The Sun. — London, England, 1822-07-27 00:00:00

~r ~'''/ :~\ -, '-j.: , . -,---*. -- --.•. ,-,,,..i.t.. . -K -4 ,-* '---"' . :.±•;.." , x ~ , ,z,, . .... . .~ ~' ~, , 11,,i ()/3"' tn NOSIBER 9336.] ' crUeILLING-OFFICE, July 23, 1822. THE COMMISSIONERS for VICTUAL- L ING His MAJESTY'S NAVY do hereby give r Thpt on Tuesday, the 30th Instant, they will be ready to receive Tenders in writing (sealed up), and treat for • Ope Hundred Tons of MUSCOVADO SUGAR; to be answerable to samples of not less than twu pounds weight . each, to be produced with the Tenders ; Fifty-Thousand Gallons of WEST INDIA RUM; Two Hundred Quarters of NEW ENGLISH PEASE Thirty Tons of VIRGINIA LEAF TOBACCO; Twenty Tons of OATMEAL; One Thousand Sacks of BISCUIT MEAL; And Thirty Tons of MOTTLED SOAP ; to be delivered into the Victualling Stores at Deptford, one half within a Month, and the, remainder in a Fortnight gfterwards. The Conditions of the Contracts may be seen at this Office. I;ack, Tender must specify the Przce in words at length, 'a'id be delivered to the . Board before One o'Clock on the 40 P1 appointed, aid the Person who makes the Tender, - or ' 4 !)The Person on his behalf, attend to answer when called for. MdTTHEIP TPALLER CLIFTON. • ••1 , - NEXT TUESDAY. and J;SiItEWRIGHT are selling Tickets • and Shares, warranted undravvn; at their Fortunate 'inlets, :37, Coftihin ; 11, Holborn ; and 38, Haymarket, Cot-- ,11„nr of Co v entry-street; where they sold in Shares the Two 'Highest Prizes drawn the First Day, viz. No. 1,639 (Class A) Z 2,000. NF No. 1;639 (Class B) 4 2,000 . the TUESDAY, JULY 30, is the Last Day but One , and "e Two First Prizes will have £20,000 each ! The Wheel' is I' Rich, and contains TWO PRIZES of £30,000, TWO of &c. &c. Consols and Money. TUESDAY NEXT. NWIFT and Co. beg leave to remind the Public thY, LY 30, is the Last C onsols of Drawingat but NEXT One, wh TUES en T DA WO J P U RIZES of X-20,000 ~o nsols are sure to be Drawn. 4 , The Wheel contains TWO of £30,000, and TWO of - - 20 ,000 Consols, with many Prizes of smaller value. 9 ne of the First-drawn Capitals on the First Day of the pre sentl Lott er y was S o ld in Shares by SWIF I' and Co. who 0 Shared an d S o ld b o th th e Highest Capitals in the Last ILottery,ch at their Old and Fortunate utbees, I I, Poultry ; 12, ar Mg-Cross ; and 31, Aldgate High-street. be in the Downs on the 20th September, having the greatest part of her Cargo engaged and Shipping, FOR MADRAS AND CALCUTTA, ,41Ir THE Fine SHIP WOODFO - RD, \Ni "if - %.'Ne -A 1, Burthen 600 Tons, lying in the , East ,2Votsa Lndia Export. Dock, ALFfIED CHAPMAN, • Commander. For Freight or Passage, apply to the Coin !bander at the Jer H H usalem Coffee-honse, or to JON CAP MAN and C o ., 2, Leadenhall-street. ST. SAVIOUIt'S PROTESTANT UNION, Instituted in the Year 1821. This Day was published, price Is., A N APPEAL from this SOCIETY to the 4 - 3 1, PROTESTANTS of the UNITED KINGDOM on the Subject of the ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS, together with their Declaration and Address, and Lists of the Majority a n,( l Minority in the Divisions on the late Bill. 1 - 1 1, 111 little work developes the origin and objects of this As urgetr- It embraces a brief abstract of the topics usually. Pation aria d against the measure of Roman Catholic Emanci of the P s intended to excite a spirit of vigilance on the part from th r°t estants, against the renewal of any similar attacks gesti nr , L.ad,vocat e s of Popery in future ; it also contains a sug - "' tne means which this Society judge to be the most e xpedient to preserve and perpetuate our Protestant Establish- Merit s t. , °l4 by 11. Hill, 71, High-street, Southwark ; W. Turner, I L. b tio ner to his Majesty, 69, Cheapside ; Chappel, Royal 4t r arYs Pall-mall, and other Booksellers. Also, may be had the Office of Revolution of 1688, and Protestant ni"," Exeter -street, Strand and of FRED. WM. CARTER, Hon. Secretary, No. 48, High-street, Southwark. TOOTH-ACHE AND EAR-ACHE. Ibt , RRY'S ESSENCE has received the sanc tion and support of the most Distinguished Person ein the ki ng d oni , t oge th e r w ith th e united T e stim o ny o f tri e fir st Physicians in Europe, and numerous favourable com beq nts in highly respectable Medical Journals, where it has declared to he the " Best thing ever discovered fur the 4 1 :Mt-a c h e and Ear-ache. " —lt instantaneously relieves the Prevents e xcruciating Pain, preserves the Teeth sound and firm, quterits further De ca y, effectually cures the Scurvy in the fastens loose Teeth, and renders them Firm and Sri-- f' e able t o t h e l atest per i o d , an d effectually Prevents the °4 th -ach e Sod • • 111 0. sit Bottles, at Is. lid. and 2s. 9d. by Butlers, Chemists, 41144, Cheapside, and 220, Regent-street, London; 20, Wa ll ttP l acc, Edinburgh 34, Sackville-street, Dublin ; and k . e principal Medicine Venders throughout the United _ S"M• STRICTURES CURED. a new Method the above troublesome k ppi. , Complaint is entirely eradicated (Without the use of or s f lo v:_or Caustic), if not constitutional, whether of long camranding, as well as all weaknesses generally ae osta".',Yltig it, and in a short time the whole system is re hy ,l2ed, being one of the greatest discoveries ever made. N LYNCH, 44, Duke-street, St. James's. ttra`:?!ctable references will be given, if required.