The Sun. — London, England, 1832-05-23 00:00:00

and he agreed with them that the colonies were not Wortl having if their trade went away. Then, again, with the countries of the north of Europe, what was the result?? lu 1826, our trade with Sweden, Norway, Denmark, acre' Prussia was such, that we employed 113,000 tons of ship ping, while the trade of other foreign nations to the same kingdoms only employed 98,000 tons. In 1831, though it was true the amount of our trade had increased, its in crease had been exceeded by that of other nations tradius to those kingdoms; for the number of tons of British shipping employed in that trade amounted the 258,000. while the tonnage of foreign vessels in that trade had in creased to 341,000. That was the change which hey+ taken place in consequence of these reciprocity treaties. It was important to look to these things, not with the spi rit of party, nor with a view to any peculiar theory, but with the object of deciding the question to which they related, for the good of the country. In the present, or early in the next Session, that House ought to examine that question, not with regard to any particular political theory but with the aid of by-gone experience—of the experience of the last twelve years. They should try this policy hy that test, and then they would see whether the course they had adopted was wise, or prudent, or cautious, and whe ther they ought to persevere in that course, or to stop short and alter their plan. He did not question the truth of the general principles upon which they acted, but he questioned the application of the principles; and even Mr. Huskisson seemed to have done so too, for he had made alterations in the enumerated articles of British shipping. The Hon. Member for Middlesex said, let them have free trade at all events ; but Mr. Huskisson had not been of that opinion, for when the American tariff became the subject of discussion in that House, Mr. Huskisson said they must have some means afforded them of meeting that tariff. The fact was, that with all manufacturing countries, and all that desired to be so, we were losing our trade, and only kept it with Spain, Portugal, and those countries which bad not the means of becoming manufacturing countries]. With such countries we had made an exten sion of commerce, for they were totally dependent upon ns. With France and other countries of the same sort, that could compete with us, our trade bad not increased ; for, although our imports had increased three or four fold since 1819, our exports had diminished in the same degree. He would tell the Noble Lord opposite, that while be did not compel an exchange of commercial arti cles with those countries, this country would lee trading with them at a disadvantage. France had obtained the direct mode of getting payment for her goods by compel ling us to pay for them in gold, but we had adopted the circuitous mode of carrying on trade, and we suffered the disadvantage of it. Our trade with South America had been a forced trade for the purpose of obtaining a vent for our goods which could not find an European market, though they ought to do so, if the liberal policy which this country was recommended to pursue had universally prevailed. Our manufacturing interests for the last ten or twelve years had been, with respect to foreign trade, in a state of retrogression. In order to meet that, we ought to have our internal commerce and our colonial commerce preserved to us. The Noble Lord seemed to him to act upon a policy of anticipation of some benefits, which, un fortunately however, never arrived. The French Govern ment did not act upon that policy ; it was not regulated by , our example, but by their own views. The French Mini ster said that if France would pursue our system, it would put an end to their commerce. The United States were of the same opinion, and they were right, unless they wished to make themselves dependent upon us ifor their manufactures. This country owed all the advantages it enjoyed as a commercial nation to the energy of its people, and not to the wisdom of its Legislature. Indeed he thought he might say that the commerce of England had flourished in spite of the Legislature—(Hear, hear, hear, from the Ministerial Benches)--in spite of unwise changes. He would argue against the changes of the last twelve years, made without warning by a Committee of that House, upon the mere recommendation of the Minister. He recollected the answer which Lord Castlereagh made to him some years ago, when he waited upon the Noble Lord at the head of a deputation, to request him to obtain from Spain conditions favourable to the commerce of this country, which bad expended so much blood and treasure to effect the restoration of the Spanish Dynasty. The Noble Lord said he could not do what was required, for he considered it unworthy of a great nation like this, and unbecoming our magnanimity, to make stipulations of that sort. That might be liberal, but it was foolish. The Noble Lord opposite in the same way refused to ask favours from another Government, but he granted them favours willingly enough, and in that way he lowered the duties on French wines without requiring corresponding favour for our manufactured goods ; and by acting in that manner he, in fact, held out a premium to other Governments to refuse to join us in the reciprocity system. The peculiar state of this country, from the amount of its debt and the expenses of its Go vernment, was peculiarly opposed to such a practice. The Hon. Member for Middlesex said, let us have articles from all parts of the world, provided they are cheap ; but if the cheapness of the article was all that was required with re spect to commercial regulations, they must go a little further, and give them cheap Government and the ex tinction of the debt. If that system, too, was to be fol lowed up with respect to manufactured articles, the same rule must be applied to other things, and we must have an alteration of the Corn Laws. France did not act upon our plan. There were no less than fifty articles of our manufacture prohibited, either absolutely, or by a very high duty, from entering Paris, but the raw material was admitted ; and its introduction, indeed, was encouraged in order that France might become a manufacturing country. and France was making such strides towards that state, that unless we made some arrangements they would spee dily exclude us altogether. Our trade with Spain was more advantageous than with other countries, but even there French s hi ps were a d m i tte d a t th e sa m e rate o f d uty that Spanish s hi ps t h emse l ves pa id, w hil e E ng li s h s hi ps paid a rate of d ut i es cons id era bl y hi g h er . Th at state o f things was contrary to actual treaty, and he called on the Government to look to it. Portugal again afforded one of the most advantage ous an d valuable branches of our foreign trade, and he hoped it wou ld not be interrupted' by the system of which he was now complaining. With Russia, too, we carried on an advantageous trade, but even with Russia our imports had doubled since 1820, while our exports had not at all increased. We had the advantage of all the carrying trade with Russia, but she levied extraordinary duties with respect to British ships, and a greater number of articles were absolutely prohi bited. That was not a liberal policy towards us, and it was becoming still less liberal;—(Hear, hear, hear)—for he saw, by the recent ukase, that they bad increased the amount of their duties. Then be came to the trade with Prussia ; that was one of the countries to which we had been taught to look for an in crease in our trade, provided we would but consent to give her some advantages with respect to the timber trade. The increase had taken place, but it was really insignifi cant ; while our exports had actually diminished during the same period. Since 1820 our imports had increased from 587,0001. to 1,300,0001.; while our exports had decreased from 974,000/. to 