The Sun. — London, England, 1832-07-07 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. ROUSE OF LORDS, JULY 6 The Earl of SHAFTESBURY presented a petition from the town and inhabitants of Worcester aglinst the Boundaries Bill. Lord DUNDAS presented a petition from the inhabi , tante of Shetland, to the same effect. Lord WHARNCLIFFE presented a petition from the inhabitants of Liverpool, in favour of the London and Bir mingham Railway Bill. Lord WHARNCLIFFE moved the third reading of the Zemindar of Nozeed The LORD CHANCELLOR, after takleg an elaborat. view of the whole of the vase, opposed the Rill. CONFERENCE WITH THE COMMONS. At the conclusion of the Lord ChanceHot's speech, the Deputy-Usher of the Black Rod announced a message from the Commons. On the usual motion, " That the Mescengirs be called in," being made and agreed to, Mr. W. WYNN, and several other Members, appeared at the bar. Mr. WYNN stated that he and the other gentlemen con stituting the deputation were directed by the Hence of Commons to request a conference with their Lordship% in the Painted Chambtr, on the subject of certain alterations made by their Lordships in the Bill for abolishing the pu nishment of death in certain cased. The conference was granted, and on the mall of Eat] GREY the following Peers were nominated to manage it ma the part of their Lordships : —The Lord President (Mar quess of Lansdowne), the Duke of Ricl , mond, the Earl of Shaftesbury, the Earl of Rosslyn, Lord Kenyon, the Bishop of Herefrrd, and the Earl of Rosebery. During their Lordships' absence at the conference the House was adjourned. On their return, the Marquis of LANSDOWNE stated that the managers appointed by their Lordships had met the managers who appeared on the part of the House of Commons in the Painted Chamber. The Commons stated, by their managers, that they disagreed from the amend ments made by their Lordships in a Bill entitled " A Bill for the Abolition of the Punishment of Death in certain cases," for the following reasons,—because they thought the amendments to be of so much importance as to demand a separate Bill, and because they required more detailed consideration than had been given to them. On the motion rf the Marquis of LA NSDOWNE, the communication from !he Commons was ordered to be taken into consideration on Monday next. The discussion was then resumed on the ZEMINDAR OF NOZEED BILL. Lord WYNFORD supported the Bill. Lord ELLENBOROCGH was prepared to negative it on the broad ground of justice ; because, in his opinion, the petitioner was not borne out in his claim by any plea of law or equity. Lord WfIAiINCLIFFE supported the third reading o the Bill. Lord ELLENBOROUGH then moved, as an amend ment, that the Bill be read a third time that day six months. • On this the House eivided, Content l4 Not content Majority against the amendment — 9 On our re-admissb , n below the bar, we found The LORD CHANCELLOR addressing the House on the original motion, and entreating their Lordship not to come to an immediate decision on a matter of such high importince, and involving, as it would, such serious con sequences. After the decision to which the House had just conic to, be would not again divide it on the question, that the Bill be then read a third time, but he again begged to express his earnest hope that they would post pone the third reading to a future day. Lord KENYON said, that the decision to which the House bad urine, was, no cli Wit, very different from that which the Noble and Learned Lord on the Woolsack had expected. He put it to him whether, if the result had been different, he would have asked them to take the course he now advised ? Lord ELLENBOROUGH admitted, that what was asked by the Noble and Learned L , rd on the Woolsack was unusual, but he must say that so were the circum stances under which he asked it. For his own part, he must say, that in his opinion, the individual making this claim had not a shadow of justice or equity to support it. He, for one, would be extremely unwilling to take the responsibility of the Government of India, if clairus,al4 as these were admitted. Lord WHARNCLIFFE confessed that there did not appear to him any reasonab'e ground urged for the further delay of this question. He felt fully justified in moving, that the Bill he now a read a third time. The LORD CHANCELLOR bad no right in a vise of this kind to ask their Lordships to receive his opinion, as he should in a case where he was giving it judicially. He would, however, ask their Lordships to postpone the third ~.