—All Let. Pik `" be post-paid. 13 Per fe let Cure for Bilious A ff ections and Obstructions in °we The price of the Medicine is Four Pounds. A p Jest published. price ss. rid. Svo., dna RACTICAL TREATISE on NERVOUS, BILIOUS, lid LAM • t rod AMMAIORY AFFECTIONS, with a new . Me- C R , lst ." l Curing Strictures without the use of , Bongte or Children' With an Appendix on the Diseases of II omen and mre n. By John Lameh, 44, Duke-street, St. James's, W. Crawford, 124, Cheapside. LITERARY LIBELLING. SCOTCH JURY COURT, r —DINBURGH, JULY 22. I i II PROFESSOR LESLIE V. BLACKWOOD. and tiiB hi ghly important case excited a great deal of i nterest, e Court was crow'led at an early hour. the,", substance of the 1 ,sues against the defender was, whe sat,,,'. tn, various numbus of Blackzcood's Magazine, the pur itelti 15 fais elY, maliciously, and injuriously represented and la h ,u_P to ridicule and contempt, as ignorant of the Hebrew . of I",:gge, and even of the Hebrew alphabet, or as being guilty hecauPeertinence, or of disliking the Hebrew language, merely tselt e 4 3 i t 4 the language of the Old Testament, and to At ',eerfas et neyits, or as being an enfant perdu, to the in- Will/1u damage orthe said pursuer ? t tAre s eth et the pursuer is falsely, maliciously, and injuriously 414.e:teen' er In ented and held up to public ridicule and contempt as litha t raglarY, to the injury and damage of the pursuer ? the Pursuer is falsely, maliciously, and injuriously LePre sen :Fd and held up to public ridicule and contempt, by 'Qui st . 'mg hini to be, or asserting that he is, an insolent dog ofhe i s , , or that he has the impudence to criticise that of which bi Ignorant, or that he is actuated by hostility to the language ot ;; t e elation , simply because it is the language of Revelati9n; fNte up o nhying, dishonest, or joining with a bookseller to.nn ro, otherpublic by dishonesty; or as having purloined °eti k authors or as havin been guilty of a thousand tion „..,°r who'bemling a parrot; or as an object of supi ``' tnos hold the crip s ' tures in honour, and impiety ' • . - A , . . , . .._ a4i eti7-7 / 1 7 it ,./k4,--"": // 2 c...(---z 4-4 t.— -. . —.. " le.' - SATURDAY, JULY 27, 1822. • mind. It is the universal opinion of the scientific world that the discovery is original. Attempted to perform Mr. Leslie's experiment, but did not succeed ; nor does he think any per son succeeded in performing it, till Mr. Leslie himself came to London. Cross-examined for the defender.—lt is not impossible that a man of profound genius might have drawn the inference Mr. Leslie diew from the facts stated by Mr. Nairne, but Mr. Leslie's discovery certainly displayed great inductive and in ventive genius. Dr. Thomas Thomson had repeated Mr. Leslie's discovery on heat about a hundred times. Never conceived, nor at pre sent conceives, the discovery to be a plagiarism. Has no doubt that L's so far as relates to Mr. Nairne, the discovery of Mr. Leslie is original. Never heard a doubt regarding its originality. Dr. Dewar corroborated the statements of Drs. Marcet and Thomson: Here closed the evidence for the second issue. Mr. Caddel is partner to Mr. Constable, the bookseller. Published the first edition of Mr. Leslie's Philosophy of Arith metic. The second was published by Mr. Tait, the booksel.: ler. In the second edition there is the addition of twenty pages and a table. Conceives this to be an enlarged and improved edi tion. To sell this edition at a shilling of higher price than the former was decidedly not an imposition on the public. Mr. Tait, bookseller, published a second edition of Mr. Leslie's Philosophy of Arithmetic : could not express - this any other way than by calling it a second..eclition. Cross-examined for the defender.—lt would not have in formed the public what was done in the second edition, by stat ing the number of pages and improvements made in the tables. There may be a second edition of a publication formed of the unsold original copies of a work. Mr. Aitken, bookseller, has been 12 years a partner with Bell and Bradfute. Thought the publisher of the second edi tion of Mr. Leslie's Philosophy of Arithmetic, entitled to call it a new edition. Being shewn Condorcet's Arithmetic , stated it as his persuasion that this book was published by Mr. Black wood as a second edition of the original copies. Cross-examined for the Defender.—Did not know of any author publishing as a second edition the original copies of a work. By the Couit.T.—ln consequence of the addition made to the second volume of Mr. Leslie's work, would have =ilea it a se cond edition. Mr. Miller, bookseller, expressed the same opinion with the former witnesses. Cross-examined for the defender.—The public ,would, no doubt, conceive that the second edition was reprinted. Re members a case in which Manners and Miller published a se cond edition, as in this case, of a work, with the concurrence of the author, without reprinting it. Mr. JEFFREY then stated that they had now dosed the case for the pursuer. Mr. FoitavTif then addressed the Jury for the defender.— He insisted first on the proof there was that the Hebrew lan guage was not reduced to the clumsy expedient of reduplica tion. He maintained the Roman mode of recitation was more clumsy than the Hebrew, but yet there is no allusion made by Mr. Leslie to their Clumsy expedient. The 'Greek, too, was praised, though borrowed from the Hebrew. It would have been surprising if an assertion like this regarding the lie,rew, coming from such an eminent authority, had not called forth animadversion. The question, then, was, whether Mr. Leslie could establish that the assertion of his ignorance or prejudice regarding the Hebrew is made out of malice to Mr. Leslie, or must be viewed as reasona bl e cr iti c i sm . Hi s pl ea was , that the criticism on Mr. Leslie's book, contained in the first issue, was perfectly lawful. There was no attack made on the pri vate life or character of the pursuer in this issue, but merely on what he h a d p u bli s h e d , i n w hi c h h e ma d e himself a public cha racter. It was no just ground of complaint to say that the in dividual thus criticised was held up to ridicule, or injured in his literary reputation. Lord Ellenborough maintains that the author of a book is a fair subject of criticism, however painful that criticism might be to his private feelings.