The Sun. — London, England, 1832-01-25 00:00:00

fore the House; the petitioners stated, that although they viewed the crime of " Burking" with great horror, they viewed the Bill with still greater horror, as they firmly believed it would open a door for a more " refined" system of " Burking." They concluded by stating that if the House were determined to supply the anatomical schools with " subjects" they would recommend the schools to be supplied with all persons, male and fern who were in the receipt of unmerited pensions, all sui cides, convicted felons, and those Members of the late Parliament who voted for Mr. Warburton's Bill. The petition was ordered to be printed. The Hos. MEMBER also presented a similar petitio❑ from Robert Thomas Webb, a surgeon, in St. Mar le bone, who, while he avowed himself an atheist, cared nothing for the form of burial, and did not care what be came of his own body after his death, but said he had a wife and family to whom the provisions of the Bill were highly objectionable.—The petition was ordered to lie on the table. Lord NIORPETH would take that opportunity of hav ing a matter set right about which there seemed to have been some difficulty. The House would recollect he pre sented a petition last night, which drew forth an anee dote from the Hon. Member for Preston, in which he alluded to an individual having stated that he had roasted his Bible. In these sources, from which the public gained their information of what passed in that House, the expression had been fixed upon a Mr. Baines, of Leeds. He (Lord Morpeth) was per fectly satisfied that the Hon. Member for Preston had not mentioned that gentleman's name, and he wished, there• fore to know whether that charge was intended for him ? Mr. HUNT felt quite certain that it would be in the recollection of the House, that he did not mention that gentleman's name. He mentioned the name of a Mr. Smithson, and had not the slightest intention of making any imputation against Mr. Baines. It was true that Mr. Baines had often traduced him in his paper, but he should be ashamed of himself if on that account he brought a charge so serious against him. Mr. STRICKLAND was quite certain that no person who had attended to the statements of the Hon. Member for Preston, could for a moment imagine that he had made such a charge as had been stated. He (Mr. Strickland) had no doubt that the mistake had arisen in consequence of the Hon. Member's observation not hay ing been heard. As the Political Union of Leeda bad been mentioned, he would take that opportunity of making an explanation which he had been requested to do the first opportunity. It would be in the recollectio❑ of the Hon. Member that not long since the Hon. Member for Kirkcudbright had made objections to Political Unions, and had more especially pointed at the Political Union of Leeds— Mr. WARBURTON rose N order. A petition had been presented against the Anatomy Bill, and the Hen. Member opposite had taken that opportunity of speaking upon Political Unions..--(Mr. Strickland at once gave way and the petition was ordered to lie en the table.) Mr. HUNT did not know whether, according to the forms of the House, he could move the printing of the pe tition, as it represented to be the petition of one person, hut bad been signed by upwards of 70 individuals, who coincided with its prayer and recommended its considera tion to the House. The SPEAKER thought that the petition could not be ordered to be printed, and Mr. Hunt would not press the motion upon the House. - Mr. HUME, in presenting seven petitions from diffe rent parts of Ireland, praying for the abolition of tithe', would take that opportunity of stating that he was extremely sorry that the Honourable Member was not present who made some observations rather per sonal to himself. It appeared to him an extraordinary thing that such language should he used in that House, calling the speech of an Honourable Member disgrace ful to him. If, indeed, they had freedom of speech in that House, he conceived such a proceeding totally un called for. He, however, would make every allowance, because he himself very often made use of expressions, which were given an interpretation to by others which he certainly did not intend. He had no hesitation furthi r ;n saying that he had used words which he should have been glad not to have uttered. But the sum and sub stance of the arguments used by the Hon. Member he had referred to was, that it was digraceful to state facts in that House.—(Loud and continued cheering.) With regard to the present petitions, they stated that the greatest distress existed in Ireland on account of Church taxation, and they characterised tithes as the Irish cholera, and stated that the people had began to think there that they were not morally liable to the payment of such extortions. For his (Mr. Hume's ) part, he had no hesita tion in saying, that if the Legislature of this country persevered in continuing laws that had perverted the feel ing of the whole nation to such an extent, as that they con sidered themselves not morally bound to pay tithes, it was a question whether it was not disgraceful to the Legislature to continue such Acts? He thought that ihe period hail now arrived when it was incumbent on Government not to be satisfied with reducing tithes only, but they must pro ceed to the Church property, the vestry law, and every tax which came under the denomination of Church tax ttion. If such taxation was continued, he would do as his an cestors had done before him in Scotland, resist such pro_ ceedings. —( Cheers.) Year after year had the complaints of Irishmen been brought before that House, and been almost always passed by, up to the present session. Sound policy—humanity—the interest of England and Ireland required that such laws should not exist, and if his Majesty's Ministers wished that unanimity should exist in Ireland and England, they must relieve the former from the expence of keeping up a garrison in order to en force the collection of tithes. He held it to be inconsistent with sound principles of policy in any country, to have any part of it treated as Ireland was; and he hoped that the day was not far distant when the ills of Ireland would he taken seriously into consideration by his Majesty's Go vernment. The Hon. Member concluded by moving for leave to bring up the petitions. Sir ROBERT PEEL did not know whether it would not he disgraceful not to adhere to the present system of tithes, but when the House had consented to a Committee it had not shewn a❑ unwillingness to consider whether any new arrangement might be made. In pursuance of his duty, he had that morning been occupied in consider ing the extent of the objections made, the nature of their ground, and the possibility of making sonic other arrangement. The time had not arrived to pronounce on the question, and he would not be led into the general question, notwithstanding the objections made. The Hon. and Learned Member for Kerry, said that he would propose the Hon. Member for Middlesex as a member of that Committee. But the Hon. Member for Middlesex said the question of tithes is useless, because the question of the payment of tithes had been decided. That question had not been decided. He had not recol lected having used the word " disgraceful," but while there were individuals who hail vested rights in property under the laws of