The Sun. — London, England, 1847-12-07 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGENCE. COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Dec. 6. (Sittings at Nisi Prius, before Mr. Justice COLERIDGE and a Common Jury.) GIBBS V. JOHNSON AND ANOTHER. The plaintiff in this action was the well-known civil engineer, and the defendants were some of the original promoters and provisional committeemen of the Northern and Southern Connecting Railway, one of the schemes got up at the time of the mania of 1845, for uniting the South-Eastern, the South-Western, and Brighton lines with the Great Western and the London and North- Western Railways. The action was brought to recover 6,6911., being at the rate of 73/. per mile, which the plaintiff claimed as the engineer of the line, for preparing the plans, sections, and surveys. The scheme was thrown out upon the second reading of the Bill, at the instance of several of the shareholders, who, repenting of having connected themselves with the concern, got up a strong opposition to the Bill, and the result was that the scheme never found its way into a committee of merits. For the defence it was contended that the charges were excessive and unreasonable, while the bills of costs which the plaintiff had delivered contained items for work and services that had never been performed. No evidence was adduced in support of the defence, but it was elicited on cross-examination that at the present time the work could be executed at something like 15/. or 201. per mile. The defendants had therefore paid up wards of 3,0001. into court, which they considered would amply remunerate the plaintiff for his labour and ser vices, and the only question to be decided now was whether he was entitled to the full amount of his claim. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff, awarding him 2,0001. above the 3,0001. already paid to him. HOARE V. SILVERLOCK. This was an action of libel against the pro prietor of the Nautical Standard. The plaintiff Miss Sarah Hoare appeared in person and stated, in opening her case, that she was the daughter of the late Lieutenant Hoare and grand-daughter of the late Admiral Sir George Rook, but being in very reduced circumstances, she was unable to fee counsel, and therefore she hoped the Court wou'd grant her the indulgences which her unfortunate situation demanded. The libel she complained of arose out of her connexion with the Royal Naval Benevolent Society, upon whose bounty she bad repeatedly been de pendent for the means of subsistence, but through the representations of Commander Dickinson, the Executive of the institution passed a resolution refusing her further assistance. This occurred so far back as 1842, and since then the statements of Mr. Dickinson, who filled the office of secretary to the society, had debarred her from obtaining many excellent situations, amongst which were those of amanuensis to the daughter of a bishop, and companion and teacher to the children of a , clergyman ; and all the naval papers up to January, 1846, concurred in pronouncing her to be an injured woman. About that period, however, the Nautical Standard was commenced, under the auspices, as she understood, of Commander Dickinson, and the editor ship of Mr. Churchward, the naval editor of the Morning Herald, and the libels complained of, which stigmatised the plaintiff as a worthless and immoral woman, appeared in the former paper at various times during the first year of its existence. The libels were contained in leading articles and reports of the meetint,s of the Royal Naval Benevolent Society. The papers containing the alleged libels having been put in, witnesses were called to prove that the charges of immorality preferred against the plaintiff by Commander Dickinson, and upon which the libels were founded, fell to the ground upon an examination before a committee of the Royal Naval Benevolent Society, ap pointed to inquire into the subject, and that the articles complained of were not only calculated to injure the plaintiff in the estimation of the public, but had actually induced naval offi..ers to vote against her when her ease as a candidate for relief was before the Royal Naval Benevolent Society. One witness said the plaintiff was an authoress, and had written religious and mural works. Mr. Sergeant TALFOURD, for the defence, complained of the plaintiff having adopted the course of stating her case in person rather than of suing in forma pauperis, because it gave her the opportunity of stating circum stances which could not be proved, while her doing so could not be gracefully objected to by the counsel who was retained to appear for the defence. She had stated facts connected with the proprietor ship and editorship of the Nautical Standard which could not possibly be proved, because they were not true, and she had applied to herself remarks ,e hich related not so much to herself as to the fact of the Royal Naval Benevolent Society making so much of a case that was unworthy being made the subject of some of their most prominent proceedings. The next libel complained of was contained in the report of a speech reported at one of the quarterly meet ings of the Royal Naval Benevolent Society, but as the report was a faithful one, the proprietor ought not to be held responsible for the statement it contained. The other articles mentioned in the declaration did not, as the plaintiff had stated, stigmatise her as an unworthy object of charity, but only insist,d that there were more worthy objects of the Royal Naval Benevolent Society than the plaintiff. These articles did not insinuate that the plaintiff was an unworthy person, but that her cla;rns upon the funds of the Benevolent Society had become unworthy by her importunities, and it was quite evident that there was no libel in such a statement as that. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff—Da mages 403. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Dec. G. (Sittings in Banco.) BROWN V. DE WINTON, AND DAT V. LA.NDER. The Court was occupied the greater part of the day in !nearing the .argumencs in these two cases, the only point in which is-, whether a promissory note, payable to the maker's own order, and indorsed by him, i 3 a negotiable instrument under the statute of 3 and 4 Anne, chap. 9. The COURT took time to consider their judgment. The only other case argued to -day was one in which the question was, whether an agreement between mister and servant was void for want of mutuality. The cir cumstances were of no general interest. (Sittings at Nisi Prius, at Westminster, befere the LORD CHIEF JUSTICE and Special and Common Juries.) DEAN AND OTHERS V. HAIGH. In this case Mr. Sergeant Channell and Mr. Bovill were counsel for the plaintiffs ; and Mr. Huinfrey, Q.C., anal Mr. Wood represented the defendants. The plaintiffs are Parliamentary agents, carrying on business at 19, Fludyer-street, Westminster; and the defendant, Mr. John Haigh, resides at Leeds. The action was brought to recover the sum of 4451. odd, the amount of the plaintiffs' bill of costs for their services in promoting a Bill before Parliament last session for in corporatin a company for constructing a railway to be called the St. Albans, Hatfield, and Hertford Junction Railway. It appeared that when this undertaking was originally set on foot a provisional committee, of which the defendant was one, was appointed. This committee was very soon superseded by another body. called the committee of management, of which the defendant was not a member, though he occasionally attended its meetings as the representative, as was alleged, of the shareholdyrs residing at Leeds. In January, 1546, the failure of the Leeds and Weat ltidin - Rank occurred, in which the funds o f th e railway company were deposited, which led to the dissoluti,n o f t h e company in the fol lowing June. Subsequently various meetings of the directors were held with the view to wind up the affairs of the company; and eventually, for this purpo se , three of the principal shareholders, of which three the defen dant was one, were empowered to act as trustees for compounding with the Leeds Bank, paying the creditors ot the company, and Gividing the balance among the share holders, there being, h o wever. a; it turned Out, no balance to divide. At one time the funds of the company seemed sufficient to pay the creditors a composition of 15s. in the pound. The plaintiffs, however, had all along re fused to accept anything short of the full amount of their account, which appeared to be made out in the first in stance on a very reasonable scale, being 150/. short of what they might have fairly claimed (but when they found that there was a difficulty of recovering their de- Mand from the company without resorting, to leg ,- !l pro ceedings, they intimated to the defendant their intention of insisting upon payment of the additional sum they were entitled to charge. The plaintiffs had selected the defendant from the provisional directors and sued him for their bill of costs, with the liability for which they now sought to fix him, he having refused to settle the bill amicably. For the plaintiffs, Mr. More, the secretary of the de funct company, proved that the defendant wag placed upon the original provisional committee, but that his name was omitted from the committee of management which shortly afterwards superseded the provisional committee ; that he attended the meetings of the