736,000/. With Sweden, too, our trade had fallen off considerably ; our exports to that country now amounted in value to only 157,000/. not as much as to the smallest of our West Indian colonies. Of what use, then, was it to encourage our trade to that country, unless we did so upon an arrangement that must be beneficial to us ? Our exports to Denmark only amounted to 227,0001., while our imports had risen from 170,000/. to 494,0001. in the same time; and besides this, the trading of British merchants to Denmark war subjected to many onerous regulations. He would now refer to the trade with the United States. On looking at the returns, Le found that there was an immense in crease of the imports—the amount, in 1820, being 2,300,000/., and, in 1830, 6,200,000/,, without, how ever, there being any:proportionate increase in the exports. But the chief blunder that we had committed, was that of opening i the W e st I n di a t ra d e to t h e United States—not y spontaneously, b ut w i thout t h e s li g h tes t reciprocity on their part. H e k new o f hi s own k now l e d ge that the American merchants had for years been endeavouring to get across to the British Colonies in the West Indies, because it was felt that the United States would have peculiar facili ties for supplying them with timber and provisions. Another effect of this conceasion was, that the American marine was receiving a great accession of strength and activity. The United States h a d no claims this colonies had couritry , , while on the other hand our North American the strongest possible claims ; and, still further, he would take upon himself to say that those North American coln nice, small as they were in the comparison, were capable . of affording as good a mark e t f or W est India produce as the whole of the United St a t es . H e knew that there were some Hon. Gentlemen who thought that the two could be united, but this was a mistak. for unless the West Indies took their timber from th e ' North American colonies, the North American colonies would not have it in their power to take the West India produce. The fact was, that th e U n i ted States were looking to the establish rnent of their own manufactures; observe, and those manufactures, it was necessary cotton, for most rapidly increasing. Take the article of to or instance;—ls] 1800, there w e re only 500 bal es of cotton fn tt manufactured in the United St a tes; in 1805, the nunitibe. 1510, the number was 10,000 ; afndbailteis 18 wasl 181 5 , It,h n 000 ; iu e bet was 90, 000 . And, again, with respect to iron, there were now 300,000 tons of iron annu a lly manufactured in the United States, the produce of which amounted to thirteen millions of dollars—eight millions of which were paid in the way of wages to no fewer than 800,000 persons, for whom the iron-works found employ ment. He believed that the Americans would mo- (lily their tariff ; but still he felt sure, that tin. American rate of duties would Always be sufficiently 'nigh to exclude British manufactures from entering tin narkets of the United States with any prospect of success. lie contended that the colonies of this country had not een fairly treated by this or the former Governments o: this country. There were a set of politicians in that House (smong whom the llon. Member for Middlesex stood preeminent) who were for looking at our colonies merely through the medium of those annual votes which were brought before Parliament for their support—and who, seeing that those votes took money out of the pockets of the people of this country, were too often tempted to exclaim that it was time to get rid of the co lonies, if they were not able to support themselves. This, however, was, in his opinion, a very erroneous view of the subject. Hon. Gentlemen might, if they pleased, continue to maintain the inutility of the colonies : all he could say was, that be did not envy the contracted views of those persons who entertained such opinions, and still more must he deprecate there being i❑ the Councils of the King individuals who suffered themselves to be deluded by such views. In spite of all such attempts, however, he trusted that a good understanding would continue to exist between the colonies and England. He now came to the last part of his subject, and that was the state of our home trade and manufactures. He real'y believed that the change which took place in our foreign policy was made in the sincere expectation that it would promote and increase the home trade and the manufactures of this country. He had formed this opinion from finding that at the time the most confident predictions were made to that effect; and he therefore thought that he was war ranted in asking the House to consider what was now the real state of the trade of the country, as corn- pared with 1520, when the alterations took place. It waa not necessary for him to prove that the present de pressed state of trade and commerce in England had been occasioned altogether, or even in a material degree, by those changes. It was enough for him to be able to show that the predictions that had been so confidently made, and so hastily assented to in that House, had not come to pass; and that the state of our trade was now worse than at any former period of our history. His object in making the motion was to get the House to grant him a Commit tee to inquire into the state of trade, and the effects of the policy adopted in 1820. He meant to call on the House to form no opinion upon the subject, but only to appoint a Committee. He would not anticipate the objections which might be made, such as that the session was too far advanced, and the House had other matters on hand ; he would only say, that this matter was too important to be with propriety neglected. The Hon. Member con cluded by moving—" That a Select Committee be ap pointed to inquire into the present state of our trade, com merce, and navigation ; and specially to investigate and report upon the practical operation of the changes in our navigation laws and commercial policy since 1820 ; with a view to promote domestic industry, and to improve those national resources by which alone the prosperity and stability of the British Empire can be maintained." Mr. PIGGOTT seconded the motion. To support his views the Hon. Member entered into some statement as to the declared value of commodities exported since 1810, with the intention of showing, as we understood, that there had been, since 1820, a great diminution iu the de clared valve of our exports.—(The lion. Member, how ever read over his figures so fast, that we could not cor rectly follow him.) The object of the regulations of the Government was to encourage a trade with France. This was bad ; for the two countries were not adapted to trade with each other. They resembled each other in civiliza tion, their wants were nearly the same; and between them there never could be much trade. Yet to encourage this trade, to sacrifice the trade between this country and Por tugal, and our colonies, whence we got raw materials, the Government was throwing away certainty for the hopes of a trade with France, which would never be realized. Our trade with that country was now next to nothing. Our imports from that country did not amount to a 122 d part of our whole imports; and our exports to that country were only the 81st part of the whole of our exports. The commodities we imported from France wese all luxuries ; such as silks, perfumeries, and other things of the same kind, all of which were luxuries. According to the political economists them selves, these were articles which ought to be highly taxed. Now what were the commodities which we sent to France ? The returns of 1526 mentioned 111 articles of the total value of 1,171,0001. Of these 11 1 articles, only seven were of importance, and they formed two-thirds of the whole. Of these, cotton yarn alone was exported to the amount of 290,0001., and the rest of these articles were indigo, raw silk, machinery, saltpetre, coals, &c. All these articles could be of no prejudice to the French manu facturers ; on the contrary, they were of use to them, and enabled them to compete with the productions of England in the Foreign Market. Looking at our staple manufactures, and selecting one, he found that our cottons exported between 1818 and 1828 amounted to 152,752,000/. ; and what was the proportion of them exported to France? 