the land, it would be disgraceful for the House of Commons to act on the assumption that that claim had been defeated, because the question had been settled by an illegal and riotous combination. He said that would have been disgraceful. He would not decide between the competency of the Legislature to consider the question, and the right which individuals had under the existing law. The Hon. Member for Middlesex said, if he were an Irishman he would resist the payment of tithes. But he had ❑o more right, moral, legal, or equitable, to defeat the claims of tithe-holders under the existing law, than a tenant had to resist the legitimate claim of his landlord. Mr. O'CONNELL did not believe that any thinking wan considered Ireland to have determined on refusing the legal rights of the working incumbents. But theme was an increasing determination in Ireland not to continue the payments of tithes, if the subject were not taken up in such a manner as to ensure a satisfactory settlement for the future. A Committee indeed had been appointed for eonsidiring the question, but that Committee could be no satisfaction to Ireland. It was appointed on the prin ciple that Catholic Members should be excluded ; that they had no right to search into and inquire what arrangements should be proposed in respect of tithes. What was this but announcing to Ireland that the Catho lics had no concern with tithes but to pay them ? It was a subject fit for the Legislature, to consider how far a popula tion, of which seven-eighths did not belong to the Est mblished Church, should pay for that Church which they did not want. As to the refusal to pay tithes, it was not, indeed, universal at present ; but, judging from its spread during the last year, if it proceeded in the same ratio, by next year it would be universal. It was therefore incumbent on the House to take up the question at the present period, in order that some satisfactory arrangements inight be effected. If the question were left to the people them selves, it would soon most effectually be decided. It bad already been decided in similar circumstances in Scot land, and it would be put an end to in Ireland, by another, but not less efficient means. The question, therefore, demanded the serious consideration of the House ; the people of Ireland showed not the slightest disposition, whilst they hated sinecures, to prevent the working clergy from being amply paid. Mr. STANLEY thought it would be extremely incon venient to enter into a discussion on the general question respecting tithes, either as regarded England or Ireland, nor would be have felt it necessary to rise on the present occasion, but for the remarks of the Learned Member for Kerry relative to the constitution of the Committee ap pointed. He might say it would have been more areordant with the rules of that House when the question was dis cussed, and the principles were laid down on which the Government formed a Committee. But there was one remark which he could net but make regarding the con stitution of that Committee. It had been the wish of the Government as much as possible to abstain from putting down the names of Members who ha,l in any very unequivocal manner expressed their decided opinion on the subject, and who were beyond the possi bility of being changed by reason or argumeat. Trutt while, so far as possib'e, they should endeavour to obtain Members on both sides, the main body of the Committee should be composed of me❑ of moderate feelings and sentiments, who should be ready dispassion ately to hear and impartially to consider the evidence ad duced. But the Committee had not been constituted on the ground that it was expedient, and would be more sa tisfactory to abstain from including Roman Catholic Mem bers. It was not come to from any feeling on our minds that the Roman Catholics would not conscientiously have discharged the duties imposed on them by their solemn oaths. Had his Majesty's Government been inclined to think the Roman Catholics would have swerved from such a duty, it could not have happened that every Member of the present Government, without one exception, for a considerable number of years would have supported as they did the claims of the Roman Catholics to stand in the British Legislature on the same footing with Protestants. It was with a view to convince both sides that fair and im partial justice would be done—to convince both parties that the Government was not desirous of putting on the Committee any person+ who might have a bias one way or the other—that it was thought expedient to adopt the course which was resorted to, and to prevent any thing like a complaint that the subject had been referred to a Roman Catholic Committee. The Roman Catholic Members of this House would, undoubtedly, have an opportunity of dis cussing the recommendations of the Committee, and any measure that might be brought forward in consequence of those recommendations for the considera tion of Parliament, as fully and as impartially as any Pro testant Member of the House ; but it was to be remembered that the question was one of a very extensive consideration as regarded the Established Protestant Church; and it was, moreover, conceived to be more expedient and more desirable—nay, to be acting with greater delicacy towards the Roman Catholics them selves, that Protestants only should be put upon the Coin mittee, and by no means from any wish to throw any im putation on the Catholics. From these motives, and from these alone, upon a subject involving an extensive Reform in the Protestant Church, it was thought more desirable that the subject should• be delegated to a Protestant Com mittee than to a Roman Catholic Committee, or a Committee composed of both. If any gentleman would take the trouble of looking at the names of those who composed that Committee, he must be satisfied that ample care had been taken that the feelings and opi nions of Roman Catholics should be consulted, and their views amply represented in that Committee by their Pro testant brethren. He (Mr. Stanley) had thought it right at once to state this, that it might not be supposed it was from any accidental circumstance the Committee had been composed, but from a conviction that the course taken was much more likely to prove beneficial than any other course that could be suggested. Upon that ground, and that only, if a motion should be persisted in, which notice had been given, to place upon this Committee Roman Ca tholics, he (Mr. S.) would feel it his duty to oppose it in Coto. He would oppose the placing on the Committee a Noble Friend of his own, who it had been said would be proposed to be placed upon the Committee—a gen tleman than whom no one could he more unexceptionable; but upon the ground that it would be a violation of the rule which the members of his Majesty's Government had laid down for acting upon on the subject, he would feel it his duty to oppose the appointment of that Noble Friend. He had now stated the views of Govern ment upon this question—the justice or injustice of the line of conduct they had taken would have to be decided upon by the House and by the country, but they had cer tainly thought it much the best way to put no Catholic name on the Committee. Mr. RUTHVEN, in allusion to the Committee which had been appointed, said he much regretted it was not so selected as to give satisfaction to the people of