com mittee of management occasionally, but only as repre senting a large body of shareholders resident at Leeds ; that on the failure of the Leeds Bank he was requested to act as a director of the company in the place of Mr. Smith, who was the manager of the bank, and that he refused, though he subsequently acted with others in the capacity of a trustee fer winding up the concerns of the bank. The deed executed by the defendant, appointing him and others trustees to wind up the affairs of the c oucern,contained a recital referring to a deed executed previously, in which the defendant, amongst others, was il ded on e o f th e di rec t ors o f th e com p an y. itr. u FREY, for the defendant, submitted that the plaintiffs must be nonsuited. The defendant was not one of the ni • case of an action -I"' committee, and it was the common director, when i against a provisional committeeman, or point of fact there was a managing committee, withnprn: additional strong circumstance, that it had been the plaintiff's own witness, that the defendant te7Olkby the managing committee, no part in the proceedings of I),t)nesi3trn'atiTe'gwilthtothteorawna: oc casionally, from Leedso,nt.:/e,re any tha r .t r he had no control how they were going to over the funds of the comp Learned Counsel to the jury so submitted there was no eviden eo t he the plain as to fix the defendant with the lia;;llgit'les having tiff's demand. Mr. Sergeant CitaNNELL and Mr. B oa . mt. replied, the LORD CHIEF JI7STICE, in summing up th e ca told the jury that it a pp eared that at the commenceniene' of the company a me etin g was held at w hich certain gentlemen were present ; they resolved that a company should be established, and the defendant was recog n i sed as a provisional director, but at that met Ling six pe rsons were nominated as a managing committee of directors. Now, as between t hose called provisional . directors and those called the manag in g committee of directors, what was the authority deputed ? The defendant, it was true, was called a prontional director ; what power . hall , he, as between him and those w ho acted as the committfe of . management ?—as he (the Learned Judge) collected, none. The committee of management took to themselves the whole exclusive power. There was no doubt that the defendant was bound by the acts done by that managing committee in the general course of manage ment of the committee, but that by no means led to the conclusion that he gave them that authority to do those acts upon his own individual pecuniary responsibility. The funds of the company were placed in the hands of certain trustees to make arrangements with the creditors; and, as far as the defendant was concerned, it was perfectly plain that there was no evidence against the defendant, that he ever gave authority for his credit to be held out to the - plaintiffs as the foundation for them to act upon. In the absence of evidence which could properly be made the foundation of an authority actually given, and, as it appeared to him (the Learned Judge), also in the absence of evidence of the managing com mittee having contracted with the plaintiffs on the per sonal credit of the defendant, and if the defendant could only be bound by actual authority, the plaintiffs must of course be nonsuited. The plaintiffs were nonsuited accordingly. HEMP V. ORATES. In this case Mr. Sergeant Byles and Mr. Hugh Hill were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. Phinn represented the defendant. This was another action against a provisional com mitteeman. The plaintiff, Mr. N. J. Kemp, for a con siderable length of time had been the secretary of the Midland Grand Junction Railway Company; and the defendant, Mr. C. Twizleto❑ Graves, who is a captain in the navy, acted as one of the directors of that company. The action was brought to recover 125/., the amount of salary due to the plaintiff. At a genera l meeting of the promoters of the scheme, on the 23(1 of October, 1845, they resolved themselves into a provisional committee, when, among other things, they appointed the pleintiff the secretary, at a salary of 3501. per annum. There was a meeting on the 29th of the same month, at which the defendant was present, which confirmed the minutes of the meeting on the 23d, at which meeting the defendant was not present. At a meeting on the 16th of April the secretary's salary was reduced to 3001. The plaintiff's father and brother were members of the provisional committee ; he himself interested himself in getting up the company, and continued to act as secre tary up to the 31st of March in the present year. The defendant attended almost the whole of the meetings of the provisional committee, and on one occasion signed, with two others of the committeemen, a cheque upon the bankers of the company for 861. 10s., for a quarter's salary due to the plaintiff. It was resolved at one of the earliest meetings to prepare a deed of indemnity from the secretary, solicitors, engineers, and promoters of the company, to keep harmless the members of the provi sional committee against the expenses incident to the formation of the company ; that resolution appeared never to have been acted upon, and it was passed before the officers named in it had been appointed. The de posits of the shareholders never exceeded 2001. Mr. PIIINN, for the defendant, said, the question for the jury was, whether there was any promise, as laid in the declaration, to pay the plaintiff, on request, his salary. Captain Graves, the defendant, felt very keenly the hardness of the plaintiff's selecting him from the committee as the person to he sued, and leaving the defendant to the poor expedient of a remedy over against his brother directors. He submitted that the resolution respecting the indemnity deed, though it was never acted upon, went to show that the plaintiff demand was founded in bad faith and a violation of the agreement between the parties, and that the plaintiff looked, not to the individual members of the provisional committee, one of whom was his father and another his brother, but to the deposits of the company for remu neretion for his services. The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE told the jury, the simple question for them to decide was, upon what terms di,! the plaintiff perform his services as secretary for which he claimed to be remunerated. They would have to consider the construction to be put upon the resolution passed at an early stage of the company's existence, by which the secretary, solicitors, and engineers of the company were to indemnify the members of the pro visional committee. This resolution had been passed before any of those officers had been appointed. Did that resolution mean that the provisional directors were to be indemnified only up to the time when it was adopted by them ? or did it go forward prospectively to affect those members who should afterwards act as pro visiomd committeemen ? The jury would have to con sider whether, by the terms of this resolution, the plain tiff was to be employed upon the personal responsibility of the directors, or was to indemnify them, or whethe r it ha I any other meaning which entitled the plaintiff to call for payment. The jury found for the defendant. POLICE INTELLIGENCE. BOW-STREET. Yesterday Mr. H. Hugh O'Donnell Clayton, a young gentleman lately an officer in the army, and residing in Bury-street, St. James's, was brought before Mr. Jar dine, charged with sending threatening letters to Mr. Gilbert East. Mr. Williams, a solicitor, of the firm of Cox and Williams, produced several letters, and, handing them up to the bench, stated his belief that they were in the handwriting of the defendant. They were understood to convey a threat that the writer would assassinate Mr. G. East or his son unless some request preferred by him were forthwith granted. Mr. Williams had formed his judgment upon the writing by means of comparison. The defendant said nothing to the eharge. No further particulars of the matter transpired in Court. His Woastnr remanded the defendant for further examination. MARLBOROUGH-STREET. Mr. M 1.41114131 yesterday proceeded to givo judgment in the case of Sir G. Berkeley v. Attenhorough. which was argued before him last week. He said the points in the case were of too great nicety to be settled at guar er sessions; they ought to be decided by a higher court. He would give every facility for taking the case to the courts at Westminster; but he certainly did not ace that the quarter sessions were in a position to give a much better decision than he had given, and there was this reason—that it was probable the decision of the quarter sessions would be appealed against. There was nu dispute about the facts; so the best way would he to state a general issue, and let the superior courts of law decide the question. Mr. Attenborough said he hoped he sto, d before the Court without any impeachment of character fur having contested the point._ _ Mr. BINGISAM said, certainly. He was only an in nocent recipient of the goods, and he was perfectly juititied in trying what was the effect of an Act of Par liament. The plaintiff's solicitor applied for the restoration of other property not included in the summons. Mr. Attenborough would readily give up that pro perty also. It was not a question of pounds, shillings, and pence with him. It was a question as to the proper construction of an Act of Parliament. Mr. Attenho rough also denied