<1:os on the ground that many Noble Lords went away before the division, not expecting that any would take place. On the Bill itself he had no personal feelings of any kind. He had acted in the discharge of what he considered his public duty. He had never canvassed in any way, or asked a single individual for a vote on it. He would not say that there had been any canvassing on the other side, but he felt that in all cases of individual claims, it was difficult to prevent it. The thing had been carried so far in the other, and to some extent in this House of Parliament, as to make canvassing not without a precedent, but he hoped it would not be without a remedy. He did not, however, ask for any delay on that ground. He asked it on those he had already stated, for the sake of the character of their Lordships' proceedings, and on the ground of the absence of many Noble Lords who would' be disposed to take a part in the debate. Lord NAPIER said, that when the House was about to divide, several Lords had left because they were unwilling to vote against the Bill. This was a question between a' powerful body, the East India Company, and a private in dividual, and if the Bill were now delayed t wait for a stronger opposition to it, it might be well said that the weaker was allowed to go to the wall. Lord GODERICH opposed the Bill. The Earl of HAREWOOD voted for the Bill, from a firm conviction that the individual had fully established the justice of his claim. If the delay now sought for was given, it could only he to defeat the Bill. Lord WHARNCLIFFE denied any canvassing for the Bill. He would would now move that it be read a third time, and that it do pass. Lord ELLENBO . ROUGH said that the opposition of the East India Company was given to the Bill officially, just as the Government might feel itself disposed to oppose any claim on the public purse, for which no valid grounds had been shown. Lord HOLLAND moved that the debate be adjourned. The House then divided— Content Not content 24 Majority against the adjournment - 9 The Bill was then read a third time and passed. CONTEMPTS IN ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS BILL. On our return to the Bar, we found The Marquess of WESTMEATH addressing their Lord ships, on the order of the day for the second reading of this Bill, and requesting its postponement on the ground of the absence of the Noble and Learned Earl (Eldon). The LORD CHANCELLOR saw the reason why their Lordships should postpone the second reading. It could not be the absence of the Noble and Learned Earl, who, if he (the Lord Chancellor) were not very much mistaken, was in favour of the Bill. The only object that could be gained by the present postponement would he delay, and of that there had been more than enough already. This Bid had been passed through their Lordship,' House last Ses sion, and was sent down to the Commons, where it was stopped only by the prorogatio❑ of Parliament. He did hope that no further impediment might now be opposed to its progress, It was a Bill which had for its object to do away with that privilege by which about 1,100 per sons, Members of both Houses of Parliament, might set the authority of Ecclesiastical Courts at defiance ; so far at least as obedience to their monitions or citation., was concerned. Thus, for instance, suppose a man died, leaving by will a charge of 10,0001. on hi, estate, in favour of his second son—the will was in the pocket of the eldest son, who might not like to produce such an evidence of a charge on his estate, but who, if he were a Member of Parlia ment, might laugh at any monition or citation to produce it. There were many other cases in which a privileged person might with impunity set the authority of the ecclesiastical courts at defiance, and defeat for a time the ends of justice; but that which he had supposed, and which might happen, was enough to show the necessity of this Bill. There were other cases arising in questions of divorce and alimony which would equally prove it, necessity. Under these circumstances their Lordships would admit that, tactless some strong ground were made out, (which he could nut expect, and for the simple rea*on that he did not believe it possible to make such a case) to show why the Bill should not pass, no further delay ought to take place to prevent the second reading of the Bill, which he now moved. The Marquis of WESTAIEATH—The Noble and Learned Lord had said that this Bill was dropped in thr House of Commons on account of the prorogation. He, (the 148,43iiPOC.W.dstrneath) denied that fact, and hi, assertion - watiPrgood as that of the Noble and Learned Lerch The Bill vtss-epused in the House of Common• and was droppaleg!ttrae\ii.,\ was apprehended that the 1 ' .0; • ).t3t1103 transactions connected with the measure would be exposed• He wished to know why the Noble Lord did not enti•i into an explanation similar to that which the Bill th.it iffected Members of Parl'ament was accompanied. The LORD CHANCELLOR had done so. The Marquis of WESTMEATH did not recol'ect and his memory was usually tolerably accurate. The Bill was brought into Parliament for the purpose of oppressine him individually. The report of the Ecclesiastical Cern missioners had recommended certain improvements in the practice in the Civi Law Courts, and particularly that the xamination of witnesses should he conducted publicly, instead of, as at present, in a private room. It would have been batter if the Noble and Learned Lord ha.l brought in a bill which would have comprised all these points, instead of a partial measure, directed to only an isolated part of the subject. He would now proceed to state the grounds upon which he conceived that guoad himself this bill was