—[Here Mr. Forsyth read a number of other law authorities in sup port of his opinion, and particularly alluded to the case of Sir Joh n C arr , who was ridiculed, as in the present Case, on . account of certain publications, and where the anther of the articles said to be libellous escaped, on the ground that the ridicule was directed against the plaintiff in his lite rary capacity.] It was said the defender must be held guilty of malice, because the pursuer's religious character was attacked ; but here he was still only spoken of as an author.— If Professor Leslie understood by the Hebrew what all not ac quainted with theological speculations understood by it, his ignorance of it was demonstrated. A plea has been set up, that by the Hebrew lie meant the Samaritan; but what was the public or the Churches of England and Scotland to understand by the term Hebrew?—surely the Hebrew of the day—Hebrew which students learn and are examined on. If Mr. Leslie meant the Samaritan, he should have said so. It was the same as if a Frenchman should call the English the rudest and poorestlan guage, and if attacked, should offer as a plea that he did not mean modern English, but that of King Alfred, or the Saxon Hep tarchy. He conceived the explanation made by the pursuer the most miserable and crooked quibble that ever he heard in troduced into a court of law. It was charity to think that Mr. Leslie was ignorant of the subject, when he said it was the rudest and poorest of written languages; because if he was not, he was misleading the public regarding the language of Scripture. In imputing Mr. Leslie's remarks on the Hebrew language to his hostility towards the Scripture, they were only ascribing a mo tive which seemed to have dictated such an absurd and revolt ing assertion, as that the sublime language of Scripture was the rudest and poorest. What could tempt a man to make such a pre posterous statement, but an aversion to the sacred oracles ? Was it to be tolerated that, in a Christian country, the language of Scripture should be so sneered at and profaned, and yet that no one should be allowed to lift up his voice against such an asser tion ? He would now proceed to the 2d issue, relating to the charge of plagiarism. Disputes often occur with regard to the ori ginality of invention ; but he never heard of such being brought into a court of law, especially when these are disputes regarding inventions in philosophy. This was the first he had ever heard of, and he hoped it would he the last. But the pursuer never denied that Dr. Brewster had, in a public journal, affirmed Mr. Leslie's discovery to be a plagarism. Now all the defender affirms is, that Dr. Brewster said so; he does not make the statement himself. This issue they would therefore conceive to be irrelevant. From the similarity between Mr. Nalrne's and Mr. Leslie's experiments, he contended that it was a most natural inference to conclude that they were the same. The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to the third issue, which relates to the charge against Mr. Leslie, of entering into a coali tion with his bookseller to impose on the public by selling the old copies of his work fora new edition. He would ask was this not true ? Mr. Miller stated that the way of printing old and original copies for a new edition was apt to deceive the public, though it was a trick resorted to by the booksellers. He was sorry to think that there were tricks in all trades but theirs—(a laugh), and he was sorry to think that booksellers have tricks as well as others. When a book would not sell, they add a few leaves to it, and then profess it to be a fine new and improved edition. This, he was of opinion, was dishonest, and could not be justified. If the plan was not meant to im pose on the public, it would not be used. As to the appella tion of a parrot, which the defender applied to Mr. Leslie, it was only a sorry jest, and he conceived the Jury would pass it by as unworthy of their notice. The Gentleman then very shortly dwelt on the last charge brought against the defender— that of charging Mr. Leslie as corrupting the youth, maintain ing that there was nothing in the passage to lead the pursuer to conclude that he was nieant as included in the charge. The LORD CIIIEF COIVIISSIONEIt having summed up the case, the Jury retired for about an hour and a half, and re turned the fullowing verdict :—Find in the first issue for the defender to the words—" We must look" in the 7th line cf page 3d of printed issues, to "he may" in 21st line, for the pursuer ; and the remainder for the defender. The 2d and 3d issues for the pursuer, and the 4th Issue for the defender. Da mages 1001. The Court was crowed to excess to the conclusion of the trial, which took place about 11 o'clock. HUMILITY.