106,142/., or one two hundred and twelfth part of what was exported to America, one one hundred and sixth part of our exports to Italy, and one seventy-sixth part of the exports to Portugal. Mr. HUME thought himself called on by the reference made to him by the Hon. Member (Mr. Robinson). It was curious enough that the Hon. Member had described all the returns as erroneous, and as unworthy of any reli ance, and at the same time the Hon. Member had not ad vanced one fact to support his assertion but what he had borrowed from these returns. He had brought forward no evidence whatever to support his views as to the im policy of our present regulations. He agreed with the Hon. Member that it would be most beneficial to extend our commerce ; but he thought that not only our domes tic, but our foreign commerce should be extended. He would encourage anl promote all and every branch equally, and as much as possible. As to our colonial po licy, he thought that the course pursued had been most erroneous. We had been pitting one colony against another, and ruini ng o ne f o r th e sake of another. With regard to foreign commerce, i.e thought it should be left to those concerned in it, and he should be glad to see it flourish. The Hon. Member ascribed all the evils we suffered to free trade. Why, we had no free trade. All our limbs were bound and fettered, and not one motion was free.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member admitted that prohibition, restriction, and protecting duties, were evils of themselves, and yet the Hon. Gentleman's whole speech was intended to advocate prohibition, rest. iction, and protecting duties. Where did the free trade of which the Hon. Gentleman spoke exist ? When the Hon. Gentleman said that he (Mr. Hume) was advocating opinions opposed to the commercial community, he begged leave to remind the lion. Gentleman of the great meeting at the Egyptian Hall, and the petition presented by the Hun. Member for Thetford, which he should never forget. He was sorry that the Hon. Member for Bratnber, who then supported that Petition, was not present, as lie could tell the Hon. Member, that the Go vernment, with which he found fault, had only followed the recommendations of the merchants of London. After that great Meeting and elaborate Petition, what did the Government do ? Did it act immediately ? No ; it ap pointed a Committee, which sate for three years, and ex amined all sorts of practical men. The Government also appointed a Committee of the House of Peers, which ex amined practical men from all parts of the empire. These Committees recommended an alteration in the wine and the timber duties ; and there was nothing he admired more in the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Althorp) than the hold and manly manner in which he brought forward those subjects. The Hon. Member described those measures as failures, and spoke of them as defeats; but how was the Noble Lord defraud ? By a union of those who were pledged to these measures ; and the Hon. Member was himself one of those who united to thwart the Noble Lord. That opposition was got up for factious and party purposes. He was surprised to hear the Hon. Member who wished for restrictions. Why, there was not one species of raw material, one species of trade, which had not been exposed to restrictions, as if the Legislature had studied to limit the industry of the country. The Hon. Member had selected silk as a specimen of the injury done to our manufactures by free trade. Why, this free trade was yet incumbered by a duty of from 30 to 70 per cent. The lion. Member wanted to keep prices high because we had high taxes ; but because the taxes were high, he was of opinion that the people should get everything they used or consumed at as low a rate as possible. According to this view, lie had always been of opinion that we ought to get our corn as cheap as possible. Ile had always ad vocated the removal of the corn laws on that ground. Cheap food was essential to us, precisely because we had 'OEI enormous taxes to pay. If the corn laws were abolished, a general equality of price would be the conse quence ; and the price would fall here, and rise on the Continent. The Hon. Member had mistaken the mean ing of the Reciprocity Act, and confounded trade with navigation. What was the origin of that Act? Why, Prussia declared that it we did not, within a cot tarn time, lmit her vessels into our Fits on the same terms as our wn, she would lay heavy duties on our shipping. Where Prussia had one vessel, England, however, had three; and Mr. Huskisson therefore recommended that the ships of foreigners should be placed on the same footing as English ships, provided English ship were placed on tlio same footing as the ships of those foreign nations. That was the object of the Reciprocity Act, and as England had more ships than any other nation, the advantage was all on her side. If, for example, our ships were admitted into foreign ports at I s. a ton, then the ships belonging to those ports were to be admitted into our ports a Is. a ton. .• By that Act, then, we gained advantage in proportion to our extent of tonnage. He approved of that Act, and of the statesmanlike views by which it was dictated. Let it be remembered, that no foreigners were admitted to the advantages of this Act who did not comply with its conditions, and admit our ships into their ports on reci procal terms. The Hon. Member objected to our admit ting articles from France. In his opinion, we did not hot admit enough. If the mutual exchange between the two countries could be extended, it would be for their . . _ ... mutual advantage. Both nations would be benefited by that. The Hon. Member said, France would not let our goods into that country ; but if France would not let our cottons in at 6d. a yard, and made her people pay 9d. for them, encouraging smuggling, was that any reason why the Government of England should not allow the English people to consume French wine, and the other produce of France, at as cheap a rate as they could be procured ? He maintained that the Government was bound to suffer the importation of such articles, even where no apparent reci procity takes place. Whether there was any reciprocity or not, it was the duty of the Government to get goods as cheap as possible, and therefore we ought to admit them without any prohibitory duty. In speaking of prohibitory duty, however, he did not include that portion of duty by which the revenue was to be raised, but only those duties which were called protecting, bat which were, in point of fact, prohibitory. Every such law was injurious to the interests of the community, and ought to be put an end to. The Hon. Member then referred to the state of opinion in America on this subject, as expressed in the mercantile con ventions held at Philadelphia and Baltimore to consider the propriety of altering the tariff; and it was decided upon, even by those of the most ultra opinions, even by those who were desirous of keeping up the tariff to the highest point, that it must be lowered—(Hear)—and it would be lowered in the course of the next session. It was found also by a Committee of the Congress, that by the course which America had been adopting, she was sacrificing the . . best resources of a young country, and had been acting in opposition to the best principles of commercial intercourse. The American shipping had fallen off, whilst ours, in con sequence of our acting on a more liberal plan, had in creased from nine to fifteen per cent.