that the plate had on it the family arms of Sir G. Wrkeley. MARY LEBONE. Yesterday a young man, who gave his name Thomas Willis, and said that he lived at 23, Lewisham-street, Westminster, was charged by Mr. Collard, soperinter, dent of the Great Western Railway- C.9mpany's pollee, with having practised a trick cf very frequent occur rence, via., that of riding a greater distance than that for which fare had been pa;d. The evidence went to show that on Saturday evening last the defendant took a ticket for a third•class carriage from Puxton to Faringdon-road, for which he paid Is. 5d., the distance being seventeen miles; he, however, thought fit to ride on to London, and when the excess fare, ss. 3d., was demanded of him, he said he had no cash, but expected his friends to meet him on the plat form shortly; none of them, however, arrived, and Mr. Collard, after perusing a letter found in the defendant's pocket, in which his mother had expressed her determi nation not to assist him any further, it was deemed ne cessary to give him into custody. The defendant in default of paying los, for the offence, in addition to the s s. 3d. clai me d on t h © part of th e company, was committed. Wm. Grummett, John flail, Henry Windsor, George Windsor, George Radley, and James :Spencer, were finally examined on the charge of having unlawfully pond at the enclosed part of E ar l dragged Nfans6dcs for pfiasrh in a k, Caen Wood, Hamptead, and stolen therefrom between 401 b. and 501 b. weight of carp, tench, perch, &c. Mr. Lewis attended for the prosecution, and Mr. Ro binson for the prisoners. Some particulars of what previously transpired have already appeared. The whole of the depositions were now read over by Mr. Phillips, the clerk, and the accused parties were all committed for trial. Bail was taken for their being forthcoming at the sessions. WORSHIP-STREET. Yesterday James Shaw Foster, a middle-aged man in apparently very bad health, was placed at the bar before Mr. Haminill, charged with obtaining money by false and fraudulent pretence from tradesmen transmitting and receiving goods by the Eastern Counties Railway. William Fearn, clerk in the grain department at the goods station, in Brick-lane, Spitalfields, stated that it was the duty of the prisoner, who was a clerk in the same department, and had been in the company's service several years, to make out from the invoices duplicate copies of tickets for grain sent by the carmen for deli very to houses in town, and that in consequence of it having been discovered by accident that fraudulent overcharges were being committed an investigation was set on foot, when it was established that the prisoner had been implicated in such transactions, and he was thereupon given into custody. John Bolton, clerk to Messrs. Noble, the seedsmen in Fleet-street, proved that on the 19th of last month their house received by one of the company's trains 114 quar ters of peas from the country, for the freightage of which 13s. l Id, was charged in a bill he produced, and Bs. for the cartage. The bill and goods were delivered by a man named King, the carter employed, to whoa I the money was paid, and who receipted the ticket. Mr. Fearn proved that the ticket in question was in ' the prisoner's handwriting, and, producing a book in which the proper amount was entered, deposed that Messrs. Noble had been greatly overcharged, and that the prisoner had only paid to him the correct value of the freightage and delivery. Sergeant Price, w h o t oo k t h e accuse d i nto custo d y, stated, ti, that upon so do i ng he told him it was all a mis mibtltee,dwi when e the b e h ro u r r e r hurry of e o t magistrate, business, to o nd p r that o ye i l e should be a that pon being called upon for his defence, it was So t but again for the co y te , the prisoner and was ordered to be brought up of the evidence. didMOC.4I-olAffemr3tiaLni, L'..l:ted to accept bail if the prisoner h could er fo fi r n e d r i e t m , b o u v t e d h e i n N e v t u he vuantable to do so, and he was a direction being placed on the commitment that his health should be looked to a . E youngS T M I m N a S n T E R about by the surgeon of the gaol. twenty years of charged with plundering his Henry Laurence, W age, wasfather, Mr. John Laurence, a fishmonger, at 2, Motcombe-street, 13el graye-square, to a considerable extent. The prisoner has for a series of years been in the • habit of robbing his father, and has by his violence and outrageous conduct become the terror of his family. On tho night of the 27th of last August the prosecutor's premises were entered by the back kitchen window, and a quantity of linen stolen. The prisoner was very strongly suspected, but no proceedings were taken against him at that time. On the morning of the 20th of November, after the prosecutor had gone to market, his house was again entered, and a valuable timepiece, some coats, and other articles of wearing apparel stolen, and in a few days afterwards the prisoner, meeting his brother, who resides with his father, gave him the duplicates of the stolen property. On Thursday morning last the prosecutor became alarmed on hearing a noise at a very early hour in his house, and feeling confident that somebody had broken into it, called the police. It was then discovered that the prisoner was in the lower part of the premises. Upon Sergeant Mackensie, 58, proceeding to the back kitchen, he found the door bar ricaded; and upon his attempting to enter by the window • the prisoner made some desperate blows at him with a • fish-tray, and demolished the window frame. The ser geant sent for assistance, and having placed two coasts ! bles at the window, with the help of a third forced the door, whe❑ the prisoner struck him with an iron bar, but was immediately disarmed. The prisoner, who re sisted ♦iolently, was then conveyed to the station. • Evidence having been given against the prisoner in support of the charge of the 20th of November, he was committed for trial upon that, but as the evidence as to . the burglary on the 27th of August was incomplete, he was ordered to be brought up again before the magistrate on Thursday next. As the prisoner, who said he knew nothing about the things, was leaving the dock he suddenly rushed towards hisj brother, who had given evidence of receiving some duplicates from him, and inflicted a desperate blow under his right eye, from which the blood immediately flowed copiously. As this took place in the presence of the magistrate (Mr. Burrell), he directed that it should be added to the depositions on the next examination. SOUTHWARK. Yesterday Thomas Lewis, the master of the Robust, was summoned fur refusing to deliver up possession of the certificate of register of that vessel. Mr. Edward Jenkins stated that he was one of the registered owners of the Robust, which belonged to a society called the True Britons, at Aberystvrith, in Wales ; that he and the other two trustees, being de sirous to remove the defendant from the command of the vessel, had applied to him for the register, but he refused to deliver it up, and stilt remained on board. On the part of the defendant, it was contended that the majority of the society to which the vessel belonged wished him to remain in command, and that the com plainant and the other two registered owners had a sinister object in view in attempting to get possession of• the certificate of register and turning the defendant out of the vessel. Documents were also put in to show that the society to which the ship belonged were desirous that the defendant should still remain as master, and also to show that the complainant, not having obeyed some of the rules by which the society was guided, had, therefore, no authority to act in the disposition of its affairs. O❑ the other hand, it was submitted that the com plainant had a right to the register, being one of the three individuals to whom it was granted. After a considerable discussion on the point, The Magistrate decided that the complainant was en titled to the register, but that, under the peculiar circum stances of the case, if the defendant refused to deliver up the possession o: the document he should mitigate the penalty from 1001. to 101. The defendant, by the advice of his solicitor, refused to give up the register, and the latter fine was inflicted, which was immediately paid, and the parties withdrew. Two men, named Capton and Hands, were brought up for re-examination, charged with stealing a watch from Thomas Plume, a shipwright. It appeared that a few nights since, as the complainant was walking borne, accompanied by another man, the two prisoners rushed against them, and in a moment Hands drew a watch out of the pocket of the former, and both prisoners run away. They were, however, soon afterwards taken into custody, and when Hands was in gaol he sent for a man named Fitzgerald, in formed him that the complainant's watch was at his house, and begged him to go and get it from his wife and throw it into the Thames, in order that it might not be produced as evidence against him. Fitzgerald acceded to a part of the request ; he obtained the watch, but, instead of throwing it into the river, he took it forthwith to the owner, and offered to deliver it up if he consented not to appear against the prisoner. The com plainant, however, refused to adopt such a suggestion, and a policeman being present, Fitzgerald was taken into custody himself, but the magistrate, on being ap prised of the real facts of the case, and thet the latter person had no hand in the robbery, and was ignorant that he was acting contrary to law, ordered him to be discharged, and committed the other two prisoners for trial. THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, DECEMBER 7, 1847. IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOUSE OF LORDS. Dec. 6. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY, in the absence of the Lord Chancellor, took his seat upon the Woolsack at Five o'clock. SIX PILOTS DROWNED. Yesterday morning, about tidetime, several pilots belonging to No. 4, pilot-boat embarked in boat No 12, for the purpose of proceeding to their own vessel, which was on duty on the Hoylake station. At half-past one o'clock, the two vessels being but a short distance from each other, between the Bell-buoy and the Bar, the pilot got into the punt be longing to No. 4, and were proceeding to that vessel through a heavy sea caused by a strong gale from the westward, when the punt was capsized by the waves, and the whole seven men were immediately seen struggling in the water. The crews of the two pilot-boats made the most strenuous efforts to save their comrades, but they only ' succeeded in rescuing one, Thomas Eddleston, who was picked up by No. 12. The others, we regret to say, were all drowned. The names of the unfortunates are, Wm. Quayle, David Davies, r4nd John Fuller, journeymen ; and George Benson, Joseph Ledder, and Wm. Charlton, apprentices. The body of Quayle was subsequently picked up by the crew of No. 4, and taken on board, where every means were tried for the restoration of vitality, but without success.—Liverpool RAILWAY S HARE MARKETS. BRISTOL, Dec. 6. _ STOCK EXCHANGE.--The safes are—Great Western, Quar ers, 2 1 / 4 p.—llitto, 17/. Shares, 1% p.—North Staffordshire, 6s. 3d. dis. LIVERPOOL, Dac. 6. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The following were the transactions this day :—Birkenhead, Lancashire, and Cheshire, 31/. Shares, 571 4 c. dis.—Ditto (late C. and 13.), 17 1 4 3 —Eastern Counties, WA— Glasgow and Dumfries, 7 1 4—Great Wes tern, Quarters, 2 1 / 8 p.—Huddersfield Canal and Railway, dis.— Lancashire and Yorkshire, Fifths, 1 4 p.—Ditto, Halves (late L. and B.), 11 dis.—London and North-Wes tern, 15514—Ditto, Quarters (A. and B.), 4 1 A c. p.—Ditto, Quarters (C), 4 1 A c. p.—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lin colnshire, Eighths, 2 3 / 4 dis.—Ditto, Preference, 1i p.—Mid land, Halves, 1 1 4 dis.—North Staffordshire, 1 4 dis.—North Union (A), 208—Preston and Wyre, 3134 c.—Shrewsbury and Chester (late N. W. M.), 1 p.—Ditto, New, 1 h p.— Shrewsbury, Oswestry, and Cheshire, 514 dis.—Ditto, Preference, 38s. 9d. p.—Sauth-Eastern and Dover, 311— Ditto, New, No. 2, 5 dis.—Ditto, Consul, No. 3, 4 3 / dis.— Ditto, No. 4,1% dis.—York, Newcastle, and Berwick (G. N.E. Purch.), 1 1- A p. BLANCHESTER, DEC. G. Srocic EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Birkenhead, Lanca shire, and Cheshire Junction, 5 1 / 7 dis —Dublin and Dro gheda, 32 dis.—Ditto, Thirds, lON—East Anglian, New Preference (6 per cent.), par--Lancashire and Yorkshire, Halves (11. and S.), 9 dis.—Ditto, Preston and Wyre, 34% n.—Ditto Halves B), 7-16—London, Manchester, and Bir mingham, Quarters (A), 4% p.—Ditto (C), c. p.— Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference, 3-16 p. —North Staffordshire, h—North Union (B), 5-16—Oldham Alliance, IST dis.—South-Eastern and Dover, No. 4, 11-16. YORK, Dec. 4. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Great Northern, 41. 10s. 6d.—Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midland, 19s. 6d.—North British, Quarters, 4 1 4—Ditto, Extension, 13s.— York, Newcaitle, and Berwick, No. 2 (late New Berwick4), 12/. 18s. Jd. c. EDINBURGH, DEC 4. STOCK EXCHANGE.—The sales are—Caledonian, New, 1/. 7s.—Dundee and Northern Jun, tion, 295. 6d.—Edinburgh, Leith, and Granton, Quarters, ss.—Great Northern, 4/. 13s. —North British, Halves, 12/. 10s.—Ditto, Quarters, 41. 17s. —Ditto, New, 13s. 6d. —Ditto, Thirds, V. Bs. GLASGOW, Dic. 4. STOCK ExcifAxor._—The fluctuations in the market this week have been very trifling, the tendency being generally in favour of a steady rise. Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr have advanced to 1041. 12s. 6d. •, North British, to 78?—s_ Edinburgh and Glasgow, to 95; Caledonian, 36 3 / 4 ; and all rather firm at these quotations. Scottish Centrals are re covering from the influence of the late unexpected call of 51. per share, and now stand at 314 p., rat h er b uyers. A good business has been done in Manchester and Southampton, Great Northern, and North British Thirds. Bank Stocks are still heavy, and there have been but few transactions in exchange companies. Row IN A RAILWAY CARRIAGE.—Joseph Mar shall was charged at the magistrates' office, Courts, on Saturday, with creating a disturbance in a carriage on the Msryport and Carlisle Railway, while the train was proceeding on its way from Wigton to Carlisle, and also obstrUcting the policeman of the company who attended the carriage in the discharge of his duty. Tho prisoner, accompanied by a few friends, was returning to Carlisle from Wigton, after having attended the Martinmas sports, and having partaken too freely of liquor, they were all in high spirits, and thought to relieve the tedi ousness of the journey by a fight in the carriage. A mite ensued, and the policeman interfered; but the party were somewhat unmanageable, and after a scuffle at Curth waite, where the prisoner got out and fell on the rails, he was taken into custody. The case was clearly proved and the magistrates inflicted a fine of 10s. and costs. — Carlisle Journal. Notwithstanding our late numerous failures, con sols have got up, and discounts lowered to 6 per cent. The result is an improved tone i❑ the share market, with a continuation of an increase of transactions in the healthy stocks, and a prospect of a much larger business during the ensuing week. Last Friday we gave a list of a tew of our dealings in stocks, which had advanced the previous month, and there is still an improvement to the better.—Nalional Advertiser. REMARKALE EFFECT OF TIIE ELECTRIC FLUID. —As a matter of interest in a scientific point of view, it may be mentioned that the wires of the electric tele graph have been sometimes thrown out of order during a thunderstorm. On one occasion, Morse's telegraph inscribed a mass of symbols on paper by the action of atmospheric electricity alone. The lightning sent its own message, and recorded its own results ! Many philoso phers are already engaged in speculations on the pro bable effects which a net work of electric telegraphs may have on thunderstorrns.—lkfedical Cantle. THE CITY OF LONDON ELECTION.—It is confi dently stated, that a petition has been prepared against the return of one of th e M embers for the City. This measure has, it is said, b een resorted to in consequence of some recent disclosures. IRELAND. The Earl of FORTESCUE presented a petition from the board of guardians of the Waterford Union, praying for the advancement of a loan, to be ex pended in employing the people of Ireland in repro ductive labour. PAPAL BULLS. The Bishop of ST. ASAPH presented a petition from the Masters and Wardens of Sherborne Col lege, Durham, praying their Lordships to prohibit the circulation in Ireland of the Papal bull, " In cone' Domini," the circulation of which was prohi bited in other Roman Catholic countries. Lord BEAUMONT believed that bull was still in existence, and was annually delivered out by the Propaganda of Rome. The Court believed the Sovereign and inhabitants of this country were in error, and they merely denounced these errors, and called upon all Catholics to pray for their conversion. But in Rome all that was under stood by it was, that this country was in error in faith. The form was absurd and ridiculous, but no thing more. He believed the whole of this proceeded from not having diplomatic relations with Rome, while they were kept up with overy other country ; but the bigotry of this country had refused to put itself in communication with a power, the existence of which it was forced to acknowledge. He be lieved that if relations were opened with Rome, and representations made to the Pope, the spirit of reform would do away with these absurd forms, which shook the feelings of some and misled others. THE IRISH PRIESTHOOD. Lord FARNHAM, in putting certain questions to the Government, disclaimed all intention of wish ing to embarrass them, or to cast any imputa tions on the character of the Roman Catholic priests. Indeed, he had great satisfaction in re minding their Lordships of the exemplary manner in which many of the Catholic priests had done their duty, and had denounced the lawless murderer from the altar. Having related some instances in exemplification of his argument, the Noble Lord proceeded to say that it was his painful duty to submit to their Lordships some instances of a contrary con duct on the part of the Catholic clergy. The first speech, to which he should direct their attention, was that of Archdeacon Laffan, who, on the 14th of Nov., at a time when murders were of frequent occurrence, and terror reigned throughout Tipperary, ventured to denounce the Saxon, and to say that if the Saxon suffered what the Tipperary peasant suffered, be would, if he had the courage of a man, sally forth and shoot the first man he saw with a