--The celebrated Madame Viol., though by no means handsome, had a habit of continually fix ing her eyes on the glasses in any. apartment, where she hap pened to be. A lady of her acquaintance, offended with this inconsistency, once resolved to reproach her with it in the com pany of several other persons. " There," said she, "is Ma dame Vint, for ever contemplating her , own image." " Yes it true," replied she ; I. wish. to know, by experience, whether it is possible to habtuate uneself to ugliness," in detestation ; or as going out of his way to recommend an impious work; or as having cast an ignorant sarcasm on the language of the Bible ; or as sneering at the fancies of one of the Apostles. to the injury and damage of the said pursuer? Whether the pursuer is falsely, maliciously, and injuriously held out and represented as being one of the public teachers by whom young men who come as students to the University of Edinburgh have their religious principles perverted, and their reverence for holy things sneered away, to the injury and da mage of the said pursuer ? The damages were laid at 5,000/. Mr. JAMES IVIONCRIEFF opened the case to the Jury for the pursuer. He said he addressed them in behalf,of a man who would be respected 'wherever genius was valued. He added to the fame of the University, and of the country at large. He had complained of a number of most injurious libels—libels which affected in the nearest manner his cha racter and reputation—particularly that one which charged him with perverting the youth who attended him. He hoped it would appear that these_ libels proceeded from no Motive but determined malice ; because Mr. Leslie contributed largely to a work which affected the sale of a similar publication, sold by Mr. Blackwood. The ground of the remarks in that number, which charged the pursuer as ignorant of Hebrew, was founded on the publication of a book, entitled The Philosophy of Arte metic ; in the preface of which work, he makes a remark on the Hebrew tongue, which is, that the Hebrew, having only 22 letters, they were reduced to a clumsy expedient of express ing numbers beyond 400. Now, in this, remark, he referred only to the ancient Hebrew, as appeared by an observation in another part of that work; the remark was Also limited to the powers of numeration. But it mattered not whether the pur suer was right or wrong in this point—the libel ascribed that remark not only to ignorance, but to a desire to throw obloquy on the language of the Old Testament, because it was the lan guage of the Old Testament, which he (the pursuer) conceived the language of superstition. It mattered not, therefore, whether Mr. Leslie was erroneous or not in his statement re garding the Hebrew. No Jury would consider the libellous matter founded upon it as at justifiable. But Mr. Leslie was right in that statement. [Here the Learned Gentleman read a number of authorities, to prove that the ancient Hebrew or Samaritan, to which Mr. Leslie alluded, had only 22 letters, and that the expedient adopted for numeration beyond 400 was as he had stated.] If Mr. Leslie had said the very reverse, that the language consisted of 27.1etters or lied said nothing of the language at all in such a work, the libeller would have found a much greater scope for his obloquy. No course could have prevented him from being calumniated. They accused Mr. Leslie, also, on the ground that he had stated that the Hebrew was the rudest and poorest of all written languages. But Mr. Leslie here spoke of its rudeness and poverty merely in reference to its power of numerical expressions, as appeared from various passages in his work. The injustice of the as sumption that Mr. Leslie speaks thus of the Hebrew out of contempt for the Scriptures, must appear when it is considered that in the same work he praised highly the Greek language, in which also part of Scripture is written. The Learned Gen tleman then proceeded to state that part of the libellous charge against Mr. Leslie which accused him of being a plagiarist in regard to his theory of heat. Mr. Leslie's discoveries in heat had spread his name over all Europe, and had acquired him high honours from the most learned societies. It certainly did not appear very likely in this case that they could have been mere impositions. [Here the Learned Gentleman entered into a description and explanation of some of these discoveries.] All idea of plagiarism was done away by this circumstance, that the result of some of his experiments were different from what he expected. Mr. Leslie sent an account of these to the French Institute, and they were soon after performed through out France, Italy, and different parts of America, with great applause. In this case it seemed strange that ten years after an individual should start up and declare these discoveries to be monstrous plagiarisms. The gtound of this assertion is the pre tence that Mr. Leslie's experiments were performed long be fore by a Mr. Nairne, but the principles of Mr. Leslie's disco veries were knewn long before ; the learned world was indebted to him only for the combination of those principles. Every common reader must have inferred from this charge against Mr. Leslie, that he had been actually guilty of a fraudulent imposition. The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to that part of the libellous articles which charged Mr. Leslie as hold ing out the second edition. of his Philosophy opirithinetic as an enlarged and improvededition, from a dishonest attempt to impose upon the public, as the only enlargement of it was that it had a few additional leaves. Now, how could Mr. Leslie be said to design imposing upon the public, when he specifies in his preface to that edition all the improvements he had intro duced into it ? The Learned Gentleman then alluded to that part of the libellous matter which compared Mr. Leslie to an over-fed parrot, for puffing himself and condemning others. This comparison, he maintained, was meant for the purpose of holding up Mr. Leslie's person to contempt, and was therefore libellous, as he endeavoured to show by quotations from libels of a similar nature. Mr. Moncrieff then proceeded to the last part of the charge against the defender, which was, that Mr. Leslie was accused of perverting the religious principles of the youth attending the University. These words are a continua tion of calumnious assertions against Mr. Leslie, contained in the 44th Number of the Magazine, and the plea of the defender was, that the charge