Ireland. The Members of it, however respectable, had so strong a bias, a bias which was so well known in Ireland, that it was highly improbable that they could give general satisfaction. Ireland had been repre sented as being in a much greater state of agitation and tumult than it had in fact been—(Hear, hear)—he had been in some parts where there had been no resistance to the payment of tithes, and in many cases the clergy were themselves unwilling to enforce the payment of them. Although he knew that some parts of Ireland were in a very disturbed state, still it was overstated in this House. The people wished to see the titles placed under proper regulations, and they conceived that the revenues of the C , ,urch as public property were at the disposid of the Le gislature. The people did not agree that tie tithes were the private property of the clergy. He earnestly called upon the House not to submit to intimidation, or to com binations, but to guard against such combinations, and to place the revenues of the Church establishment upon a proper footing. Mr. WYSE said that the resistance to the payment of tithes was rapidly extending. Last year it was only ma nifested in a small portion of the Queen's county, and in a confined parish of the county of Kilkenny. But now the principle appeared to be pervading the country in every quarter from north to south. It should be remarked that the opposition was shown—not against individuals, but against the principle. Where the clergyman had excited feelings of kindness, the people had not been backward in acknowledging it. He knew one instance where a clergyman, who for several years had been actively bene volent, bad recently been refused the payment of tithes. Two Roman Catholic clergymen, however, addressed their congregations, and having shown to them the benefit which they had derived from the conduct of the clergyman, de manded of them whether they would not spontaneously grant to him that which by law he had a right to claim. Those people did subscribe the money required—they gave it to the clergyman as a donation, but they would not give it as tithe. With respect to the appointment of the Com mittee, he was of opinion that some Roman Catholics ought to have been placed on it in order to satisfy tLe Ca tholic population of Ireland. Colonel PERCIVAL rose to contradict the statement of the Hon. Member for Kerry—namely, that all the Pro testants of Ireland were favourab'e to tie atrocious con spiracy against the payment of tithes. Mr. O'CONNELL—I did not say all the Protestants of Ireland. Colonel PERCIVAL—That atrocious conspiracy was fomented by those desperate agitators, who were the curse of Ireland. If it were not for that conspiracy, the Roman Catholics would be very willing to pay the tithes. Mr. HUNT thought it contrary to every principle of justice not to place Roman Catholics on a Committee. Mr. SHEIL did not think that the Gallant Colonel could have visited many parts of Ireland when he asserted that the Protestants of that country were to a man dis gusted with was called the combination against the pay ment of tithes. Surely he would not say that the Pres- • byterians of Ulster were strongly in favour of the tithe system. The fact was, that in every part of the country the impression against that system was hourly increasing. He (Mr. Shell) was happy to find that none but unbiassed and impartial Members were selected for the Committee. Yet he could not help observing, that there were acting on that Committee three Members for English Univer sities, and a Right Hon. Gentleman formerly Chief Se cretary for Ireland.—(Hear, hear.) To this Committee there were twe questions referred—the one the collecting of tithes, If hic ,• :- the Protestant department ; and the other the -? .„, , i them, which was the Roman Ca tholic d e , , , ; had formerly been complained that justice was no , t ministered in Ireland, because its administration elan, , rested with one party. Might not the same complainerhe made Fere, when on a question of fact some of those who had most interest in its decision were not allowed to assist in the investigation ? It would perhaps be alleged that the Irish were a suspicious people, —he admitted that they were ; but what had male them so ? Long continued wrong and grinding oppression. To dissipate any such suspicious feeling, some Roman Catho lics ought to have been mixed up with this Committee. Lord ALTHORP wished to say a few words with re spect to the constitution of the Committee. It was very well known that prejudices existed on both sides of this question, and therefore Ministers had selected none of those who had expressed strong feelings on the one side or on the other. They had selected a Committee, the Members of which they believed were well acquainted with the sub ject, and were most anxious to do impartial justice; amongst the Members of that Committee there were no less than seven gentlemen who represented very large bodies of Catholic constituents.—(Hear, bear.) Having selected those Members, it did appear to him that it was impossible for any one justly to say that the Catholic inte rest would not be carefully and impartially attended to, in the consderation of this great question. On the other hand, it should be recollected, that on investigating this subject they had not merely to look to the feelings of the people of Ireland, but to the feelings of the people of Eng land also. It was necessary to keep in view the senti ments of the Protestant population of both parts of the empire. This being the state of the case, he would ask, when the question under consideration of the Committee was one particularly applying to the interests of the Pro testant Church, whether great jealousy would not be ex cited against the settlement of that question, if Roma❑ Catholics had been allowed to take a part in its decision ? After a few words from Mr. C. PELHAM, Mr. WALKER, and Mr. HOLE, Mr. O'CONNELL congratulated the Right Hon. Se cretary for Ireland on the change that had taken place in his opinions with regard to the nature of Church property, and the power of Parliament to dispowe of it. The Learned Gentler - win postponed his motion for placing the name of Lord Killeen on the Tithe Commitee until to morrow. Mr. STANLEY said, that his opinions with regard to Church property had undergone no change whatever. He had always Feld that it would be most unjust fur the Le gislature to interfere with the property of the Church,with a view to converting it to purposes nut ecclesiastical ; but he would at the same time always assert the power of Parliament to regulate the property which the Church, a s a corporation, held in trust, and for the due management of which it was, like every other corporate body, respon sible to the Legislature of the country. The petition was then ordered to lie on the table, and to be priated• PROPERTY TAX. Colonel TORRENS said, that as he did not wish to interpose any delay whatever in the progress of the Re form Bill, he begged leave to postpone his motion that stood for this day, for leave to bring in a Bill " for re pealing such taxes as have the effect of lowering the profits of capital and the wages of labour, and for substituting in their stead a modified property tax," until Tuesday, the 6th of March. IRISH MAGISTRATES. Mr. G. DAWSON had a short motion to make, which would only take up the time of the House for a few mi nutes. It related to the fees demanded from the Magis trates of Ireland in the renewal of their commissions.