lie called upon the House to unite with hial_r er ebi pealing the punishment of 'death, to achieve t°_;'d a great social, moral, and religious victory, 1 ": offer up a last sacrifice, expiatory of the stte4,7 ; jier legislation of the past, upon th e unit e d a lt a rs of el" - don and Christianity. t hat Dr. BOWRING, in seconding the motion, sai d o ut every discussion which took place in that House, an he n' of doors brought the time nearer when the total bed Lion of capital punishment would take place. Seee ese fe riti hitherto attended every attempt to mitigate the se' j 0 0 1 of the criminal laws of the country, and he dout e l i t ion but that the same result would follow the total auu of the punishment of death. It would be found that state regard of human 'life was always associated with P en ne' of barbarism, and that a disposition to re tr ` e ." o ea. the sacredness of life, and .an t ill' to throw it away, was the great, the t e l6 ve guishing boast of civilisation and ehristr e bte and the furtherst advance of civilisation an d te ` et losophy. It would be found also that in a ets e - hefe society in which human life was wasted „v• t oe. would also be found, the greatest amount of f iia ' - e of The legisture wanted to create a horror of the c,r'; be' murder, and yet by means of their legislation te e J ae ad came murderers themselves ; they wished to r ir e r eisle life by safeguards, and y e t by t h e i r system s ot i . ment they strove to overthrow and destroy W ee the intention of the legislature to ehe ris e"oo lo they should not take it away themselves. - -% d The murderer was a man of universal abhorrence' setbeir undoubtedly ought to be so ; but did they et ree ee t e tielg object by this mode of punishment ? Had ex` - ' O Ol 4 impressed upon the public mind any additional hf ura ges By no means. It appeared to him that of all the J ' e test beings who gather around the scaffold, the g r a ;be number of them applaud the courage and heroism beg in sufferer, instead of decrying his crime. Let there We re themselves at the right end, by showing that thol e ; is not willing to destroy life—let them show that IS e r their estimate, was a thing too valuable to be spilt of thrown away, and thus, by adding to the self so life, they would create a new state of things, ana_! a b in prove the public mind, as even to effect a reform ,r the man who was disposed to throw life away sacrifices of life, and the amount of suffering t h e h e r nishment led to, induced him to think tha t some be mode of punishment could with safety and proprietlor adopted. It was most gratifying to contrast the legLae. tion of the past with the legislation of the presen e tu much as it proved that the experiments they had e lree e go o made had been successful, and he hoped the !, ~a , would, therefore, agree to the motion of his Hon. I . l .' le :ot Sir GEORGE GREY regretted that he coula ," a d agree to the Bill which the Hon. Gentle: 3 ; i %; it sought leave to introduce. On the present oe aliasr. was true he had avoided the objection which Ws merly entertained with respect to a similar Wist vhich,the Hon. Gentleman made settle years eV:4, O d 1841, he believed the Hon. Gentleman brought 0 aaffirermsoeludtion, that,w h i i n ch t , h i e f i o t p h in ad ion bee o n f a t d h o a p t te H d: ou w se e , llll , d e li p il it l a e l punishment ought to be altogether abolished o . b Je tt:: resolution as that was open to the greatest of and would have had the effect, if it had been adft e e " d ' placing those intrusted with the administ r the laws, in a vary. painful and difficult P°3144 S 0 th e in , jitord J. fo r Pre t , Y, coltEe, ~-- 11•111111