—(Hear, bear.) H• then referred to the report of a committee on the wine trade in France, to prove that similar opinions prevailed there. The doctrine of prohibition was to sell to foreign nations, but never to buy; just as if commerce did not depend on the benefits resulting from mutual exchange of the produce of different countries. It was a mistake to look to gold only ; if he were to cram the Hon. Member with gold, he would not be half so happy or so well off as if he were to cram him with corn or other articles. — (Hear, and a laugh.) The Hon. Gentleman had made use of a strange argutnent ; he had said that it increased crime and pauperism—that clime and pauperism bad increased in a direct ratio as prices bad decreased. It certainly ought to be the reverse, for as the means of enjoyment were brought more within the reach of the poorer classes, the more was the inducement to crime diminished. Tee Hon. Member was wrong in the statements which be had made : referring to the opinions which had fallen from him when the petition from the Merchants of London was presented in 1820, he defended the tone of argument which he then pursued, and declared that he should object to the inquiry sought for, lest it should hold out to the country any ground for believing that they were about to return to the old and evil system. There was nothing to call upon them for such an inquiry : they had no petitions from merchants or others on their table, and he thought it the duty of the House to discourage every attempt to return to a system which had been so ruinous as that from which they had now happily escaped.—(Cheers.) Mr. WHITMORE said, the Hon. Gentleman who had made this motion, as well as the Hon. Gentleman who had seconded it, had laid it down as an incontrovertible fact, that trade had diminished during the last twelve years. If ever an argument was brought forward on any question calculated to deceive the House and the country, it was surely this.—( Hear, hear.) It was remarkable that, during the last forty or fifty years, trade had regularly in creased in a certain ratio ; and so far from having fallen off since 1820, that ratio was yet more extended. The annual official value of the exports of the produce of this country, from 1790 to 1799, was 17,000,0001. and a fraction. From 1800 to 1809, 26,000,0001., being an increase of 9,000,000/. annually. From 1810 to 1820, 36,000,000/., being an increase of 10,000,000/. in the preceding ten years. Front 1821 to 1830, 48,000,000!., being an increase of 12,000,000/. annu ally; whilst the exports from 1830 to 1831, exceeded 60,000,0001.—(Hear, hear.) Still they might sly that the official value was no guide, and that the declared value had fallen off, which was, he believed, the case ; but it was not the value but the quantity which they wanted to ascertain, and, in this particular, the official value was a current guide. There could not be a greater fallacy than to imagine that the trade of the country had fallen, when, in point of fact, it had considerably increased in amount; and from 1821 to 1831, there had been an immense increase in the amount of exports.—(Hear, hear.) The consequence of granting the Committee would be to paralyse the taade of the whole nation.— (Hear.) He looked forward to an alteration of the corn laws, when corn should be made a national trade, which would benefit even the agriculturists themselves.—(Hear.) Mr. Alderman WAITHNIAN did not object to free trade er political economy in themselves ; hut he objected to a gross abuse of those terms. He did not blame the Government so much as he did the principles and opinions held in that House, and of which they bad now had suf ficient trial to prove their inaccuracy. The Hon. Member opposite (Mr. Hume) had spoken of the commercial pros perity of the country ; but he asked, did not distress exist on every hand ? Were not the middle ranks broken down ? And yet all these measures had been tried; they had not succeeded, and distress existed in spite of them. He did not attribute that distress to want of property, but to the want of a just distribution of property. Trade had been depressed 100 per cent. since these measures had been in troduced, and out of 147 silk manufacturers in Spital fields, no less than 47 were completely ruined. This sys• tern of favouring foreign manufactures had produced this result. He called on them to agree to the motion of the Hon. Member for Worcester. Mr. P. THOMSON said the motion itself was far too extensive to be complied with; for it involved all the questions that could possibly be raised upon all the branches of English trade, both foreign and domestic. The Hon. Member had assumed, that within the last ten years the trade and shipping interests of this country has been in a state of rapid decline. He (Mr. P. Thomson) could con fidently contradict the statement, for it was distinctly dis proved by the officirl returns on the table of that House. Ficon those returns it appeared that the trade and naviga tion of this country had increased in a most astonishing degree within the very period to which the Hon. Member referred. After all the debates that had taken place on this subject, he thought that it would have been more fair for the opponents of the system to have come down, and, in stead of making general attacks on the system, to put their finger on some particular part of it. Had that been done, the disproof of the charge would have been comparatively easy ; but it was impossible to answer general statements, that were most easily made when they had the least degree of distinctness and particularity to fetter them. The Hon. Gentleman said he should not complain of the system, but of its application. That acknowledgemen t was itself a triumph for tie system, if triumph it could be supposed to want. The Hon. Gentleman had insinuated that the Go vernment bad carried this system further than the recom mendations of the Committees of the House of Lords had warranted. He denied that that was the fact, as would be seen on examining the reports of those Com mittees, (specially wishrespect to the introduction of foreign good s i n B r iti s h bottoms. Time reciprocity system h a d no t b een a d o pted voluntarily, but under circumstances in which, if we had not adopted it, we should have been completely ruined. If we hail not adopted that system, foreign nations plight have excluded us front their ports, as we had previously excluded them from ours. He was sorry that Mr. Hus kisson had not carried the system he advocated further than be had actually done. When commercial arrange ments were in discussion between France and England, the former required to be allowed the liberty of fetching from England to her own ports the produce of our transatlantic colonies. The shipowneri raised a great outcry against that, and said, that though it might be beneficial to the merchants, it would be ruinous to them. In vain did Mr. Huskisson attempt to convince them that France could not compete with us in shipping, and that we should have all the benefit of the carrying trade. The shipowners perse vered, and in an evil hour Mr. Huskisson gave way ; and the result was, that some of the goods he alluded to now went to Ostend, while others were taken directly to the ports of France, so that the carrying trade in respect of these articles hail been entirely taken out of our hands, Much of the argument of the Hon. Gentleman opposite depended upon the state of commerce and of navigation in past times, and especially during time of w ar, but since then the at t of navigation had much improved, and the facilities of commercial intercourse had much increased, and therefore nothing could be more fallacious than were the reasonings of the Hon. Mover. In fact four voyages were now e,ade to the Baltic for one that was made formerly. From the time this country began to act upon the reciprosity system, our shipping had prodigiously increased ; and with respect o the shipping employed in commercial intercourse with those countries with which we had treaties of