was not meant to apply to Mr. Leslie. To attempt to get off was as mean as it was malicious.' The ques tion for them to try was, whether or not, upon their oaths, they could say that they had any doubt that this assertion was point ed at Mr. Leslie ? Ile should like to know, however, if Mr. Leslie was not meant, who was ? Were the religious princi pies of the medical youth sneered away by any of the other Professors ? If such a defence of the last and most weighty ar ticle be attempted, it will convince them that the defender was offered boldly to adhere to their assertion. He denied the as sertion that the religious principles of the youth attending the University were ,corrupted ; but if it were the case, libels like these would never have the effect of remedying the evil ; —the libel was introduced out of mere spite and rancour. This was a most grave charge. It grievously affected the interests of Mr. Leslie as well as of the University. The Gentleman then al luded to damages. The pursuer did not seek profit by this suit, but this he thought—that they would show, by the dama ges they would give, the sense they had of the enormity of the libels, and that the effect of their verdict would be to put down that system of libellous attack which all sober men must de precate. - The pursuer then proceeded to call evidence. The Rev. Mr. David Dickson, one of the ministers of the West Church, was called to state his opinion regarding the Hebrew language. The Samaritan character consisted of only 22 letters; this was the ancient Hebrew language. The Rev. Gentleman then explained the Samaritan mode of expressing numbers beyond 400. Mr. Leslie's account of the method of numeration in his Philosophy of Arithmetic was correct. Even the modern HebreW at one time had only 22 characters. It is the opinion of Bishop Hermicot, as well as his own, that the final letters were not introduced earlier than about 200 years before Christ. He (Mr. Dickson) would have inferred from Mr. Leslie using the word Hebrew, that he meant the ancient Hebrew. Cross-examined for the defender—The Pentateuch is the only books he knows of as written in the Samaritan. It is the Chaldaic. character, in which the rest of the Scriptures are writ. ten. This character is what is called Hebrew—the mode of rotation in this is the same as in ancient Hebrew till the figures reach 400, after which only one letter is used to express the ad ditional amount of hundreds. Does not conceive Hebrew to be the rudest and poorest of languages. By a Juryman—A person might have an excellent know ledge of the Hebrew lan o .ruage, although he declared that it was the rudest and poorest of languages. Dr. Scott, of Corstorphine, corroborated the statements of Mr. Dickson. The note in Mr. Leslie's work indicated a knowledge of the ancient Samaritan language ; nor is there any part of it which displays ignorance of the Hebrew. Cross-examined for the defender.—Theological students are examined in the Chaldaic, not the Samaritan character. It was not necessary for the Samaritans to have recourse to the redu plicating method alluded to by Mr. Leslie. Mr. JEFFREY then stated that they had adduced all the evidence they intended for the first issue, and now proceed ed to lead proof upon the second, relating to the charge of plagiarism. Dr. Alexander Marcet, Fellow of the Royal Society of Lon don, and Lecturer on Chemistry, formerly was of opinion, and still is, that Mr. Leslie's method of freezing water in vacuo was an original discovery. Some of the facts on which the process is founded were known to chemists long before Mr. Leslie's time, but the process itself was totally new. The discovery of Mr. Leslie is analogous to all other discoveries in chemistry. Has read Mr. Nairne's experiment, and knows it to be different from Mr. Leslie's. Did not conceive Mr. Leslie's experiment to be at all a plagiarism from Mr. Nairne's. The combination made by Mr. Leslie, never appears to have been in Mr. Nairne's N. PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF' LOItD3, FitlnAY, JULY 26. ROYAL ASSENT. At a quarter before four o'clock, Viscount MELVILLE, the Earl of SHAFTESBURY, and the LORD CHANCELLOR, appeared as his Majesty's Commissioners, and brought the Royal Assent to the following Bills : The Leather Duty and the Salt Duty Reduction Bills, the Exchequer Nils' Issue Bill, the Duchy of Cornwall Bill, the Court of Exchequer Sittings' Bill, the Bankrupt Laws Amend ment Bill, the Scotch Juries Bill, the Alehouses Licenses' Bill, the Ireland Insurrection Act Revival Bill, the Irish Endowed Schools' Bill, and the Ireland Temporary Advances Bill. The following Bills were then read a third time and passed : The Charge of Funded Debt Bill, the Receivers General Bill, the Scotch Royal Burghs' Regulation Bill, the Irish Fisheries, and the Silk Bounties' Bill. IRISH CONSTABLES. The Earl of LIMERICK presented ; Petition from the Grand Jury of the County of Lowth against the Irish Con stables' Bill. Read and laid on the table. Lord REDESDALE presented a Petition from the Rev. George Bugg, of Lutterworth, complaining of having been dis missed from three Curacies successively, and left with a wife and four children without provision, by the present Bishops of Winchister and Lincoln, under the 36 Geo. 111. c. 83, s. and the 57 Geo. 111. c. 99. s. 47, witlrout any cause assigned, or any complaint against his moral, religious, or canonical con duct, and praying that the above sections might he repealed. Ordered to lie on the table. NEW BILLS. Mr. BROGDEN and others brought up from the Commons the captured Vessels Bill, the Irish Commercial Credit Bill, the Ordnance Office Bill, and the Isle of Man Postage Bill, which were read a first time. The Hard Labour Bill, the General Turnpikes' Bill, the Court of King's Bench Business, and the Orphans' Fund Bills were read a second time. The East India Loan Bill, the Countervailing Duties Bill, the New South Wales Duties Bill, the late Queen's Servants, and the. Irish Salt Duty Reduction Bills, 'went respectively through Committees, and were reported.