an injury. In April last he had oc casion to see the Noble Lord, who then contemplated the introduction of some such measure as that before the House- At that time he happened to be in contempt to the Ecclesiastical Courts on account of a small sum of 2001. He had intended to avail himself of his privilege of Parliament, on account of the unhappy affairs in which he was involved. At the interview to which he had re ferred, the Noble and Learned Lord told him that he had better comply with the order of the Celia, otherwise he would he shot ; and he explained that a Bill to abridge the personal liberty of Members of Parliament would be in troduced, not by himself, but some other Noble Lord. The Noble and Learned Lord suggested that the question should be submitted to arbitration. He told the Noble and Learned Lord that when the case was heard befote their Lordships he had consented to an arbitration, and it was not his fault, but owing to the persevering determina tion of the other party, that it had not been carried into eft; cr. He d:d not see the Noble and Learned Lord again "till the 29th of August last year, when Lord Lyndhurst and the Earl of Eldon delivered judgment in the case, and in the interim he had not the honour of hearing from the Noble and Learned Lord. Subsequently to that period the Noble and Learned Lord sent him a communication, in which he expressed a hope that he (the Marquess of West meath) would comply with the decree of the Court, in order to prevent the necessity of having a retrospective clause inserted in the Bill. The LORD CHANCELLOR—I did no such thing. The Marquess of WESTMEATH would real a pas sage from the Noble and Learned Lord's letter. Tt e Noble and Learned Lord said, " I wish you would settle the matter in dispute, in order to prevent it from being men tioned in debate. I must give your case as a ground for the measure, therefore I wish you to comply with the sentence. It cannot be endured that any one should set the power of the law at defiance. I know you will not think of doing so, and therefore no retrospective clause will be wanted." The Noble and Learned Lord was well acquainted with his case. He knew that some years ago it was the subject of arbitration before Mr. Phillips, now Under-Secretary sf State, nominated by him and a person of eminence at the bar, on which occasion the evidence of his witnesses was so clear that the arbiters desired the op p'sing party to withdraw. The circumstances of the case must be fresh in the Noble and Learned Lord's recollec tion, and he was well aware that he had done every thing iu his power to prevent the transaction from being dragged before the public. He bad spoken of only one part of the subject, but he could prove at the bar that the pre sent Bill was actually drawn up by the solicitor of the party who is to be relieved by its passiOg. In one of the first communications with the Noble and Learned Lord, he (the Lord Chancellor) stated that the measure must proceed with breathless haste. He should like to know why, after that, the Ball was allowed to stand over for a fortnight before it was printed. He should very much wish to see tl e draught of the Bill originally brought into the House. Was ever such a thing heard of as a solicitor bringing in an Act of Parliament in order to obtain money for himself? He (the Marquis of Westmeath) was placed in a most cruel situation by the proceedings in the Civil Courts. The most abominable charges had been made against him, which could not be examined into without sending a commission into North Wales. He brought over a ship-load of witnesses, and maintained them at an enormous expense; and, upon investigation, he was acquitted, and his character cleared, but not a single sixpence of the vast sums which he had expended in costs would ever be repaid to him. Was this just ? The Noble and Learned Lord might treat these matters with scorn—he treated men as mere units—as things here to-day and gone to-morrow—and, perhaps, he thought that a defenceless man could be more easily trod den under foot. He (the Marquess of Westmeath), how ever, would not shrink from the Noble Lord's attack He was a suffering individual : be bad lost nearly a third of his income in consequence of the state of the country, produced by the policy pursued by the Administration. If the Noble and Learned Lord possessed an atom of mercy, be would not have brought in this Bill against him. He had stated his case against the Noble and Learned Lord ; let him defend himself, and let him pass the Bill as be could. The LORD CHANCELLOR expressed his surprise, that the Noble Marquess should assert that a Bill was to he brought into Parliament directed against himself indi vidually, which affected him no more than any other in dividual who was similarly circumstanced. The Noble Marquess had founded his assertion on a quibbling con struction of a private letter. The Marquess of WESTMEATH said the letter was not marked " private." The LORD CHANCELLOR bad no objection to have every letter which he had ever written to the Noble Mar quess, or any other person, lead; but he had yet to learn that because