reciprocity, the increase averaged not less than 35 per cent. Some Hon. Members appeared to entertain great apprehensions that our naval ascendancy might be effected by the changes that had taken place in the condition of shipping interests. He should have thought that no intelligent man could sup• pose that the greatness of England, as a navel power, de pended upon foreign commerce. Our colonial and coasting trade would he quite sufficient to sustain our navy, though he by no means admitted that the reciprocity system had any injurious tendency upon our navy. Some complaint had been made of the apparent favour shown by this country towards France in the establishment of our com mercial relations ; but he would contend, that nothing more than justice had been done to the French, in placing them upon the same footing as Portugal and Spain ; and h e h o ped the time was not distant when France would take juster and more enlightened views of our own inte rest, and co-operate with England in still further enlarging the great principle of reciprocity. But the Hon. Gentle. man opposite had asked, of what value were all projects of free trade, when they did not bring prosperity to the peo ple, and when the public distress was greater than ever? He utterly denied that the distress of the people at all ap proached to what it had been represented. No doubt, in such a community as this, there must occasionally be times of commercial difficulty, and some want of employment; hut he thought there could easily be found the most satis factory evidence of the increasing prosperity of the country in the state of our poor rates. In 1819, 20, and 21, the average poor rate of the whole country was 7,500,0001. ; whereas in 1831 it was only 6,890,0001., though the population of the country had increased two millicns in the interval. He admitted that the iron trade was not so flourishing as formerly; but that was more owing to domestic than to foreign competition. The re strictive system of the Americans, so far from being of any benefit to the United States, operated to the disadvan tage of their prosperity, for within fifteen years the ton nage of their shipping had decreased nearly 100,000 tons. The Right Hon. Gentleman then read a long statement, to prove that our trade had been on the increase since 1819, which he attributed to the free trade system that had been practised since that time. He thought that it would be much more manly for those who objected to the policy of the Government to come to the House at once and state what their objections were, instead of coming with a fish ing motion for a Committee. What he wished was, that they would state at once their grievances, and what they proposed by way remedy ; then the question would be ar gued fairly, which was impossible so long as vague gene ralities alone were dealt in about free trade—a thing which, in fact, did not exist in this country, and which was only raised as a sort of phantom for the purpose of misleading and deluding the people. Mr. BARING, with respect to the motion now before the House, certainly must say that in his opinion, though the Hon. Member for Worcester had not made a most able statement, a sufficient case had been made out by that Hon. Gentleman for the appointment of a Committee. He admitted that there was great distress in the country, but he thought it was greatly exaggerated. Mr. WARBURTON opposed the doctrines of the Hon. Member for Thetford, and defended free trade. An HON. MEMBER could say of his own knowledge there was great distress in the country, of the extent of which the Hon. Member was not aware. He could not agree with the Hon. Member for Worcester, however, that the distress arose from free trade. Mr. ATTWOOD contended that all the interests of the •ountry were in a state of distress. Colonel TORRENS coincided with the Hon. Member for Thetford, and was sorry he was obliged to differ with the Hon. Member for Worcester. Mr. ROBINSON replied. Mr. EASTIIOPE postponed his motion. BANK CHARTER. Lord ALTHORP said that the motion on the subject of which he had given notice, was one of the greatest im portance, as it affected the prosperity of the country in the greatest degree, and nothing would have induced him to have brouget it forward at so late an hour, but that, as it was for a Committee of Inquiry, he did not think it was right to delay it. He was anxious it should not have been delayed, but other circumstances had prevented him from bringing it forward as early as he could have wished. There was another ground on which tie con :eived it would appear that it was not improper for him now to bring it forward, which was, that he did not intend to enter into any discussion, or state his own views on the subject ; indeed, it would be almost using contradictory terms for him to say he would move for a Committee of Secrecy, and yet at the same time explain the views to the House which would guide him in Committee. It would be inconvenient, nay, improper, even if he bad had an opportunity of addressing the House at an earlier period of the night, for him to have gone into a statement of his views on the banking system. He would state the reasons on which lie proceeded in Com mittee. This was the first instance when the Bank Charter was proposed to be referred to a Committee of this House. But a feeling bad existed for a number of years past that the period of the renewal of the Bank Charter was the proper time for an inquiry into the general system of banking. Great anxirty had been expressed that this opportunity should be taken ; for the principles on which the Bank had conducted itself should be subjected to the review of the Legislature. And he did not think he should have acted consistently with his duty if he had entered into any negotiations with the Bank relative to the renewal of the Charter without first appealing to the House, and bringing the whole case before the Committee. It was de sirable this Committee should be one of secrecy, for though secrecy was not particularly observed on these occasiors, yet the advantage was; "et the question could not be brought into discussion in the House, or what took place in the Committee be there adverted to. This was a great ad vantage ; for when so much money was concerned, that discussion should arise before the matter was completely concluded in the Committee would be attended with great injury. He hoped the House would not object to appoint a Committee of Secrecy. The questions it would have to discuss would be, whether the charter was to be renewed, and exclusive privileges of any description given to the Bank of England? And if these questions were decided in the affirmative, the Committee would then have to re commend on what conditions, and under what restrictions, these privileges should be conceded. He thought it would be desirable also that the general condition of the Banks of issue in the country should be taken into consideration. The issuing of money was the prerogative of the State, and therefore the Legislature had a right to say on what conditions individuals should be allowed to issue money. There was another point of view under which the Bank of England must be looked at, viz , as the Banker of the State. The bargains made with it in this capacity, and as the manager of the public debt, should be inquired into. The Bank of England was both a bank of issue and the banker of the State, and it was incumbent that those two characters should be kept distinct in the inqui ries of the Committee. He should go into the Committee having his own opinion, but he hoped he had candour enough to give them up if wrong.