—Adjourned till Monday. HOUSE OF COMMONS. The SPEAKER was summoned to the House of Peers. On his return he stated the Royal Assent to have been given by Commission to several Bills ; for which see the Lords. THIRD READINGS. The Irish Commercial Credit Bill, the Isle of Man Postage Bill, the Greenland Fishery Bill, and the Barracks Estates Bill, were severally read a third time and passed., COM 11ITTEES. The Militia Pay Bill, the Irish Militia Pay Bill, and the Appropriatioh Bill, went through Committees ; the Reports of which were ordered to be received on Monday. REPORTS. The Reports of the East India Sugar Bill, the Brimstone Drawback Bill, and the Scotch Spirits Exportation Bill, were brought up and agreed to, and the Bills ordered to be read a third time on Monday. On the motion of Mr. LITSHINGTON, it was ordered that the House, at its rising, should adjourn tillßlonday. PETITIONS. Mr. HUME presented a Petition from a person of the name of 'Matthew Atkins, who had been employed for nearly twenty years, as an inland letter carrier, but had been dismissed last November, on an alleged charge of drunkenness. He; had now lost the use of one half of his person, and was compelled to subsist on parochial charity, having been denied relict from a fund, established for the relief of letter-carriers, to which the Petitioner, in the course of 21 years, had contributed from his income of 14s. per week, more than 4001. He (Mr. Hume) wished to know bow the fund thus formed was appropriated, as some degree of mystery . attached to the way in which it was managed. • Mr. LUSHINGTON said, had he been aWare that the peti tion was to be presented that day, he might have been prepared to give some answer to the allegations which it contained. As the case stood he was totally unacquainted with the subject. After a few words from Mr. CAT.CItAFT and 11r. u ME, the Petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. HUME moved for a return of the amount of the Inland Letter-carriers' Superannuation Fund in 1807, and the amount of the contributions given in aid of it, specifying how the same had been appropriated, and the present amount of the fund. The motion was agreed to. Mr. HUME said, he had another Petition to present relative to a case which he thought a very hard one. It related to the Captain and crew of the ship Charles, of Aberdeen, whose suf fering he had on two other occasions brought before the House. These persons had been charged with murder, and in conse quence had been long detained as prisoners by the Spanish Authorities. He acknowledged that M inisters had not neglect ed the case. The Noble Marquis had written in very forcible terms to the Spanish Government, but as yet no redress had been obtained. He was of opinion it would not be improper for some remuneration to'be afforded by Government to the sufferers, and on this point he had been referred to the Chan cellor of the Exchequer. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not ob ject to the Petition being brought up, but he could not admit the principle that this Government was bound to remunerate individuals who might sustain loss from acts of violence or in justice committed by a foreign Government. It was the duty of Ministers to endeavour to obtain justice for those who were injured, but failing in this, they were not bound to compen sate the parties themselves. After a few remarks from Mr. C. W. WYNN and Mr. IRvi NG, The 'Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he understood the parties to have been detained on a charge of murder. By not going,into port when the circumstance on which the charge was founded occurred, and clearing themselves of the - crime by a declaration, they had brought on themselves the inconveniences which followed. He had recently received an answer from Madrid to .a very strong remonstrance which he had written on the subject, which stated what was very fair, and in fact what he apprehended could not be got over (as we very often gave the same answer ourselves), that the Spanish Government did not feel themselves bound to look into a case while an appeal remained open to the aggrieved parties. There certainly was a tribunal in Madrid to which an appeal in this case might be carried. He commiserated the situation of the parties, who he believed to be very poor and very innocent, but did not know that the Government could do .more than had already been done.—The Petition was then read- Mr. IRVING described the hardship to which the parties had been subjected. They had been confined for nearly three years, and six months had elapsed before they were enabled to cOmmuni,...te with the British Consul, Mr. Bruce. Mr. HUME stated no blame to attach to Mr. Bruce. Hk suggested the propriety of taking a few thousands from the Droits of Admiralty to remunerate these poor people fbr the hardships they had endured. The Petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. S. II ICE presented a Petition from the Inhabitants of the Parish of St. Michael, in the City of Dublin, praying for the Kepeal of the Irish Assessed Taxes. The Petition was or dered to be printed. Mr. S. RICE presented a Petition from the Vice-President of the Irish National Society, for promoting the education of the poor in Ireland, praying for legislative assistance. After a few words from Colonel TRENCH, the Petition was ordered to be printed. KING'S BENCH PRISON. Mr. BENNET called the attention of the House to the sums voted at different periods for repairing the King's Bench Prison. He showed from a clause in an Act of the 2:2d George 11. that certain advantages were provided for the Marshal of the King's Bench, and certain duties imposed upon him. The advantages the Marshal had enjoyed, but it appeared to him that he had not fulfilled all the duties intended to attach to his situation. He enumerated the votes come to within the last few years for grants for repairs in the King's Bench Prison, and moved th , there shoulu be laid before the House an account of the manner . in which the grants of 18'21 and 18112 had been expended, so far as the same could be made out..