decent coat up m his back. (The Noble Lord then proceeded to read at length Mr. Laftan's celebrated denunciation of the landlords of Ireland to the vengeance of the peasantry.) With regard to the defence that had been made of that speech by the gentleman who presided at that meeting, and who stated that Mr. Laffan had con cluded his speech by desiring his auditors to hand over evil-doers to the law, he would remind their Lordships that such was the general conclusion of these inflammatory speeches, and he would ask, on whom the guilt of these outrages rest ? He would next draw their attention to the speech of the Rev. Mr. Hughes, at the Castlebar meeting, held on Nov.l4th. (The Noble Lord here read an extract from the Rev. Gentleman's speech, denouncing the landlords, and telling the poor that wild justice alone remained to them.) The Irish peasant knew well what the wild justice of revenge meant, and he asked what must be the state of the country when the peasants were told that they were to look for redress not to the laws, but to the wild justice of revenge. The resident landlords of Ireland endeavoured to do their duty, but all efforts to improve the s:cial condition of Ireland would be useless so long as the people were told by these agitators that they could only trust to the wild justice of revenge. He would now refer to denun ciations of persons from the altar. In Tipperary a man named Kavanagh had been murdered. The priest was asked, had he denounced him from the altar The answer was, I (lid. When ?—At mass on Sunday last. When was he murdered ?—At fiv, o'clock in the afternoon.—(Hear, hear.) He would next elude to the case of Major Mahon, who was one of the best landlords that ever lived. On the last day of October the priest denounced Major Mahon from the altar. The words used were—" Major Mahon la worse than Cromwell, and yet he lives." Within 48 hours of that time Major Mahon was shot. In the month of August the priest had also denounced Major Mahon from the altar. He asked if such language and such conduct was, or was not, sufficient to bring those guilty of it within reach of the law. No one could be more opposed to the adoption of stringent measures without necessity than himself, but he believed that necessity did exist. He said the whole of Ireland was in a state of disorganization ; that there was a widely ramified conspiracy, the members of which, unless stringent measures were adopted, would ravage and desolate the country. The crimes of Ireland would disgrace New Zealand. There was no coun try in which the ingredients of crime were more actively at work than in Ireland, and no period at which crime existed with greater atrocity. None hut measures vigorous, prompt, and coercive, could restore peaee to Ireland, and he called upon the Government to adopt such measures. The Noble Lord concluded by asking whether these speeches of the priests had been submitted to the law officers of the Crown, whether in their opinion they would be warranted in undertaking a criminal pro secution against the utterers of those speeches, whe ther in the present state of Ireland it would be deemed expedient to undertake such a prosecution, and whether the Government intended to adopt ( - more stringent measures than those already proposed ? ' The Marquis of LANSDOWNE admitted that in many chapels devoted to the worship of God the priests had uttered language most outrageous, most inflammatory, and most contrary to Chris tian morality. They had attracted the most serious attention of the Lord-Lieutenant, who had been in communication with his law advisers, but he could not state what steps had been or might be adopted in consequence. He had caused inquiries to be made, but as yet not one information had been sworn. The matter was a most difficult one, but the Noble Earl was exercising his best discretion to bring the perpetrators of such out rages (for outrages they were) (Hear, hear) — to justice. 'The law already provided a remedy— years outrag e a g and m apu nishi ng remedy— to excite persons to violat e th e l aw was a misde o meanour at common la w , b u t i n I re l an d an A ct with de a th making t a felony it t a exci t eoss e P a i i se c er i ds t inciting s o lv e ntoe others to the commission of murder, Ind enforced in Ireland, these acts would be the means of procuring the conviction of offenders. An apprehension had gone forth that the Acts in ques tion (9_and 10 Geo. IV.) did not apply to Ireland, but they specifically did, and he would take upon himself to say, that they would be enforced in Ireland wherever possible. The Lord-Lieutenant would use every exertion to procure the requisite information, and would enforce the penalties of the law in every case in which prosecution should lead to conviction. —(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had asked whe ther it was intended to seek for more powers than were contained in the Bill then before the other House of Parliament ? He (the Marquis of Lans downe) was not prepared at that moment to say that any extra powers would be asked for ; but his he could moss undoubtedly say, that the mo m.nt it should appear that the milder mea sures were insufficient, that moment her Majesty's advisers would come again to the House and ask Parliament for more effectual measures, and he thought that their application would not have less force from the fact of their having in the first in stance tried the mildest expedient which was pos sible under the circumstances. He could not con clude without expressing► his pleasure, that while the Noble Lord had found it necessary to condemn the language of certain Members of the Roman Catholic priesthood, he had at the same time borne testimony to the general Christian demeanour and exemplary conduct of that body. As far as his experience went he could fully corroborate the Noble Lord. He had during a period of unexampled suffering seen the Roman catholic clergy perform their duty in the most noble, pious, and disinterested manner ; and if it were necessary to ♦isit some of the order with punishment, it became the more necessary to honour the untiring, zealous, and Christian exertion of the great majority.—(Hear, hear.) The Earl of MAL NIESBURY said, that from one end of England to the other there was but one sentiment of indignation at the crimes which were every day being committed in the sister country. But even this indignation was superseded by the horror evinced at seeing such crimes encouraged by ministers of God.—(Hear, hear.) He regretted that the Noble Marquis had not given them any hope of more stringent measures. With respect to the language alleged to have been used in chapels, he thought it might be possible to get at proof of its utterance, seeing that it must have been spoken in the hearing of hundreds of persons. Lord STANLEY said, that although there were portions of the statement of the Noble Marquis to which he had listened with some satisfaction, as indi cating on his part, and, no doubt, on the part of the Lord• Lieutenant of Ireland, a determination, as far as possible, to grapple with the great evil so forcibly brought under their Lordships' notice by his Noble Friend ; yet he had, at the same time, to regret the indefinite and indistinct character of the answer given by the Noble Marquis. The questions pat to the Noble Marquis were plain, distinct, definite questions. They brought before their Lordships in the strongest colours, yet colours not stronger than the occasion warranted and rendered necessary, cases in which it was quite clear that either at public meetings, or in the awful form of denunciations from the altar of God, there had been put forth on the part of some of the Roman Catholic clergy, of some individual mem- : bers of that clergy—far be it from him to attribute such atrocities to the body in general—incentives to murder, which, in general, had been immediately followed up by the execution of the sentence. Under these circumstances, it was not too much for his Noble Friend to ask the Government whether the facts stated had been communicated to the Lord- Lieutenant of Ireland; if so, whether the Lord- Lieutenant had referred them to the law officers of the Crown ; if so, whether it was the opinion of those officers that the law, as it stood, was strong enough to meet these cases; and if such was not the opinion of those officers, whether it was the intention of the Government to seek to amend and strengthen the law ?—(Hear, hear.) He must say, that though no notice of these questions hal been taken by his Noble Friend, he was surprised to find that the Noble Marquis was not able to state whether or no these facts had been reported to the Lord Lieutenant. -- (" Hear, hear," from Lord Lansdowne.) Oh ! then he was to understand that they had been com municated to Lard Clarendon. This, however, af forded no answer to the main question, which was, whether the cases had been submitted to the law officers of the Crown in Ireland, and whether, in their judgment, the facts warranted the prosecution of the offending parties ?