a letter was not marked " private," the per son to whom it was addressed was at liberty to read it publicly. It was undoub•edly true it was the Noble Mar quess's case which first led to the discovery of the flaw in Lord Stowell's Act, which the present Bill was intended to remedy. He certainlygave the most considerate advice which one man ever gave to another, when lie told the Noble Marquess to avoid bringing the circumstances of his case into public discussion in Parliament. The Noble Marquess talked of the judgments pronounced in his fa vour: The judgment of the Court of Chancery was cer tainly in his favour, but those of Doctors' Commons and the High Court of Delegates were against him. The Noble Marquess complained that he had never reco sered his costs. That was because the suit was one between husband and wife—the latter, having no funds, could not pay costs. The Noble Marquess was wrong in supposing the Bill was drawn up by the solicitor opposed to him. It was framed by persons possessing greater legal knowledge than it was probable any solicitor could attain to. It was possible, however, that a parti cular part might have been suggested by the individual in question, because he possessed experience on the subject. The Noble Marquis was equally wrong in supposing that the Bill bad a retrospective effect. All that the Bill did was to declare, that if any future contempt should arise out of proceedings which had occurred in the Ecclesiastical Court within the last six years, the person in contempt should not be protected by privilege of Parliament from having his goods sequestered. The Noble Marquis was equally in error in supposing that his was a singular case. On the contrary, the most frightful injustice had been done, and was still doing, in consequence of persons avail ing themselves of the privilege of Parliament to set the process of the Ecclesiastical Court at defiance. Lord HOLLAND had read the Bill, and was of opinion that it would not have a retrospective operation. The Marquis of WESTMEATH again repeated his ob jections to the measure, and The LORD CHANCELLOR once more replied to them, and then stated that it was his intention, early in the next session, to introduce Bills to carry into effect the other objects recommended by the ecclesiastical commission —namely, the assimilating the framing of wills with re spect to real and personal property, and altering and amending the mode of trying the validity of wills by apply ing to this branch of ecclesiastical jurisdiction the trial by jury. •The Bill was then read a second time. ANATOMY BILL. On the motion of Lord 11111.ro, this bill was committed, and the report was ordered to be received on Tuesday. Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, JuLr 6. The Hon. W. PONSONBY took the oaths and his seat for Knaresborough, in the room of Sir James IFacintosh. Mr. Robertson, of the office of Woods and Forests, ap peared at the Bar with the Ninth Annual Report of the Holyhead Roads. Mr. BEAUMONT rose to present a petition from the Political Union of North Shields, signed by the Chairman, but was interrupted by the Speaker, who said, as it was signed by only one individual, and purported to come from a body, it could not be received. No one p e rson cool i speak for a body unless it was in the Parliamentary way, ,:nd bad a common seal attached to it. Mr. BEAUMONT then presented a petition from cer tain Peers and Commoners, the proprietors and lessees of coal mines on the Tyne and Wear, praying the House to appoint a Committee to inquire into the causes of the vio lence committed by the colliers. Tee petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. WILKS presented a petition from the parish of fieeri of Tottenham High Cross, in the county of Middle sex, against the Bill for amending the laws regarding poor persons born in Scotland, Ireland, and the Isle et Alan. He implored the Hon. Member for Nottingham shire, who brought in the Bill, not to pass it withou making some very material alterations in it. Lord MORPETH bad received a communication iron the Hon. Member fur Nottinghamshire, to the effect tha , he would not press his Bill during the present session, no, indeed at all, without introducing a clause, limiting liability of parishes to the providing Irish poor with relief, as casual paupers. That would obviate a very imporait objection to the Bill. The petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. WILKS presented a petition from Parsonstown, the King's County, praying for the eb ilition of the punish ment of death in all cases of forgery. The petition wits signed by the Lord Lieutenant of the County, 13:sides several of the magistracy and clergy. The petition was ordered to be printed. Mr. WILKS then presented a petition from a Benefi• Society, held at the White Hart Inn, in the county, for an alteration in the Friendly Society Laws, and complaining of the trouble and expense attending the re-enrolment of their regulations at the quarter sessions. Mr. HUME was of opinion that it was impolitic to legislate upon such a subject. He had letters every day stating that Friendly Societies