--Thc motion was agreed to. A message from the Lords announced their Lordships' con currence with the Thames Lastage Bill, and other Bills. SUPERANNUATION ACT AMENDMENT BILL. The CHANt ELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved, that the Report of the Superannuation Act Amendment Bill should be received. CALCRAFT rose to state his objections to the tnea. PRICE SEVENPEI4CE. , . . sure. He, however, begged to say, if the Right Hon. Gentle• man would make the contributions to the fund optional on those now in office, and only compulsory on those, who migh t hereafter come into office, he would give up his opposition.-- , If this were not done, he should proceed to state why he thought the measure one of great, and of unjust severity. His principal objection to it was, that it imposed a tax on indivi duals to which they had not expected they should be liable, at the time when they accepted offices. If it were a general tax they must submit ; but it was a partial tax, and conses quently it was one of which they had a right to complain. Many of those on whom it would press had already, taken the precaution of insuring their lives, and it was hard on them that they should now be called on to pay an additional five per cent. It was admitted that their services were great, and that their salaries were not too high ; yet they were told, that such was the situation of the country that it was expedient to make this deduction from their incomes. 'He would ask if any law could be more harsh, more oppressive, more vexatious, or more un just ? If those who hereafter came into office were required to submit to such regOlations, he should have no objection. In this case it would be fair, as they would know from the first that such were the conditions on which they were to hold their siivations. In another point of view this measure was objec tionable. If any of the Gentlemen whom it 'affected should be at any time dismissed for alleged misconduct, they then, like the poor postman, whose petition had been presented that day, lost all interest in that fund to which they had been con tributors. Such being the case, the parties must tither be con sidered to have a vested right in their offices, or when re moved, it must be expected that injustice would be imputed. 'On this subject he thought every one would think with him, however the majority of the House might judge it right to vote with the Right Hon. Gentleman. His ideas were supported by those of a Noble Lord whom he had seen filling, the Chair of that house, and in the situation of Chancellor of the Exche quer. The Noble Lord he alluded to had long beeo Secretary of State, and he had seldom differed in opinion from the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite. It would be singular, indeed, if they should be found at variance immediately. He then read extracts from letters written by Lord Sidmouth and Mr. Hob house on the subject, which expressed opinions decidedly hos tile to the plan. To depart from the plan of 1807, he contended, was a breach of public faith, and what security could the stock holder have after this, but that which arose from a conscious ness that he belonged to a more powerful body of men, and that what affected him would affect every description of property in the country. Lord Sidniouth had declared that he could not recommend the plan to his Majesty, and that he could not concur with the Lords of the Treasury in the opinion that it ought to be submitted to Parliament. Unluckily for the Clerks, Lord Sidmouth was just at that time about to resign, or his opinion would have been more attended to. He had stated that he considered the measure to be " in principle im provident and impolitic, and in its immediate application un- , just." It might be thought necessary to pass the Bill, but the assertions of Lord Sidmouth were well founded. If, however, it were now altered so as not to affect those who were in office before the Ist of January, 1822, he would give up his opposi tion to the bill ; but if this were not done he would persevere, notwithstanding the numerous attendance on the other side, brought down by a very strong circular, requesting them to be present at the debate on the Superannuation Act Amendment 13ill, and impressing on them the importance of not quitting their seats till the business was disposed of. A letter to that ef fect he knew had been written. lie thought-those who attended on it were likely to have a happy night of it, for he felt satisfied that however they might vote, their opinions were with him.— Ile was much inclined to think that this was the case with all, not excepting the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself.—(A laugh.)—He really thought the saving to be made by this bill might be effected by less objectionahle means. 'I he whole amount might be saved on the transactions between Govern- . ment and the Bank. He should wait to see what the Right Hon. Gentleman was disposed to do before he moved any thing. if he would - agree to have the few words introduced which he wished to supply, he would then move to alter the preamble.