-- The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for a return of the fees paid to the Secretary of the Lord Chancellor and the other officers in Ireland, for issuing new commissions of the peace there ; and also a return of the fees paid by the Magistrates of England for the renewal of their commissions on the demise of the late King. Mr. STANLEY would give a very brief answer to the wordy statement of the Right Hon. Gentleman. The payment of those fees did not depend on the will or autho rity of the Government, but upon Act of Parliament ; and in looking into the Acts of Parliament o❑ the subject, he was surprised to find that Magistrates in Ireland, in taking out new commissions of the peace on a demise of the Crown, were subjected to higher fees than the Magistrates in England were liable to on a similar occasion. A Magistrate in Ireland had to pay 21. I3s. 6d. for such a renewal, while the sum which an English Magistrate had to pay was merely a nominal one. The manner in which the difference of the law in the two countries on this point had arisen was this: —The Ist Geo. 111., c. 33, superseded the necessity of suing out new commissions in England on a demise of the Crown, but that Act did not extend to Ire land. By the Ist William IV, it was provided, that no fees should he payable for the renewal of commissions o❑ the demise of the Crown, except for the labour actually done in making out such commissions, and that the Treasury should have the power of determining the amount of re mon-ration to be awarded for such labour. The fees payable for the labour performed were accordingly reduced about one-half by a rn , nute of the Treasury, and thus the magistrates of Ireland, instead of having to pay 71. 15,. 61., had only to pay 2/. 138. 6d. Since 1760 the attention of Parliament had not been called to this sub ject ; but now th it it was, he would say that it would be proper to introduce a Bill for the purpose of assimilating the laws in the two countries on the subject. Colonel PERCIVAL said, that the dedimus issued to a magistrate in Ireland, on his renewing his commission of the peace, was a printed form with only one name to be written in it, and this was the work about which the Right Hon. Secretary spoke, and for which the fee of 21. I3s. 6d. was to be paid. He wished to know whe ther his Majesty's Government would pass a short Bill to put an end to such exactions. Mr. STANLEY said, that his Majesty's Government would not at present promise to introduce any such Act of Parliament. Colonel PERCIVAL read a letter which he had re ceived on the 9th of January (the day before that fixed for the Sligo meeting) from the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, superseding his commission, and calling on him to renew it. He stated that the other magistrates in Sligo received similar letters at the same tame, and that they all declined to take out new commissions, with the exception of the Provost of the town of Sligo. An Hon. MENIBER said a few words against the pay ment of such fees. After a few words from Sir R. Bateson, Mr. O'Connell, and Mr. Goulburn, Mr. Hume (who said he had before mentioned the case of the beef -eaters, and the exactions upon their commis.ions, and exhorted the Irish magistrates to resist the charge now made), Colonel Percival, and Mr. Ruthven, the motion was agreed to. THE VAUDOIS. Sir R. H. INGLIS said that the motion he was about to make had no reference to any party question, neither would he bring it forward on religious grounds. The Hon. Baronet the❑ gave a sketch of the Vaudois history, in the course of which he described them as being " lux in tene bris," while the rest of the North of Europe were buried in ignorance of the truth. He concluded by moving fir copies or extracts from the two treaties named relative to the Vaudois, for copies of the correspondence of the British Minister at Turin in the early part of the last century; and also fur copies of all correspondence between the Govern ment and the British Ministers resident at Turin, from 1814 to 1829, connected with the same subject. Mr. O'CONNELL seconded the motion. Mr. G ROSE sup oorted the motion. Lord PALNIERSTON assured the Hon. Baronet that the Government shared fully the sentiments of interest and sympathy expressed for this class of persons by the Hon. I3sronet, and those who supported his motion. If there were any infraction of rights respecting which we had the power to interfere, be (Lord Palmerston) would be ready to exercise that power, whether for the restoration of those rights, or the security of any privileges the Vaudois were entitled to. Sir It. INGLIS, after expressing his pleasure at the declaration of the Noble Lord, withdrew the two latter portions of his motion, and the first was agreed to. COURT OF SESSION (SCOTLAND). The LORD ADVOCATE moved for leave to bring in a Bill " to prevent obstruction of business in the Court of Session of Scotland." Sir G. CLERK and Mr. C. FERGUSON hoped that the Learned Lord would at the same time apply himself to placing the Scotch Judges on a footing with their English brethren, on the score of remuneration for their labours. At present the Scotch Judges did not enjoy one half the s dary of the English Judges, though their duties and ac quiretnents were at least equal, Mr. GOULBURN agreed with both Hon. Gentlemen as to the justice of increasing the salaries of the Scotch Judges. After a few words from Sir C. IVEmEitELL, Mr. flumE, and Sir E. SCGDEN, leave was given to bring in the Bill. PEERAGE CREATIONS. Sir C. WETHERELL postponed his motion relative to the number of Peers created since 1689, till the 6th of February. BRISTOL RIOTS. Mr. HUNT wished to know whether the Home-office had received an authentic account of the number of lives lost during the late riots and conflagration s at Bristol ? Lord ALTHORP said, the Hon. Under-Secretary for the Home Department would be in his place to answer the question to-morrow. HuA R IE EF ( O th R e IS ( ENGLAND) o i rderofthed IL Mr. ay f E ort L he . House re solving itself into a Co mm i ttee having been moved by Lord J. RUSSELL) wished to know whether tke Noble Chancellor of the Exchequer intended that the Committee on the Reform Bill should sit on Wednesdays ?—(, No, no," from all parts of the House.) Lord ALTHORP, in answer to his Hon. Friend's ques • tion, could only then say that Ministers saw no reason for taking the Committee on Wednesdays.—(Hear.) They intended that the Committee shou'4l sit on four days in each week, hoping that the same courteous understanding which obtained last session—namely of Hon. Members giving way to Ministers on those four days w h en t h e i r motions were not of urgent necessity or immediat e interest —would he persisted in during the p resent session.-- (Hear.) He did not expect that it would b e at all neces sary to take the Committee on Wednesdays .._( Hea r , h ear .) He therefore wouldthat evening move the adj ournment o f the Committee over to Thursday, taking chance for b.