—(flear, hear.) To this question, as he understood, the Noble Marquis was not able, without communication with the Lord-Lieutenant, to answer. Such being the fact, he hoped that his Noble Friend would not allow the case to rest as it stood, but would, after the lapse of another week, re new his questions distinctly with reference to these particular cases, as thus :—Was it or was it not true, that in the year 1836 a Roman Catholic priest wrote to a landed proprietor in Ireland, in the most lauda tory terms of his charity, his benevolence, his warm heart, his labours of love for the surrounding popula tion ? Was it or was it not true that, in August, 1847, that same priest from the altar of God denounced that same landed proprietor as an absentee, a tyrant, and an oppressor ? Was it or was it not true, that this same priest denounced this same landlord as worse than Cromwell, and askel " Does this man yet live ?" (Hear, hear.) Was it or was it not true that in coming out of chapel, after that denunciation, respectable person who had heard it pronounced said, "This man must be immortal if, after this anethema he survives" ?—(flear, hear.) Was it or was it not true that within forty-eight hours after this denunciation, that landlord, a most humane, praiseworthy man in every respect—a man beloved by. all his neighbours, was cut off by the hand of an assassin ?—(Hear, hear.) If these things were true, then his Noble Friend had a right to ask whether they had been referred to the law officers of the crown in Ireland--whether, in the opinion of those officers, that priest was legally, as, if the facts were as stated, he was morally, in the sight of God and man, guilty of the blood of the murdered Major Mahon—whether, if such was their opinion, it was intended by the Go vernment to prosecute the man who had desecrated the altar of God by fulminating from it an incentive to murder—or whether, if such was wit their opLion, it was intended so to amend and strengthen the law as to enable it to reach these atrocious cases ? —(Bear, hear.) The Noble Marquis had, so far, gratified him by reciting various laws already on the statute-book, which applied to such offences; but then came the further questions, how far was it in the power of Government to enforce these laws, and how far was it considered expedient to do so? He had himself had the honour, or perhaps rather the mis fortune, to act for a considerable time as Secretary for Ireland, and was quite aware of the difficulty of ob taining effectual evidence in such cases, of the diffi culty of prosecuting with any hope of success a Roman Catholic priest, before a jury composed in many instances of the lower class of Roman Catholics, whose prejudices would range them on the side of their own minister—(Hear)—but he still thought they had a full right to know whether it was the design of Government to attempt, at least, to effect a prosecution of such offenders, because, however lamentable, on the one hand, the failure of a prosecu tion, yet, on the other hand, its failure inconsequence of the misconduct of a jury would go far to enlighten the Parliament and people of this country as to the real nature of the difficulties and the extent of the remedy to be applied.—(Hear, hear.) Whatever the obstacles in the way, he regarded it as the clear duty of Government to run the risk of au un just acquittal, rather than have it to he supposed that in these and similar cases the Government were powerless, or that, whatever the provisions pf the statute-book, they were a dead letter, and that there was practical impunity for offences of this de scription.—(Hear, hear.) He must reiterate the hope that his Noble Friend would repeat his questions after the lapse of an interval sufficient to enable the Noble Marquis to communicate with the Government in Ilreland.—(Liear, hear.) Lord CAMPBELL said that his experience as a law officer of the Crown told him, what the Noble Lord's experience as a late Minister of the Crown might also have told him, that to answer such ques tions as those now proposed, under such circumstances, would be in the highest degree indiscreet, and pre judicial to the course of justice.—(Hear.) The law officers of the Crown must have sufficient time allowed them for fulfilling to the best of their judg ment the onerous duties imposed upon them, and must not, because they did not act with the rapidity desired by irresponsible parties, be branded as accom plices in the crimes it was their task to punish,— (Hear.) To the question, whether the existing laws were sufficient to meet such cases as these, he would distinctly reply, abundantly sufficient. There could be no doubt that any incitement to commit a felony rendered the party putting forth the incite ment an accessory before the fact, and liable as such, in Ireland as in England, to the same punishment with the actual perpetrator of the offence; and, in the case of murder, to undergo with the actual mur derer the punishment of death.—(Hear, hear.) Whether the incitement emanated from the platform of a public meeting, or from the pulpit, the legal liability was, of course, the same. Could it be shown that from the pulpit or the altar a priest had said, " A or R is as bad as Cromwell—does he yet live ?" or words to that effect, this would be mani festly strong evidence before a jury that the de nunciation was an incentive to the dagger of the assassin. --(Hear, hear.) The existing law, he would repeat, was quite strong enough to reach such cases, and he had every confidence that the Lord-Lieutenan of Ireland would not hesitate or delay to carry tha law into execution. The Earl of lIARDWICKE referred to a petition, presented in the earlier part of the evening, com plaining of the bulls denouncing the Queen and her Protestant subjects as malignant heretics, and urged that they involved denunciations most fatal to the peace of the country. Lord BROUGHAM observed, that as the Lord- Lieutenant of Ireland professed himself satisied with the law as it stood, their Lordships, until the inadequacy of the law could be proved, could hardly desire to force a more stringent law upon the Go vernment. Earl GREY said, that according to all the reports received, juries in Ireland did not shrink from the performance of their duties. As long as that conti nued to be the case, her Majesty's Government would be indefensible, if they asked for extraordinary powers to set aside the administration of the existing law. Her Majesty's Government shrunk f-om no responsi bility; but nothing would be more rash or unadvissble than that they should pass opinions as to what were or what were not speeches inciting to crime. In cases where the intention was most mischievous, it had often happened, even in this country, that legal grounds tor conviction were wanting. Their Lordships adjourned at Half-past Seven o'clock. HOUSE OF COMMONS, Dea. 6. The SPRAKER took the Chair at Four o'clock. JEWISH DISABILITIES. Sir R. 11. INGLIS presented a petitio❑ signed by the rector and inhabitants of the parish of Newport upon-Stroud, in the county of Worcester, and one from the town of Alcester, in the county of Warwick, against the admission of nonbelievers in Christianity into the Legislature. Mr. PLUMPTRE also presented a petition from a parish in the county of Surrey to the same effect. Mr. LAW also presented a petition from the students and graduates of the University of Catn bridge to the same effect. The petitioners stated that they felt assured that the greatness and prosperity of this country entirely depended upon the maintenance of the establishment of Christianity, and they ear nestly petitioned the House that they would not press any measure for the admission of persons professing the Jewish religion into the Legislature, as they were confident that such change would be attended with a great shock to the religious feelings of the country. COERCION FOR IRELAND. Mr, F. O'CONNOR presented a number of peti tions from members of the Chartist Land Association and others, praying that remedial measures instead of coercion might be adopted for Ireland ; and also praying the House to adopt some measure by which the working classes might receive an equivalent rate of wages. MINISTERS' MONEY. Mr. FAGAN presented a petition from Cork, signed by 16,500 persons, praying for the abolition of minis• tern' money. The Hon. Member also gave notice that he would, upon an early day, move that the petition should be printed with the votes. Mr. NEWDEGATE presented a petition from Coleshill complaining of Papal bulls. COLLIERY INUNDATION AT WIGAN. In reply to a question from Mr. F. O'CONNOR, Sir G. GREY said no official statement had yet reached the Government on the subject of the col liery inundation at Wigan, but from the accounts in the newspapers, and from other accounts which had r:ached him, it was unfortunately too manifest that the lives of six persons had been sacrificed by the overflowing of the river Douglas, at Wigan. When all the information that cotol he gairn.d upon the subject should be collected, Government would be in a position to state whether they ought to cause an inquiry to be made with re spect to this accident, with the view of guarding against the future occurrence of a similar disaster. RAJA OF SATTARA. Mr. G. THOMPSON presented a number of petitions in favour of the claims of the Raja of Sattara. ELECTION PETITIONS. The SPEAKER said he had to inform the House that he had received an intimation from the Clerk of Elections, to the effect that the recognizances in re spect of tha petitions complaining of undue returns for Great Yarmouth, Montgomery, and Stockport, had been completed to his satisfaction. The Right lion. Gentleman said he had also to inform the House that he had received a letter from Mr. Cholmondeley, stating th.it it was not his intention to defend his seat. Petitions were presented complaining of the returns for Westbury, Manchester, Sligo, LAncaster, Leices ter, Dundalk, Drogheda, Stockport, Maldon, Derby, and Bodmin. THE COMMERCIAL DISTRESS. Mr. lII._;RRIES gave notice that on an early (lay he should move the following resolution :—" That looking at the state of distress which has prevailed for some time amongst the commercial classes, and the general feeling► that the embarrassments were occa sioned by the Bank Restriction Act, it is the opinion of this House that her Majesty's Government were justified in authorising the Bank of England to depart from its provisions without the consent of Parliament, and that this House will resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to consider the provisions of the 'ith and Bth Victoria, chap. 32, with the view of suspending the limitation which places upon the issue of gold by the Bank of Eng land upon such conditions as may be provided by any Act to be passed for that purpose.' EXCISE LAWS. Mr. MOFFATT asked the Right Hon. the Chan cel:or of the Exchequer whether it was his intention, in the proposed new Excise BPI, to extend by its pro visions the bonding privileges to British spirits for home consumptiln that were at present conceded to foreign arid colonial spirits. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, as it would shortly be his duty to introduce the Bill referred to, it would perhaps be more convenient if he postponed answering the question of the Hon. Member till he stated the intentions of the Govern ment upon the whole subject. Mr. HUME asked when the Bill would be brought in ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said shortly niter the Christmas recess. BATTERSEA PARK— EMBANKMENT OF THE THAMES. Sir. IL 11. INGLIS said, as one of the Metropo litan Improvement Commissioners, he wished to ask a question of the Noble Lord, which appeared to him of Great public importance. The Commissioners made their report in January, 1845, and the Go vernment having approved of their recommendations, Bills were brought in to carry them, which were adapted, and received the royal assent on the 3d of August last year. Now, as little or nothing had been done, and as great expense could not fail to result from any further delay, he wanted to ask the Noble Lord what steps were being taken in the :natter. Lord MORPETH replied, with respeCt to the proposed Battersea Park, that several exorbitant claims had been sent in to the department with which he was connected, and it had, therefore, been neces sary to refer them to a jury. Time had necessarily been consumed in ascertaining the rights of the parties. The first case was brought before a jury last Friday, and he was happy to state that a claim for 10,2121., which appeared to him and to the Government sur veyors most exorbitant, had been reduced to 750/. —(Heir, hear) The result, he hoped, would lead to an accelerated pace with respect to the other claims. FOREIGN STATISTICS. Mr. NESVDEGA'fE stated that, on the 24th of January last, he moved for returns with respect to the tariffs of various foreign countries and of our colonies, which, he complained, had not been pre sented to the House. Lord PALMERSTON replied that the returns had found their way to the Foreign-office, but that they were in foreign languages, and as they could not be translated with the present means at the com mand of the Foreign-office, he must leave it to the Hon. Gentleman and to the House to determine in what way the returns could be rendered most avail ablo. Mr. NEWI)EGATE solicited the Speaker to point out in what way he ought to proceed to ob tain them in an available shape. The SPEAKER said the question was a difficult one. It was quite clear the House could not autho rise the transhainn of the returns. The Noble Lord had stated that the papers could not he translated without great additional expense to the Foreign office; and, therefore, perhaps the best course for the Hon. Gentleman to adopt was to move that they be laid on the table. The matter then dropped. IRELAND. In reply to Colonel SIB rtioßr, The . CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER %Wed that he sincerely trusted the debate on Ire land, to come on to-night, would not be an adjourned one. If not, he could assure the Gallant Colonel that Irish bu-iness would take the precedence of all other matters.—(Hear, hear.) THE EX RAJA OF SATTARA. Mr. G. THOMPSON inquired if intelligence of the death of the ex-Raja of Sattara had been re ceived at the Board of Control ; and, if so, whether it was the intention of the Government to take steps to have the allowance made to the ex-Raja continued to his relatives and dependents, who numbered, he understood, 700 ; also whether intelligence bad been received to the effect that they had scarcely the means of interring the deceased Prince. He did not ask the Government to give the means of upholding their dignity, but of satisfying, he might say, their necessities ?—(Hear, hear.) Mr. C. LEWIS replied that official intelligence of the death of the ex-Rpja reached the Board of Con trol on Saturday. HP had not seen the dispatch, and Sir J. C. llobhouse was out of town; but he understood that it did not make any statement with respect to the condition of the relatives and de pendents of the deceased, or with respect to the con tinuance of his provision. As, however, he had not received notice of the question he would make in quiry. IRELAND. In reply to Sir J. WALSH, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL stated that he would inquire with respect to the changing of the venue in Ireland. He was prepared to answer any point of English law, but as the law differed in Ire land it would be necessary for him to make inquiries. DEN UNCIATIONS FROM THE ALTAR (IRELAND). Mr. FITZNIAUItICE wished to know whether the law, as it now stood, gave to the Government power to bring to trial those priests in Ireland whose denunciations from the altar had been immediately followed by the assassination of the person so denounced.—(llear, hear.) _ _ Mr. J. OTONNELC—I rise to order. I wish to know whether it is competent for any Hon. Mem ber to ask any question which infers a calumny—an unproved and atrocious calumny ?—(Order.) Mr. FITZMAURICE trusted that the House would not think it necessary to take any notice of the interruption of the Honourable Member. He wished further to ask, in the event of his question being answered in the negative, whether it was the intention of the Government to strengthen the law in that respect, so as to enable them to deal with those who, by the moral influence which they possessed over their congregations, had in certain instances incited the people to acts of murder?—(Hear, hear.) The AT FORNEY-GENERAL stated that he was not aware of any facts connected with those cases, except such as had appeared from time to time in the various newspapers. This answer was however dis- tinct to the question of the Hon. Member—if any person could be proved to have been guilty of inciting or procuring murder, they could be dealt with and punished according to law. MEDIATION IN SWITZERLAND. Mr. OSBORNE wished to know whether the Government had received any information from their envoy at Switzerland, as to whether the joint media tion of the different Powers would be likely to prove effectual in settling the state of affairs in that country. Lord PAL ME ttsToN stated that communications had been received, which showed that in point of fact the civil war was at an end, and there being, therefore, no longer any contending parties, the question of mediation was at an end.—(Cheers.) POOR REMOVAL BILL. In answer to a question put by an Hon. Member, Sir G. GREY stated that it was not the intention of her Majesty's Government t o p ro p ose any substi tution or alteration of the Poor Removal Act of 1846. SCHOOLMASTERS IN SCOTLAND. Mr. B. COCHRANE gave notice of his intention, upon an early day, to move for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the duties and emo luments arising from the office of schoolmaster in Scotland. CRIME AND OUTRAGE (IRELAND) BILL. Sir GEORGE GREY moved the order of the day for the second reading of this Bill. Mr. J. O'CONNELL stated, that in the absence of his Hon. Friend the Member for Limerick (gr• W. S. O'Brien), whom he regretted to state was labsent through severe illness, he rose to move the amendment, which, otherwise, that Hon. 111serther would have done, which was that the other orders of the day be proceeded with. He felt it to be his duty to oppose the Bill at this stage and upon every stage of its future progress. In the .Bill there was but one single point which he could re cognise as worthy of receiving his support—that part was the conferring of additional powers upon the Lord• Lieutenant to enable him to send addi tional forces of police into disturbed districts. Some of the clauses of the Bill were mo.t unconsti tutional and arbitrary, and he felt determined to give the Bill every opposition in his power. The Govern• ment ought to have brought tbrvvard some measure calculated to remedy the very great enei'd distress which existed throughout that country. He thought that betbre measures of coercion h;id been brought forward those of a remedial nature should have been tried. He would not at the pre• sent moment go into the details of the Bill, hut he would ask the Government in what way they ha d entitled themsleves t o come t o that House for the present Bill, and i n w h a t wa y they dischaisted themselves of th e i ncons i s t enc e of hav in g so strenuously opposed th e mea sures of coer cion proposed by th e I s t e G o vernment, two years ago, and now com i ng f orwar d with a meas ure of coercion of their own—(liegr, hear) —with out having brought forward one remedial measure for the amelioration of the condition of the people °I Ireland ?