— If he failed in this, be should then be reduced to the necessity (a necessity which he really wished to avoid) of opposing the Bill altogether. Mr. CANNING considered the Bill in principle as objec tionable as any measure that had ever been brought forward : it was most unfair to subject any particular class to peculiar taxation, more especially if that class had been recently held up to public odium. In the arrangements of the measure there was a clear breach of faith. He did not say . that it was not in the power of the Crown to reduce the salaries of its official servants without the aid of Parliament; but for this House to originate such a plan was in direct opposition to the address of the last session, and could be looked upon only as a species of Parlia mentary taxation. The Bill was obviously a breach of faith to wards all who, since 1810, had devoted themselves to the public service on condition of receiving the benefits which the act of that year held out. He would put an individual case, that of a young man of the highest promise and of most respectable birth, but deprived of his father, who at a time when lie was obtain ing the honours of his College, and had every prospect of dis tinguished preferment in the church, was induced to accept a public situation under the Crown, on the conditions of the sta tute of 1810. On those conditions he had relied, but he was now to be told that they were not to be fulfilled—that a large part of his emoluments was to be taken 'from him, ant , it was thus to be proved that his friends and he had judged most unwisely in abandoning the original scheme and prospects of his life. This Bill would be to him a grevious injury, and he ought almost to be entitled to maintain an action at law for damages. It was impossible to know how many such cases. existed, and how many individuals had quitted the law, the army, or the church, under the faith of the act of 1810, relinguishing lau. dable pursuits and eminent advantages. Constitutionally, this Bill might be considered also an invasion of the rights and powers of the Crown. Besides if a "man were removed at some future tine from office for a fault that did not stain his moral character, he would lose all he had contributed to this fund : it would really be nothing short of pillaging him to turn him out of place without returning the money he had an nually paid. The Right Hon. Gentleman saw no remedy for this objection, but by defining in the Bill for what faults a man should or should not be dismissed, and under what circum stances he should or should not be allowed to withdraw the suers he had contributed to this joint stock, tontine, or by whatever other name it might be called. It was utterly impossible to deal correctly with these prospective claims. The first class had gone as far as it could go with respect to degree and to the apportion ment of reward : but it was quite evident that things of this rm ture ought much rather to be left to the discretion of those who at. tended to the skill and ability with which services were perform• ed, than to the operation of a legal enactment. The Bill gave all the apparent accuracy of rule to that which could not be go verned by rule. It provided not for extraordinary merit—it recog nized not services, the performance of which required superior talents. The Bill endeavoured to do that which could alone be ef fectually done by those who were conversant with the concerns of public offices. He knew nothing to which he could assimilate the system of apportioning remuneration according to the num ber of years, except the mode of reward which he had read of in a Chinese history. The examiner at a Chinese seminary would say, "A has industry as 2—attention as s—arithmetic as 3-- hanz;writing as 14," and by summing up all these, he struck a total of 24. When he came to B, he would find, perhaps, that he had genius as 6—idleness as 3—learning as B—and so on, making a total of 25. Here 25 was balanced against 24, without any regard to the preponderance of good or bad qualities, and the reward was apportioned accordingly.—(A laugh. )--Thus, by this Bill, the discretion of rewarding was not left with those who must best know where it was due; the system was settled and invariable. In the relations between the public and . their executive servants, as in the relations of private life, many things must be taken into the account, when rewards were about to be granted, which were not susceptible of legislative inter ference. He therefore would in the first instance place the extent of reward in the discretion of the Crown, and next in the high official servants of the Crown, He would not attempt to confine that discretion within legislative limits. It was a vain endeavour to define those shades of merit which were almost too minute for human observation, and infinitely too nice for legis lative enactment. Having stated his sentiments on the mea sure, he did not mean to proceed farther. in the present state of the Session and of the House, it would be vain to hope for effectual resistance to the Bill. He had repeatedly expected the discussion to come on, and though he did not like to sit .up late at night as some of his Honourable Friends, yet 'he had regularly attended in that hope. The Bill had been put off'27 times, and it was no very pleasant thing to go 27 days without a dinner—(A laugh.).—He believed the idea of the measure originated in a laudable desire to meet public opinion ; but public opinion had changed, and if it were passed, it would not, he was convinced, satisfy the publitmind. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, the pr( snit appeared to him to be a wise and expedient public S rt•, P .I )°' IrC•