-ing able to make some progress after the motion which stood for that day shall have been di•tposed of. Tee House then went into Committee. Lord ALTHORP, on moving that clause seven stand part of the Bill, would take it upon himself to have the amendment of the Hon. and Learned Member for Bishop's that the pr esent Bill sha ll Cantle (Mr. Knight)--namely , not operate as law till the Bill for defining th e b oundar i es of the boroughs and towns mentioned in it should have "'~ ~ previously received the sanction of the Legislature—carried into effect.—(Hear.) Mr. KNIGHT felt thankful to the Noble Lord, and most willingly would leave the matter in his hands. Clauses 8,9, and 10, were then agreed to without com ment. Mr. GOULBURN objected to vesting in the sheriff the appointment of returning officer. Lord ALTHORP replied, that the concluding passages of the clause would skew the Right Hen. Gentleman that it was intended to give charters to these boroughs, which must obviate the inconvenience that he anticipated. The arrangement, in fact, would be only temporary in its ope ration. Mr. GOULBURN observed, according to the plan pro posed, the sheriff would be responsible to nobody for the consequence of his appointment. Lord ALTHORP thought the objections urged would apply as much to the enfranchisement of a few large towns to a general change in the representative system through out the country.—( Hear.) Sir C. WETHERELL insisted that the proposal of the Noble Lord was a complete innovation. Mr. O'CONNELL urged that the clause would only operate to the enforcement of what was at this day compel lable by the ordinary course of common law.—(Hear.) Sir C. WETHEitELL maintained that the Sheriff had no right to appoint deputies in the boroughs within his bailiwick. Sir J. SCARLETT said the mode of appointing the re turning officer by the sheriff was, in his opinion, more objectionable than if the appointment had been intrusted to the Crown. The Bill, however, had been much altered since the first introduction of the Ministerial plan into Parliament, and he could not understand why Government had nut inquired during the recess who happened to be the superior civil officer at each of the places in question, as such a functionary, one would suppose, would be a judi cious person to select for the appointment. There could be no objection to creating these newly represented towns corporations at once, only for the purpose of enabling them to send Members to Parliament, and this would obviate the difficulty now raised. It might in the mean time be left open to the Crown hereafter to make them corporations for all other purposes. He wished to add, that he did not object to the principle of this part of the Bill, but only considered it too violent and extensive an experiment to introduce thus at once. He would further recommend that the clause should be postponed for a few days, until the information to which he alluded could be obtained and acted upon. Mr. HUNT said that the Hon. and Learned Gentle- man, in addition to making these places corporations, ought to have proposed that the voters should he them selves empowered to elect their own returning officers, as had always been the practice throughout England hitherto. This was his (Mr. Hunt's) view of the Constitution.— ( Laugh ter. ) Lord ALTHORP believed it would be rather difficult to construct a short clause of the nature recommended by the Hon. and Learned Member for Cockermouth. He could hardly think that much danger of undue influence on the part of Government was likely to arise in conse quence of their voice i❑ the appointment of sheriffs, for really the preferment was very seldom looked upon as a favour by those who were the objects of it.—(Hear, and laughter.)—ln reply to the Hon. Member for Preston, Le could inform him that he knew of many instances in which the returning officers were not elected by the people as he so confidently asserted. Mr. Serjeant WILDE observed that the plan suggested by the Hon. and Learned Member for Cockermouth had really originated with his Learned Friend, Mr. Serjeant Merewether, who had been enforcing the subject with much ingenuity and learning for the last seven years. He considered it highly essential that it should be compul sory on the person nominated by the high sheriffs, to per form the duties of the returning officer, because consi derable inconvenience would result, if it were permitted to the person so appointed to refuse to undertake the office. After a few words from Sir J. SCA RLETT and Sir C. WETHERELL, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL concurred in the spirit of the observation made by the Hon. and Learned Member for Newark, and which he thought had not been fairly represented. He understood the Hon. and Learned Member to say, not that the sheriff had the power to nominate re turning officers in existing boroughs, but that whe❑ new boroughs were to be created, and the writs were sent to the sheriff, he must perform the duty of returning officer by himself or deputy. With respect to the sheriff, he con sidered that the officer was naturally the person to whom the power of conducting the elections in new boroughs should be given. Ile did not think that the suggestion thrown out by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman (Sir J. Scarlett), with respect to the incorporating the new boroughs for the purposes of the Bill, would have been any improvement ; and in conclusion, he begged to say that he hoped they would not fall into the practice of last Session, and waste the time of the House in frivolous dis cussion, on matters which it was evident bad been ar ranged in the most unexceptionable manner.—(Hear.) Mr. C. WYNN was of opinion that the sheriff was the fittest person to have the power of appointing the return ing officers; but he principally objected to the present clause, because that appointment was made compulsory. After a few words from Mr. Cressett Pelham, Sir E. Sugden, Mr. Hunt, Sir C. Wetherell, and Lord Althorp, the clause was agreed to. The 12th clause, respecting the elections for the county of York, was then read by the Chairman. Lord ALTHORP proposed that the blanks should be filled up, but we were unable to catch his Lordship's ob servations. Lord MILTON was of opinion that the ancient divi sion of the ceun'y should not be departed from. He could see no reason why Ainstey should be separated from the north riding. Mr. STUART WORTLEY conceived it better not to alter the division of the county. Lord MORPETH was in favour of the city of York having a share in the elections, and was of opinion that Ainstey should remain as it was. The clause was then agreed to, with the additions. Clause the 13th, respecting the elections for the county of Lincoln, was read. Colonel SIBTHORPE objected to the division of the county of Lincoln, as having a direct tendency to place a large portion of it under the influence of Lord Yarborough. Mr. WILKS hoped that the consideration of this part of the clause would be postponed until the question of the division of counties came before the Committee. Sir R. HERON conceived that no personal interest would, in con,equence of the proposed division, decidedly predominate in either section of the county of Lincoln. Colonel SIBTHORPE proposed that all the words occurring after the word " Lincoln," in the third line of the 13th clause, be left out. The gallery was then cleared fur a division. The numbers were— For the amendment Cr! Against it Majority against the amendment —l3l The elluse was then agreed to. The CHAIRMAN then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Thursday. ANATO3IY BILL. Mr. WARBURTON' moved