—( Hear.) The currency was connected with the question of the Bank charter; to enter into that in the Committee would involve the Com mittee in contradictions, and he thought it ought not to be touched. He thought, certainly, the Committee ought not to go into any consideration of the standard of value. He had his own opinion, too, concerning the issue of one pound notes, but though he did not wish that subject to be debated, it was impossible to exclude it from the Com mittee. He had great difficulty in selecting the Committee, hut he believed he had placed on it a representative of every interest and every opinion. He had made the Committee numerous, it would consist of thirty persons besides him self, which was as great a number as could be placid on a Committ ee o f S ecrec y. —(H e ar, hear.) At the same time he felt that he had omitted several Gentlemen who would well deserve to be placed on it. The Noble Lord concluded by moving for the appointment of a Committee of Secrecy, to inquire into the propriety of renewing the charter of the Bank of England, and the present state of the Banks of issue. Mr. BARING thought as the Noble Lord had placed so many persons on the Committee of different opinions, there would probably be as many different recommenda tions. The currency and the one-pound notes had no connexion with the Bank Charter, and Parliament might entertain those subjects at any time. He thought that these questions should be excluded from the Committee. He wished to know whether the Committee was to discuss soul determine the conditions on which the Bank charter s g h i o in uld for no t t h e e nt p e u r h i l n ic to . sh ou ld b e renewe d ; an d w h e th er it was to make the .bar ht the r es p ons ibility o f the Government. He wished the thilisebathrgoauignr but t ha i t t s t h h o e uld Co b m e m lef a t te th e Noble Lord to explain whether these points were to be considered in the Committee or not. Lord ALTHORP replied, that as to the oue•pound note, it was not possible to exclude it front the inquiries s.f th e Committee, as the Committee would be appointed to consider Bank issues. He meant the Committee not to make the bargain with the Bank, though it might re commend the conditions of it. That must be left to the Government. The subject of small notes could not, how ever, be excluded from the consideration of the Commit- tee, without tying its hands up in a nio3t inconvenient manner. Mr. HUME thought that the firs question would be, whether the Charter should be renewed ; or whether any privileges whatever should be granted to the Bask of Eng land ? The Hon. Member (Mr. Baring) verned to take it for granted that the Charter would be renewed. Mr. PIERSE expressed a hope that a sufficient num ber of practical men would be placed on the Committee ; for if they were to be all philosophers, he feared that there would he no practical measure. Lord ALTHORP, in reply to an Hon. Member, stated the motion would not extend to Scotland, and was con fined to England and Wales. Sir H. PARNELL hoped that the whole question of banking would be left open to the Committee. Mto practical men, those of the Bank of England, their effort subsequent to the restriction of 1797, was to depreciate the paper of that establishment 30 per cent. All the distress spoken of this evening was said to be the result of practical men restoring the standard. Sir R. VYVYAN would venture to suggest that the Noble Lord should not appoint such a Committee till after the Reformed Parliament was assembled. He pro tested against the Committee, because it could never make its report. Mr. COURTENAY did not agree with his Honourable Friend, because be thought this a better House than any which could be formed, and he supposed that his Hon. Friend thought so too.—(Hear.) Lord ALTHORP bad stated last session, that it was his intention to move for the Committee, and therefore the Hon. Baronet ought not to attack him. In fact, the Bank charter expire' next year, and therefore it was ne cessary that the inquiry should now take place. He did nut apprehend that the inquiry would take up any long time, as the Committee would rather inquire into the opi nions than evidence. Witnesses must be examined, but he hoped that the examination would not go to a great length. Sir R. VYVYAN suggested that some temporary expe dient should be adopted. Mr. WHITMORE said a few words, which were not audible. Lord ALTHORP thought it not possible to exclude the subject referred to by the Hon. Member (we believe the one-pound notes.) Mr. BARING thought it would be better to exclude it, as it was totally distinct from the Bank charter. Lord ALTHORP wished it might not be gone into— that was the wish of his Majesty's Government, but he could not tie up the hands of the Committee. Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought it would be better, as the one-pound notes formed no part of the circulation, to re strict the Committee not to enter into the subject. To most it would create a great agitation in the country. He wished it to be known that the Committee should not touch the subject. Mr. HUIIIE hoped that the Noble Lord would not re strict the Committee. Mr. ATT WOOD thought that the subject could not be excluded, for if bankers could not be suffered to issue one pound notes they were probably unfit to issue any notes at all. Mr. GISBORNE though' the subject of the one-pound notes could not be excludedt rom the consideration of the Committee. The wh Jle subject ought to be left open to the Committee. The Committee was then appointed, and consisted, as far as we could make nut, of the following Members : Althorp, Viscount Smith, John Morpeth, Viscount Peel, Sir R. Robarts, A. W Heywood, B. Russell, Lord J. Ridley, Sir M. W. Ebrington ' Lord Goulburn, H. Attwood, M. Lawley, F. Graham, SirJ. R. G. Newport, Sir J. Wrottesley, Sir J. B. Herries, J. C. Baring, A. Cavendish, Lord G. Thomson, C. P. Irving, John Wood, M. Courtenay, T. P. Warburton, H. Strutt, E. Maberly, W. L. Phillips, G. R. Carter, J. B. Parnell, Sir H. Morrison, J. Stanley, E. J. Smith, R. Vernon ,Thompson ' W. Sir R. VYVYAN asked the Noble Lord if be would exclude from the Committee Mr. Alderman Thompson, the only Bank Director who bad a seat in that House? Lord ALTHORP said he had excluded the Worthy Alderman for the very reason that he was a Bank Di rector, and for that reason alone. It appeared to him that the consideration of the Bank Charter was a question on the determination of which a Bank Director ought not to be called upon to assist. Sir R. VYVYAN observed that there was a precedent for the appointment of Mr. Alderman Thompson on this Committee, in the appointment of several Directors of the East India Company on the Committee appointed to take into consideration the expediency of renewing the Com pany's charter. Mr. K. DOUGLAS supported the appointment of Mr. Alderman Thompson. Mr. BARING contended that it would give great faci lities to the labours of the Committee to have a Bank Di rector upon it; for the purpose of affording any informa tion that might be required. Sir H. PARNELL agreed with the Noble Lord that no Bank Director should be on the Committee, which ought to be free from all suspicion. Mr. ROBINSON was at a loss to conceive why a man so tit to be on the Committee as Mr. Alderman Thompson should be excluded, simply because he was a Bank Director. Lord ALTHORP was so aware of the Worthy Alder man's qurlifications, that had he not been a Bank Director, he (Lord Aithorp) should certainly have proposed him as a Member of the Committee. However, as it appeared to be the general wish of the House, he would with pleasure accede to it. Mr. Alderman THOMPSON felt some delicacy on the subject, but would accept the appointment as a public duty. The motion for the appointment of Mr. Alderman Thompson was then agreed to. The several orders of the House were then disposed of, and at Three o'Clock this moruieg the House adjourned. DESTRUCTIVE CONFLAGRATION AT Messrs. BARCLAY and PERKINS'S BREWERY. Yesterday evening, about ten minutes after five o'clock, a fire broke out in the great brewery of the above eminent firm, near Southwark Bridge, which, for the frightful spectacle which it presented, and the extensive destruction of property which it caused, has not for a long time been equalled in this metropolis. Of all the many conflicting