—(Hear, hear.) The present Government had allowed no less than five years to elapse without bring ing forward one singl e measure for the improve' ment of Ireland. It might In said that it was in consequence of the state of artier in the c ountry that they had :not brou g ht forward such meas ures, but such a statement w as b u t an i n diff e rent satis fac• tion to the people of Ireland. What had the p eo p le p of Ireland to do with parties lin this country ? I f the Government could not pass measures of aineliorationt why attempt at those of coercion ?—(hear, hear.) He thought the Government had no pretext for bringing forward a coercion Bill for Ireland: in the present sess i on ; th e y m i g h t at l eas t have wai ted till the actual time o f th e mee ti ng of Parlia ment had arrived.—(H ea r.) I n d ee d, the Isioble Lord 3 t the head of the Government the other night stated i n terms that he had called Parli amen t t o gether thu g early for the purpose of the a pp o i n t men t of the C° 111 ; mittee on commercial distress. If the Governmenf had up to February, the usual time of the meeting Parliament, exerted the law as it at present stood and found it ineffectual, he would then have OP : ported them in bri ng i ng f orwar d s trong ineasu rt ' s , The era of social impr o vement h a d n ot come, it thewU o' true, but it was upon the G o vernment and f English Parliament, and not th e un happy peop le Ireland, that the shame must fall. They had e ne c i glected all measures of a b ene fi c i a l na ture. They "sd, applied no remedies to the prevailing evils of Irelaci s n . and therefore it was not sur p r i s i ng c rime and content existed in Ireland to a large extent. J- te Bill, however, could not possibly improve this Wl_ of things. It would only serve still further of exasperate the people, and h e h o ped it would r° be persevered in. Let the Government bring, in a short Bill, asking for power to increase the a i t; stabulary and establishing a r eg i s tration of arm 4 and he would gi ve th em hi s s t renuous support, but h e did say that they ought not to ask for the other power A t r ied contained in the existing Bill until they had " th e the effect of remedial measures in calming `,) irritation which prevailed in Ireland.—( lica s ^ ,d Mr. Carden, a Tipperary magistrate, had addres a letter to the Lord-Lieutenant, in which be r_ commended that arms should be taken fr°'_, all suspected persons—that all persons ,u_.` bad character who were out after a certain hour the evening should be liable to transp or tation, 2 % that heavy fines should be inflicted on certal o f districts in default of the convictio n held guilty parties. A premium was thus , out to juries to find inn oc ent persons gtlliti;o-„ in order to save the fines. There was a p ! cious specimen of a Tipperary magistrate for Yo th . Those were the men on whose advice „ il l. Government had brought forward their •tr' not The Right Hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) was, 0 „ unlike the sailor, who having plenty of grog ana bacco, was asked what more he wished for , when 'l, replied, " more grog and more tobacco,'' for he an' e those who acted with him cried out for rn°r Irish Arms Bills and fsr more coercion. He back the epithets, " the vulgar expedient of repeal,. and " don't parley with Ireland," with the contenW'' they deserved to those who uttered them.—( ll l; hear.) Under the Government of the Rig Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) ts . " evils of Ireland grew day by day. It was to ti! ° door of his party that he laid th e p resen t state of lns unhappy country. Ile blamed the Government Or adopting such a measure as the cue they had pro • posed, whilst they left the r oo t o f th e evil - untouelle"; Let them lose no time in striking a t th e ro ot °' the evil, and of at once eradicating it. trusted of all things that the a h om inahil police system would not be ext en d e d. He given credit to her Majesty's Go.ernmeet for good intentions ; he had not, however, much to h e !' him out in that opinion. lie had endeavoured i s vain to find out what remedial measures were to ic i e proposed for Ireland. It was tree it was the inte ntion of the Government to bring forward a Grand Ju r y But such a Bill would only be a modification ...°t an existing institution, it would not go to the rl'hue of the matter, or cure the radical evils Of country. The Encumbered Estates Bill had not yet been brought forward, and he did not k o u , a , when it would b e , and even when it b. passed it w o uld b e y ea r s before the slightest ,out e d neficial effect f rom th e wor king of that measure 0 0e be felt. There were no other measures proposed brought forward as reinedial measures. It hl e b re el proved by Committee after Committee that t ", root of the evil was to be • the le o" f o und question. Surely it was high timein long agitated ques ti on s h o uld be settr It had been said that that was a difficult q , ou ld Such had beer. the excuse made for years. It no t that te at not be assumed that the statesmen of this age ha ion considered the question, or formed seine t 0r,:,., 4 , upon it. The present Government ought . e d "r tf , come forward boldly at once, and met th tru es culties of the question. Prussia and other codowi had obtained a settlement of the question, ar!_ t h e ir should not this country endeavour to follow course ? (The Hon. Member then read several t!,, a meats for the purpose of showing the miser„ I :i r " e a distress that existed in Ireland.) He was . 095 the that they would have a recurrence in inter year 1848 of the severities of the " sures of 1847, and yet no remedial Meo. had been proposed or thought of b y the G vernment. The principle of the Irish Y;',,to law was to run Ireland more and more s _';' os debt, and do no earthly good. It was It e . ; 0 „, --oor for ultimate good. denied that the , o d, would be a source of regeneration for Ire' It was an act of injustice to force upon Ittlat i , u ne poor-law in its pauperised condition ; and consider the advantages this country had secured by the j the legislative union, he had a right to call te a ll er House for an efficient measure of relief r Lil o( than a coercive Bill. Twelve millions mon ey was the estimated loss Ireland ,Seure tained from the potato disease, but ther., other losses which had reduced the capital of Ireland arite J within the last two or three years, and shish r cou ld to know how the present capital of Irelan d, ooid not support its paupers three years ag?, c in the chargeable with the support of its pauperisrtl__sotl, present day. He wanted money for Irelands kap,' oh.) He said it candidly, he wanted lnollPthsa as this country owed Ireland much more meneY t iee it had advanced, it was nothing but common Jue4yeot that money should be paid by this country to Pr lie the people of Ireland from dying of starvatinni.r.eiand repeated, therefore, that money must be had• l it e or was the mainstay of this country during the t t . ol l . that the war, and it was the height of ingratitude „tetil t House to treat the claims of her people with co' , 0 te ll and derision.—(oh, oh.) It was all nonsense.!tiotiat him that England could not bear this ad° t hat expense, and he could assure the Ilnlegene if it did not come forward nobly an d tent rously to the assistance of Ireland in its I!`,_ c t he exigencies, he, for one, would not answer r ing consequences.—(llear, hear.) It was utterly rt its possible for the property of Ireland to supr, With poor, and unless this country came forwalrou_stinae further advances of money, thousands upon ti _ e t ' b e d must die of starvation. Fever and disease already taken root in Ireland, and as the, aro pe, was making rapier strides through Europe' to he looked with considerable fear and appreheonuise to the future. He therefore implored the 1 1 . 5 _ . b ,ro come forward in a gracous spirit and ass': 'they with another grant of money, in order r.li.: they might provide against conihig t i e l nar it Of honour to themselves the present Lord-Lieu made Ireland and the present Chief Secretary I ha t ; this s i ` ' ‘ strong representation to the Government of s pre orte d of the water to furnish funds to check the disease. Those representations had been suPP t bad wha n , by the report of the Board of Health; and oontry ? been the answer of the Government in this fever They stated that they regretted to learn th at the had not diminished, hut they had no po wer ur the Ist laws for making issues for that purpose afte r _ to this of October. Why, then, did they not comv,nsteed House to ask for powers to furnish means 0$ of seeking a Bill of coercion ?—Hear, odd the subject of the poor-law, he would °" 11 , Ire one word more—viz., that by throwing ur n we re land the support of her own poor , 311 elas ;1 7 ' the suffering alike—the landlord and t he far class e veryln shopkeeper and the artizan — in short, ~Ihich was partaking of the impoverishment Iln: t e te r r oses the country laboured. Many of the b