that the House should go into a Committee, pro fbrina, to introduce a clause for granting salaries to inspectors. Mr. HUNT and Mr. ROBINSON opposed the motion. The House divided, when there appeared— Ayes (for the Committee) Noes 4 Majority —B3 Mr. WARBURTON observed, that Government ought to be repined to give small salaries to inspectors, though be believed in London and in the provinces competent persons might be found who would be willing to perform the duty for nothing. He was convinced that in England and Scotland the expence would not exceed 5001. a year. Some discussion took place, amidst considerable inter ruption, respecting the late hour at which this motion was brought on. Mr. HUNT moved that the Chairman report progress. The CHAIRMAN then put the question that salaries of 1001. each be granted out of the Consolidated Fund to the inspectors under the Act, and such sums for defray ing the expenses of such inspectors as may be deemed proper. The gallery was cleared for a division, but we under stood none took place, and the amendment was negatived. A division took place upon the resolution, when there appeared-- For the resolution 7S Against it none The resolution was agreed to, and the House resumed. The other orders of the day were disposed of, and the House adjourned at Two o'clock. IDEA! SONANS.—Lord F- married his c ook : there is no accounting for Lords' tastes. At the first grand dinner party after the honeymoon, her Ladyship was discomposed by the entrees not making their appear ance as speedily as they ought ; and she was sitting thoughtfully, with her hands before her on the table pondering how much quicker things would have been done had she been (as she had been) i❑ the kitchen. At this period an Exquisite playfully exclaimed, " Horrid pause!" Upon which her Ladyship coloured deeply, and replied, hastily withdrawing them, "If you, Sir, bad worked as hard as I have done, you would have horrid paws too !"--Litcrary Gazsite, VESTRIES' AMENDMENT BILL. The rejection of this Bill was manifest to the supporters of it, as the majority was of a mixed and unusual nature not to be easily accounted for. That those who oppose Reform in Parlia ment should also continue their opposition to the Reforrn in Se lect Vestries is quite consistent, and was to be expected: we, therefore, do not blame Sir Robert Peel, Sir H. Inglis, Mr. Goulburn, and all their associates, who have at all times objected to the abolition of the Select Vestries ; but that Lord Althorp, Sir James Graham, Mr. Rice, and their friends should be found objecting to the amendment of the Vestry Bill, and voting with the determined supporters of all ancient and restricted institu tions and abuses, must be surprising to every thinking man, and more so to a reflecting Reformer. The inspection of the list of the majority will show the strange mixture of Anti-reformers and Liberals—of Members of the late and the present Govern ment—which must really astonish the country. The history of the Vestry Bill, and the frequent disappointment of its supporters, is yet recent : and it cannot be forgotten that he discontent in th e metropolitan parishes, and threats to refuse the payment of church and other rates by the parishioners, and likely to be at tended with very unpleasant consequences, induced the present Ministers in the last Session of Parliament to sanction and sup port Sir John Hobliouse's Bill, and it consequently went through the House of Commons, pretty well calculated to answer the ob. ject of the petitioners—viz., " the abolition of self.elected Ves tries ;" at any rate the Committees of the several parishes were satisfied to make a trial of the Bill ; but in the House of Lords the Ministers were too weak to prevent the Duke of Wellington and his associates from mangling it in a shocking manner, and almost to deprive it of its efficiency. An effort was made, how. ever, by the Ministers, and the Bill was again altered, and much of the objectionable parts rejected, but enough remained to be, in the opinion of the Committees of the parishes, almost as a complete bar to their attempting to get rid of the self-elected Vestries, and they, therefore, now came to Parliament to have those errors corrected, and the Bill perfected. If Lord Althorp intended to concede a boon to the wishes of the numerous parishioners in and about London, he surely meant that the Bill should be such as would enable the parishes to act upon it. The parishioners, who know their own capabilities best, declare they cannot avail themselves of the intended boon, and that the Bill, unless altered, must be a dead letter to them. The Lords, for example, actually prevent the parishes from acting on the Bill until March, and when that time shall come, it is in the power of a minority of the rate payers in the parish to prevent its operation at all. Sir John Hobhouse stated as his reasons for the second reading of the Bill, " that the amendments might be considered in the Committee." That did appear to be reasonable, to say no more of it. And it was matter of astonishment to see the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his colleagues led so er roneously by Mr. George Lamb, to oppose the Bill, on the plea, as he stated, that, however absurd the Bill might be, and how ever inapislicable for the purposes intended, the House ought to wait, and that a trial of the existing Bill ought first to be made. That Mr. Lamb should oppose the Bill is no matter of surprise to those who recollect his declared opinions, and know he injured the existing Bill last Session by his amendments. But that Sir James Graham and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Rice, Lord Duncannon, and others, who had voted with Mr. Hob house for the Bill in former Sessions, when opposed by the Tories, should now be so glaringly inconsistent and hostile to their friends as to join Mr. Peel and the other Anti-reformers, and throw out the Bill, as there were only a majority of four against the Bill, it may be regretted that Sir John Hobhouse did press the House to a division at that time when unprepared, as it really does not appear possible, although the Ministers have acted inconsistently, that a House of Commons now supporting Reform in Parliament, could have been so inconsistent as to re fuse to sanction a complete, efficient, as well as speedy reform in the self-elected nomination Vestries. We hope for the character of the House generally, although the Ministers have shown they pay little attention to their inconsistency, that the Bill would have passed if there had been a full attendance. It is lamentable to think that the crying abuses of any self. elected vestry should be allowed to continue another year, and the more so when those abuses must be considered to be sanc tioned and perpetuated by the very Ministers who are support ing Reform, and pressing it with praise-worthy perseverance in the House of Commons. Let those who can account for such proceedings—we cannot, and will not attempt it. LIST OF THE MAJORITY OF 44, WHO VOTED AGAINST THE SECOND REAI)ING OF THE VESTRIES' AMEND MENT BILL —Jan. 23. Althorp, Vis.—Northamptonsh. Baring, F. T.—Portsmouth Burge, \V.—Eye Mangles, J.—Guildford Palmerston, Vis.—Bletchingley Peel, Sir R.—Tamworth l'onsonby, G.—Youghall Porchester, Lord—Wootton Campbell, J.—Stafford Copeland, Alderman—Coleraine Courtenay, T. P.—Totness Cramptou,P.C.