statements which we received on the spot of the origin of this terrible catastrophe (and indeed so bewildered, so absorbed in terror and stupefaction did all seem to be, who witnessed the appalling vision, that it was not easy to collect any information, save what the visible progress of the devastation presented), the following seemed to be supported by the best authority :—The miller, being obliged to absent himself for a short time from his post, committed his duty to another. A machine, called Ja cob's Ladder, which conveys, by means of revolving buckets, the ground malt into the mash-tubs, became de ranged in its operation, or had altogether stopped. The man, in whose charge it was left, took a lamp or lantern to the bottom, to examine the cause of the disorder or sus pension. Either from accident or a sudden gust of air, a spark dropped on the combustible malt-dust lying about. An instantaneous and wide-spread blaze seized the arid wood that composed the machinery, and before the men on duty could recover from their consternation, the fire was fed by the susceptible fuel that the heated apartment abundantly furnished. Another version is, that the engine was set on fire by the velocity of its own rotatory motion. An alarm was spread with the greatest possible prompt ness ; but while fire engines and voluntary thousands were rushing to save the concern, the flames bad gained too strong a position. In less than one hour about forty en gines arrived, and all the avenues were crowded with a dense mass of men, anxious to lend their aid. A great body was admitted within the gates, others were busy (flanked by a powerful body of police, forming an outpost of defence) in assisting those who plied at the engines stationed in the streets. London, Southwark, and Blackfriars bridges were thronged with spectators gazing at the magnificent but terrible picture. At half-past six the fire having devoured the boiler apartments, burst into the brewing-house and mounted in a deluge of flame to the roof, which was topped by a cu pola 110 feet high. The engines were then brought to bear with all their force upon this part, where the whole power of the fire seemed to be concentrated. But the volumes of flame that burst through the windows and mounted high above the roof, mocked and baffled the ener gies of the firemen. The flames soon seized the cupola and soon over-topped it. For about half au hour they shot 100 feet over the cupola in one immense column. The wind was quite still, which gave them a perpendicular and compact form ; if the wind had been high, the lateral and devious spread of the element, which seemed at this time to rage with unconquerable fury, would un doubtedly have produced the most t err ibl e r e sult s s o u f rrou th n e ding cup b o u l i a ldin w g e : s e cofortunately,asunled at once, from evenly-ascending directio n of th e fi re , th e but tttorheestslemes and it sunk directly down, with a crash of thun der, beating all the under-floors in its course along with it, and raising a shower of sparks that fell thickly on the firemen and spectators. If the cupola had been under mined only at one side, and had fallen over, the havoc of human life, in consequence of its elevation, and the con densed multitude in the yard close to the building, not expecting so speedy a fall, would Lave given a moat ap palling aggravation to this terrible event. The whole brewing house after this was one mass of fire from one end to the other. The engines were then brought to the hard, and continued for at least two hours to discharge . tb Per -nt '.• ': .- ' 7 At 1k • 1 r . * •••••'''. * torrents of water tlrough the i A•.-sZLlvolei t I , * „ . . the walls ; but all effttts w, r. /s e • 7;.;:r . I:'.l . ol 64 : .. ' ..; ;;ll an itt ti : 4 t nir power could cheek the fu '5. , r i t e , ,,,,.. 0 .i;,.• • osense beams that supprted the 'oo ' - - a,_ lit , i vie d of the building kept the flame alive—ftit a• when a few of them fell, and by draWl4 - after them the mperincunibent mass, formed a heap of half-consumed fuel ; no strength of water discharged from the engines .(mid quench this compressed mass of burning mate rials. The fire having now borne every thing before it, mei supplied from this reservoir in the brewhouse, gushed into the stage, where the mashing-tuna and wooden machinery were placed, and having con4urned these reached the dwelling-house of Mr. F. Perkins, which adjoins it. Before this, precaution was used to convey all the fur niture away; but from the confusion necessarily iiiciden t on such an occurrence, and the intemperate precipitation of the strangers who tendered their services, some valuable pieces of furniture were greatly damaged. They were flung into the little plot of pleasure ground opposite the house. The main efforts now of the firemen and persons employed in the brewery were directed to save the hops and malt loft. Several thousand hop-bags were flung out of the loft, and rolled to a place of security. The contents of the beer-vats, containing about 2,000 barrels of [her, were poured out from the cellars to supply the engines. At eleven o'clock, by the most incredible personal exer tion on the part not only of the firemen but of a vast body of persons assembled in the yards (most of whom seemed to us to be persons in a respectable sphere of life), the malt loft was declared to be out of danger. However, from the immense pile of half-consumed materials that are blazing within a few yards of it, if a breeze sliould spin up from the south, there must be danger. FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE. MASTER OF THE HORSE'S-OFFICE, MAY 22, 1832. The King has been pleased to make the following appoint. ments:— Colonel E. Bowater, of the Scots Fusilier Guards, to be Equer y to his Majesty, vice Lieut.-Colonel Fox, resigned. The Right Hon. W. Hay, commonly called Lord Hay, to be Page of Honour to his Majesty, vice Somerset, promoted. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, M.tY IS. Corps of Royal Englceers. Second Lieutenant W. Stace to be First Lieutenant, vice Le. mon, deceased, dated March IS, 18.t2. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Somerset. G. Vivian, Esq., April 13, and the Hon. J. Boyle, May 3, to be Deputy Lieutenants. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Middlesex. Royal East Middlesex Regiment of Nii.itia. G. Hatch, Esq. to be Captain, Doc. 2t , 1831. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Derby. Sir E. C. Disbrowe, Ent ; J. Pares, E.q. ; J. Sutton, Esq. , and J. Meynell, Esq. to be Deputy Lieutenants, May 11. &Commission by the Lord Lieutenan± of the County of Dorset. Dorset Regiment of Yeomanry Ca% y. H. Oglander, Gent. to be Cornet, vice Cox, promoted, April 25. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of, Southampton. North Hants Yeomanry Cavalry. G. E. Heathcote, Gent. to be Lieutenant; W. B. Heathcote, Gent. to be Cornet, May 3. DECLARATION OF INSOLVENCY. THOMAS TAYLOR, Northchapel, Sussex, farmer. BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. SAMUEL RICKARD, JOHN DOCKRAY, and THOMAS PINDER, Leeds, machine.makers. BANKRUPTS. WILLIAM SANGSTER, Holland.place, Lambeth, builder, to surrender May S, at two, and July 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Colquhoun, Woolwich; Bower, Chancery. lane. THOMAS GREENHILL, Great Dover-street, Surrey, flour dealer, May 22, at eleven, and July 3, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Tilson, Son, and Squance, Coleman-street.. ROBERT STA INTONDIXON, Fore-street, Lambeth, flour factor, May 30, at half-past ten, and July 3, nt ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Williams and Bethel!, Lincoln's Inn-fields. WILLIAM DOWELL GRAHAM and JOHN TATE, New castle. upon-Tyne, linen-drapers, June 1, at two, and July 3, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Bell, Broderick, and Co , Bow Church -yard. JOSEPH VOSE, Serle-street, Lincoln's-Inn-fields, boot and shoe-maker, May 29, at ten, and July 3, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Eldred, Southampton-street, Bloomsbury. THOMAS SPENCER BARNES, Cheapside, warehouseman, May 29, at two, and July 3, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Crowther, Cary-lane, Cheapside. RICHARD BYWATER and WILLIAM BAXTER BY. WATER, Waltham Abbey, Essex, grocers, June 1, Lt eleven, and July 3, aftwelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Smith, Charter-house-square. JOSEPH ORBELL, jun.,Walsingham-place, Lambeth, flour dealer, June 5, at eleven, and July 3, at half-past one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Tilson, Son, and Squance, Coleman-street. JOHN CROFT, Brunswick-row, Queen-square, wine-mer chant, June 2, at eleven, and July 3, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Coome and Wright, Tokenhouse.yard. CATHERINE BOTHAM and CATHERINE BRINSDF.N, New Bond-street, milliners, May 30, at three, and July 3, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Allen, Gylby, and Allen, Carlisle-street, Soho. _ . _ SAMUEL hOUSFIELD, Ileaton-Norris,Lancashire, saddler, June 6, at three, and July 3, at nine, at the Palace Inn, Man chester. Milne, Parry. Milne, and Morris, Temple; Walmsley, Marple. near Stockport. THOMAS KNuWLTON WILSON, Pocklington, York shire, tanner, June 2, and July 3, at eleven, at the Red Lion Inn, Great Drittield, York:hire. Walmsley, Keightley, and Parkin, Chancery-lane; and R. Shepherd, Great Drittield. JAMES HARDING, Nailsea, Somersetshire, baker, June ;, and July 3, at one, at the Commercial Rooms, Bristol. White and Whitmore, Lincoln's Inn ; and Bevan and Britian, Bristol WILLIAM SWAINSON and THOMAS MUMTELL, Lon. don ' warehousemen, June 6, at four, 7, and July 3, at nine, at the Palace Inn, Manchester. Abbot and Arney, Symond's Inn ; and E. Bennett, Manchester. JEFFREY DANIEL GORELY, Bath, brush-maker, June 8, and July 3, at twelve, at the Three Cups Inn, Bath. W. Jones, Crosby square, Bishoissgate-street ; and K. H. Hellings, Bath. JOHN MANSFIELD, Billingborough, Lincolnshire, mercer, June 8, and July 3, at eleven, at the Mail Hotel, Grantham, Lincclnshire. Worth, Bourn, Lincolnshire ; and Williamson, Gray's-inn-square. HANNAH LEACH, Rochdale, Lancashire, flannel-manufac turer, June 6,7, and July 3, at two, at the White Bear Inn, Manchester. Brundett, Spinks, and Randall, Temple ; and Brown, Oldham. DIVIDENDS. D. Grant, Torquay, Devonshire ' builder, June 14, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Ellis, Mark-lane, victualler, June 14, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Nelson, Moll's. buildings, Chancery-lane, livery-stable-keeper, June 14, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy—A. Murray, Mark.lane, flour-factor, June 14, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy—E. Roberts, Pall-mall East, lodging-house-keeper, June 14, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. Still, South Island-place, Brixton, mer. chant, June 14, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy—W. Dods and It. Moore, Percy-street, Tottenham Court-road, linen-dra pers, June 14, at half-past twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy— J. Clothier, Wilmot-street, Brunswick-square, timber-merchant, June 14, at half-past eleven, at the Court of bankruptcy—T. Stephens, London-road, linen-draper, June 15, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy—C. Pottinger, Green Dragon, near Stepney Church, victualler, June 14, at eleven, at the Court of Bank ruptcy—E. Knights, Debenham, Suffolk, currier, June 13, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy—J. and W. Mello', Castle. street East, Oxford Market, jewellers, June 13, at hvelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy—W. and W. S. Plimpton, Lower "I harnes street, seedsmen, May 24, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy— C. Pope, St. Philip's, near Bristol, copper-manufaciurers, June 19, at one, at the Bush Tavern, Bristol—T. Gray, March, Ely, Cambridgeshire, brewer, June 18, at seven, at the Gridin March—J. Scott, Norwich, upholder, June 14, at eleven, at the Offices of Messrs. Beckwith and Dye, Norwich—W. Ibbetion, Knaresborough, Yorkshire, dealer, June 14, at twelve, at the Commercial-buildings, Leeds—W. Taylor, Liverpool, porter. dealer, June 19, at two, at the Offices of Messrs. Shackleton, Wright, and Hunter, Liverpool. _CERTIFICATES, JUNE 12. J. F. Dean, Burton-upon-Trent, Stafibrdshore, provision dealer—J. Lapage, Leeds, merchant—T. Curnin, Birmingham, victuallar—R. Jamieson and J. Sandiman, Ashton-under-Lyne, iron-founders—G. Muir, Newcastle upon-Tyne, draper. T. Eve leigh, Maidstone, grocer—O. Purnell, Gloucester, currier—C. Chandler, Poulshot, Wiltshire, cattle-salesman—G. H. Rickards, Cowley-road, Brixton, wine-merchant—J. Smith, Grove-place, Camden Town, silversmith—G. Harrison, Ebury-street, Pi sihco, builder—J. Barry, Mincing-lane, wine-merchant. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. G. Poole and A. Mountcastle, Whitecross-street, coal-dealers —M. Gravatt and J. Burbridge, Great Russell-street, Covent. garden, linen-drapers—W. Carroll and W. D. Carroll, Val. worth, surgeons—J. and J. Lee, Newington Causeway, eta. tioners—J. J. Jackson and Co. Bahia, Brazil—G. T. Sealy and Co., Rio de Janeiro, Brazil—J. Barnes and J. Anrdell, St. Helen's, Lancashire, attorneys—J. and W. Mitchell, jun., Ec clerhill, Yorkshire, coal-dealers—l. Niblett and It. Langbridge, Bristol, coach-proprietors—J. Johnson and C. Laing, Man. chester, architects—T. and E Holt, Liverpool, glass-merchants —W. Cox and H. Pratt, Bilston, Staffordshire, grocers—A. Bel cher and A. B. Belcher, London—T. and J. Rigby, Live/T.oot, painters—P. Dale and J. Chadwick, Warrington, Lanca,hire, cotton spinners—W. E. Flashman and J. Horne, Hythe, Kent, upholsterers—S. Peace, sem, and Co.. Sbeirele., saw manufac turers, so far as regards S. Peace, sen.—J. and B. Nash, Brom. ley, Kent, haberdashers—G. and R. Belt, Neweastle.upon- Tyne, manufacturers of sail-cloth—C. W Hick and R. March, Cheapside, hatters—R. W. Spurrier and A. Meggett, Darlington, Durham, surgeons—G. M. Mason and Cr..., Lane Delph, Staf fordshire, china manufacturers, so far es regards G. M. Mason— J. B. Bostock and T. W. Younghusband, George-street, Man sion House, attorneys—S. and W. B. Mitchell, Sheffield, saw manufacturer.. POSEN, MAY 3.—Two sentences were lately passed in the First Instance against two ladles. Frauleins V. Przcysatkowska and Szczauinski, who, during the Polish revolution, went to Warsaw, anti performed in the hospi tals the office of the charitable sistent. They are sen tenced to six months' imprisonment and loss of their pro perty; but they have appealol against this sentence, and flatter themselves, like many others, that on the King's birth-day a general amnesty will be published.—Nurem burg Corrispondent, May 13. CORFU, APRIL 28.—The aspect of affairs in Greece is not very satisfactory, in consetplenc,t of the changes which lately took place. Acting after reports that were not quite impartial, the London Conference, under the pretext of putting an end to the factions, gave orders to the three Residents to displace the Government esta idished by the National Assembly, and to form another instead, in which those participate who were excluded from the first. This new Government was installed at the beginning of the present month, after violent disputes with the Senate. To prevent the adverse parties from d roceeding to acts of violence , a military force wits landed !rum the three squadrons w hich occupied the cita del of Napoli, and one thousand Frenchtroo ps' ea .e s r u e re s s um le m ac o i n th d e 'torn Navarin to A r g os. May these tgitators to be peaceable. As soon as Count Capo d'lsttias •arned the will of the London Conference, lie left Greece 00l came to this island on board a Russian man.of-War. fhe members now forming the Commission of Govern nent, which is under foreign influence, are Coletti, Ypsilanti, Boundouri, Zaminti, Metaxa, Culiopoulo, and Zogrm49.