—MilbournePort Duncannon, %Is. —Kilkenny Co. Dundas, It. A.—Edinburgh Estcourt, T. G. B.—Oxford Un. Forbes, Sir C.—Malmesbury Freshfield, J.W .—Penryn Freemantle, Sir T.—Bucking. Basset Praed, W. M.—S. Germain Rice, Rt. Hon. T. S.—Limerick Robinson, G. H.—Worcester Rose, Sir G. H.—Christchurcn Ross, C.—St. Germain Russell, C.—Reading Sam4on, Viscount—Liverpool Smith, V.—Northampton Somerset, Lord G.—Monmouth ham Goulburn. H.—Cambridge Un. Graham, Sir J. R. G.—Cumberl. Grimston, Viscount—Newport, Cornwall Herbert, E. C. H.—Callington Hodgson, Barnstaple Holmes, W.—Haslemerc shire Stanley, Right Hon. E. G. S.— j Windsor J Stormont, Visc.—Woodstock Wason, R.—lpswich Willoughby, Sir H.—Yarmouth Isle of Wight [Yorke, Capt.—Reigate , Hughes, W. H.—Oxford Jenkins, R.—Shrewsbury Joliffe, Sir W.—Petersfield Inglis, Sir R. H.—Oxford Un. Lamb, G.—Dungarvon TELLERS. Mackinnon, W. A.—Lymington Weyland J.—Hindon MINORI' Benett, J.—Wiltshire Blamire, W.—Cumberland Blackney, W.—Co. of Carlow Blunt, Sir R. C.—Lewes Bouverie, D. P.—New Sarum Briscoe, J. I.—Surrey Brougham, W. —Southwark Burke, Sir J.—Co. of Galway Carter, J. B.—Portsmouth Calcratt, G. H.—Wareham Calley, T.—Cricklade CY OF 40. Paget, T.—Leicestershire Pendarves, E. W.—Cornwall Phillips, Sir It. B.—Haverfordw. Ruthven, E. S.—Downpatrick Sanford, E. A.—Somersetshire Spence, G.—Ripon Strickland, G.—Yorkshire Strutt, E.—Derby Stuart, Lord 1). C.—Arundel Talbot, C. IL—Glamorganshire Thicknesse, It.— Wigan Venables, Ald.—London Walker, C. A.—Wexford Warburton, H.—Bridport Williams, W.—Monmouthshire Wood, J.—Preston Wilde, T.—Newark Wyse, T., jun.—Tipperary Co. Ellice: K —Coventry Ewart, %V.—Liverpool Gordon, R.—Cricklade Hoskins, K.—Herefordshire Hunt, Henry—Preston Lefevre, C. S.—Hampshire Marjoribanks, S.—Hy the Marshall, W.—Bevur ley Noel, Sir G.—Rutlandshire Nugent, Lord—Aylesbury O'Connor Don—Roscom. Co. TELLERS. Hume, J.—Middlesex Hobhouse, Sir J. C.—Westmin. PARLIAMENTARY PAPER. POPU, ,ATION. RETURN TO AN ADDRESS TO HIS MAJESTY, DATED DECEMBER 17, 1831 ;—FOR RETURN OF THE POPULATION OF THE SEVERAL COUNTIES OF ENGLAND AND WALES, SCOTLAND AND IRELAND, AS ENUMERATED IN 1831. WALES. COUNTIES ENGLAND. COUNTIES OF TOTALS. COUNTIES OF TOTALS. Bedford 95,383 Anglesey 48,325 Berks a 412 3 11 4 4 : 9 5 473, ' , :95:00, clCßMontgomery7,, )iaareerernr(Carmartheni.libiaginnrgahe. Cardigan hi, Buckingham 100,655 Cambridge.... Chester Cornwall .. .......... ... 30 ' 2 , 44 0 Flint 60,012 Cumberland ' 33,609 Derby 66,485 Devon Durham Dorset Essex .. .................. 317,233 Gloucester 386,904 Hereford Hertford Huntingdon 53,149 Kent Lancaster Leicester Lincoln Middlesex 1,358,541 Monmouth Norfolk Northampton Northumberland 2' 2 .2,912 Nottingham 225,320 Oxford Rutland 19,385 Salop Somerset Southampton Stafford 410,485 Suflblk Surrey 486,326 Sussex 272, 328 Warwick Westmoreland 55,041 Wilts Worcester 211,356 York (East Riding) 168,646 York (City) & Ainsty 35,:2,62 York (North Riding) 190,873 York (West Riding) 976,415 SUMMARY OF G England Wales Scotland .. Army, Navy, &c SCOTLAND. COUNTIES OF TOTALS. Aberdeen 177,651 Argyle 101,425 Ayr Banff' 48,604 Berwick ...... ....... .. Bute 14,151 Caithness 34,529 Clackmannan 14,729 Dumbarton 33,211 Dumfries 73,770 Edinburgh Elgin 34,231 Fife Forfar Haddington Inverness 94,797 Kincardine 31,431 Kinross Kirkcudbright Lanark 316,819 Linlithgow 23,201 Nairn Orkney and Shetland Peebles 10,578 Perth Renfrew Ross and Cromftrty Roxburgh Selkirk 6,833 Stirling 72,621 Sutherland Wigtown 36,258 ItEAT BRITAIN. 13,089,338 805,236 2,365,H.07 '277,017 T0ta1.... N.B.—No Return has be Whitehall, Jan. 19, 1832. 16,537,398 en received from Ireland. S. M. PIIILLIPPS. The GLORIOUS CAUSE of ANTI-REFORM. WARWICKSHIRE ANTI-REFORM PETITION. This praiseworthy document was sent to our public office yesterday morning, at eleven o'clock, for signatures, and up to twelve o'clock to-day, has received only five signatures. Rouse yourselves borough mongers, or you will be laug ht d to death. Mr. SERLE, of the Coburg, has a new tra gedy out at Drury-lan e Th eatre, i n which Mr. 51Amtc:ming AnYii to perform the principal character.— Taller. We contend that all the disgrace, all the obloquy, which has been cast upon the city of Bristol, bas resulted from the inefficiency of its local government, We therefore regret, deeply regret, that his Majesty's Mi nisters have delayed to institute a rigid inquiry in the right quarter. The term Bristolian has become a re proach, confidence has been destroyed, trade is languish ing, the task of patrolling by day and by night has been imposed on or undertake❑ by the citizens, our streets teem with military, and every thing wears the appearance of a city requiring some extraordinary effort to restrain the whole population from revolt ; and all this because the timidity of those to whom we had a right to look for pro. tectio❑ in a case of emergency gave a licence, at least in roost eases, to a comparatively insignificant number of wretches to revel in the work of destruction. We re gard such conduct as a monstrous case of public delin• quency, and it is one to which our minds will never be reconciled, uutil a full and impartial investigation shall have bad the result of accumulating on the criminals that disgrace which now would seem to rest on the heads tf the entire population.—Bristol Mercury. TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN. Strt,--It may be satisfactory to the British public I know how the prisoners are managed _in the Penitentiar of Maryland, in the United States of America, that Rom comparison may be made of the expence which is incurre there and in England for the same purpose. In the Pen tentiary at Milbank, the only one in England, 19,700, was voted in 1831 for the maintenance of 550 cor victs, being 361. for each convict.* In Maryl in Penitentiary there appears from the report, date Baltimore, December 20, 1830, a profit of 4,316 dollar in the year 1830, after paying 3,000 dollars for interests the money for building the Penitentiary for maintenance convicts, salaries of officers, and every other expence ! What a contrast! The Penitentiary at Milbank cost fc building upwards of half a million sterling, and costs abou 20,0001. sterling yearly for its maintenance; but to ac count for that difference, look at 5,8001. for salaries, am notice the salary of the Chaplain, the Surgeon, &c., twit as much as many populous and virtuous pari.hes in Eng land can afford. But England is the country in whir every device has been resorted to as an excuse for extrava fiance, and for providing places for the dependants of sour man in power. We believe that the system of work an of education carried on in the Penitentiaries in Americ is as superior to that in England, for the purpose of u forming the convicts, as their expence is less. On the Ist December, 1829, there were in the Maryland Penitentiary Admitted in the year ending 30th November, 1830 ll 41 Diccharged in the year IC Remaining on the Ist December, 1830 gq Of the 117 prisoners there were 58 m ties and 1 female whites, and 43 males and 15 females, blacks; of the /1' there were 102 Americans and 15 foreigners; of the 101 Americans, 33 were from Maryland (of whom 72 wer final Baltimore), and 19 from the other States; of the If foreigners, 11 were Irishmen, 1 Englishman, 1 Scotsman and 2 South American. As death is abolished in th United States, except for murder, it may be worth know. ing the punishments that take the place of hanging, whicl disgraces this country. Of the 117 committed to th Penitentiary— Go were committed for 2 years. 7 7 ...... ... ditto 28 6 4 1 o 1 1 . ..... ... ditto The Committee, in their report to Thomas Kini Carroll, Governor of Maryland, make the following observations as the result of their experience, which ma] be worthy the attention of the County Magistrates it this country, who have converted the prisons into palace: at an enormous expense to the country, and yet withou adopting any efficient system of classification and educatiot for reforming the convicts, like what the Americans adopt " The f tet (states the report) confirmed by the whop history of crime, that neglect of education in its relation] to mental cultivation, and the means of procuring honest subsistence, is among the most fruitful sources of vice ; early impressed upon the Board the propriety of a genera, system of instruction, which might comprehend the whole mass of the convicts; they accordingly caused them to lit arranged in classes suitably organized in regard to capacity to be provided with teachers selected from among the most intelligent of the convicts, and furnished with the neces sary books and means of general education in various de partments approi riate to their respective talents. Th e) assigned to them the upper story of the western wing sot school-room, where they shou.d assemble every Sabhatt day, and devote all parts of it, not employed in the usua religious exercises, to the pursuit of various useful attain. ments. The whole bring under the superintendence o the keeper, and other of the officers, the utmost order and decorum prevail, and the steadiness and care with which the object has been pursued have resulted in corresponding improvement. "The advantages of this regulation are not confined tc the intellectual benefits derived from it by the convicts, but are evinced in an entire destruction of the improper indul gencies and corrupt associations in which exemption from labour formerly afforded them more opportunity on Sun• day than any other. " The practice of allowing a portion of the profits of the labour of the convicts to them in prison, to purchso delicate articles of food, is discontinued, and the whole reserved until the prisoner is discharged, when it assists to provide decent clothes." - Although crime cannot be altogether prevented in that country, it is much less than in England, and the fellow , ing observations on that head by the Committee deserve attention :—" The moral improvement of the culprit, and not the vengeance of the law, is the grand object of prison discipline, to accomplish which, and at the least possible expense to the State, is the great desideratum. The ex perience of this institution amply proves that the prisoners can be so employed as to defray the expellees of the esta blishment, and it has recently been ascertained, that after performing an amount of labour commensurate with the cost of their support, there are large portions of time which must remain unemployed, or be very ill employed, unless properly directed to pursuits which will increase the in tellectual powers, and thus prevent the mind from sinking into apathy, and cheri•hing the perverted conceptions already existing. The experiment, although itupet fectly tried, warrants the assertion, that convicts are not only capable of intellectual culture, but that they gladly resort to the means of instruction, as a relief from corroding re flections ; and that this diversity of employment, so far from infringing upon the amount of labour, gives them more alacrity, and consequently incites to greater industry; that since the institution of our school there has been less vice and immorality, and that the aspect of the prisoners is greatly improved ; the dark scowl of despondency or desperatio❑ having changed into the more confiding look of hope, and the more cheerful expression of contented em• ployment. There are now few blank vacant, visages, all exhibit the marks of active thought. We are confident that the only plan for effectuating the designs of penal law, is to blend productive labour with useful education." The trades that are carried on in the Penitentiary are comb-making, shoe-making, sawing, smith's-work, weaving, hat-making, dyeing, carding and spinning, brush making, and carpenter's-work, &c. I may return to this subject, so important to every Englishman who takes an interest in the welfare of his countrymen, and is desirous of seeing the annual calendar educed.—l am, &c. ' Estimate of the expence of the Penitentiary at Milbank for the year 1831, as voted by the House of Commons : Furniture and clothing £2,9eo Provisions, medicines, fire, and lights Stationery and books `250 Miscellaneous 1,050 Gratuities to prisoners, and wages of labour 400 Salaries to Governor and officers 5,940 Total £19,700 N.B. The number of convicts now within the walls is 550. Amount of the actual expence of the Maryland Peniten. :iary, 1t330 Dollars. X Balance of the household expences 4,983 or 1,107 Salaries to the Committee of Management, to physician, keeper, deputy.keeper, &c. Interest on money borrowed to build the Peni tentiary Total 16,461 or 3,65E3 „ LEATHER AND C ANDLES .—A petition ( says a correspondent) is about to be prepared in Faringdorir praying the Legislature to restore the duties on leather and candles, as not the slightest benefit is likely to arise to the consumers in consequence of their repeal ; the prices, in deed, are rather advanced. The Dips and the Crisping alone (our correspondent adds) can unravel the paradox. —Devizes Gazette. LAW INSTITUTION.—A general meeting of members was held yesterday, at their building in Chan. cery-lane, Mr the acceptance of the charter of Inc , rpora• tion recently granted in their favour to Messrs. Amnia- TON, BRUNDRETT, FREERS, and TocKE. The latter gentleman was called to the chair, and prefaced the read ing of the charter by observing, that they were assembled on the occasion of the most interesting and at the same time gratifying event which could occur to them in their professional capacity—to receive and accept his MAJEsTy's charter of incorporation, who had thus graciously granted his royal sanction to their undertaking, and to the useful pur• p ses to which the building was devoted. Their predeces sors frequently adverted to the importance of that object, which they considered as unattainable, but which it had been their good conduct to achieve. It would be a waste of that precious of all commodities—eime--,to insist upon what they were all equally, if not better, able to appreciate than himself—the value of the boon conferred. He should, therefore, only, observe that it for the first time gave them a permanent local habitation and a corporate name ; .e it their care, as it was their duty, so to occupy an d employ the one as to redound to the credit of the others The charter was then read and accepted by an unanimous ' vote of the meeting, upon which resolutions of thanks were passed to the Chairman and the Committee of Ma nagesnent ; and the members adjourned app arent l y hi g hly gratified by the acquisition of the ch ar t er , an d b y t h e handsome and convenient building whi c h i s i ntende d to give efficiency to its object. The ball and library a re expected to be opened shortly for business.