were being broken up in consequence of the state of the existing law. He thought those societies should be allowed to manage their own funds without any legislative interference, as they were the best judges of their own interests. Mr. BRISCOE thought there was much misapprehen sion on this subject. It was generally believed that a society must employ an attorney and counsel at the quarter sessions in order to get the rules enroled, and cer tainly in such cases the lawyer's bill would amount to a serious sum, but the fact was that the Societies might enrol their rules themselves by applying to the Sessions, at an expense of only 25.. He hoped that this fact would be sent forth by those gentlemen to whom the public were so much indebted, he meant the public press. After a few words from Mr. GISBORNE, the petition was ordered to lie printed. Mr. VERNON presented a petition from Derby in favour of an increased allowance to Coroners. Sir M. W. RIDLEY thought the case of Coroners was well deserving of attention, and th.t an extension might fairly be made of their allowances for travelling. Mr, HUME did not see any necessity for the increase of the salaries of Coroners, when individuals would come forward and expend thousands, for the purpose of obtain. ing office, regardless of its emoluments. Mr. GISBORNE considered it perfectly clear that C•s roners received more for the performance of their duty than their mere salaries. If be thought that would be put an end to by an increase of their salary, he should be one of the first to give his sinction to such a measure. Mr. HUNT thou g ht if Coroners did their duty they were not overpaid. He hoped a Bill would be introduced to compel them to perform it. Mr. STRICKLAND hoped the Bill which had been introduced would materially decrease the expense attendant upon the election of coroners. The petition was then ordered to be printed. Mr. D. BROWNE presented a petition from a parish in Mayo, praying for the total abolition of tithes. The Hon. IWett,ber could not concur with the prayer of the pe tition, believing that if tithes Here abolished they would sink into the pockets of the landlords. He thought tithes ought not to be abolished without compensation. After a few words from Mr. RUTHVEN and Mr. H. GRATTAN, the petition was ordered to he printed. Mr. NV. ELLIS presented a petition from Leicester, in favour of a full measure of Re`orm for Ireland. Mr. H. ROSSpresented a petition from Banff, in favour of Burgh Reform in Scotland. He was very glad to see the Honourable Member for Devonshire (Lord John Russell) in h:s place. Hi• had taken such a prominent part in the cause of Parliamentary Reform, that he (Mr. Ross) had hopes he would now turn his attention to the subject of this petition, which was scarcely less necessary. Mr. DUNDAS hoped that the Municipal Government of Scotland would not be interfered with unless a full in quiry was instituted into the whole of the Corporations of England and Ireland. Mr. FERGUSON considered that it would be a matter of course that the Scotch burgh laws would be altered when the Reform Bill passed. Mr. HUME was astonished to heir the remarks of the Hon. Member for Edinburgh. The Scotch borough sys tem of government already stood condemned by the report of a Select Cominitt,e of that House. After a few words from Mr. Paget, Mr. C. Pelham, Mr. A. Johnson, and Sir C. Forbes, the petition was ordered to he printed. Mr. S. RICE obtained leave to bring in a Bill to add certain names to the list of Land Tax Commissioners.— Read a first time, and ordered to be printed. On the Order of the Day for the Punishment of Death Abolition Bill being read, Sir J. HOBHOUSE, in answer to a question from Mr. Hunt, said, that an application having been made to him by the relatives of Somerville for his discharge, he had some communication with the Commander-in-Chief. The answer to him was, that it was most probable his dis charge would be made out in a few days. The Order of the Day for taking into consideration the Lords' Amendments to the Abolition of Death Bill, was then read, on the motion of Mr. EwAwr. Mr. SHAW understood that the discussion on these amendments was put off last night, on the understanding that they would be negatived to-day without a division, and a conference had on the subject with the Lords. The SPEAKER said, be perhaps was the best able to explain how the case stood. He did not understand that the consideration of the amendments was put off at all on the understanding mentioned by the lion. Member ; but that the amendments being brought under the considera. tion of the House at a late hour, it was thought better that they should be discussed at an earlier hour, and in a fuller House. • After a few words from Mr. IlumE, Mr. W. WYNN, and Mr. STEPHENSON, Lord ALTHORP said that if he thought a conference with the Lords would be the means of losing the Bill, he would agree with the amendments, though he thought them objectionable. The amendments of the Lords to clauses A, B, and C, were then read seriatim. . Sir R. PEEL did not feel opposed to the principle of the amendments, but they were worded very vaguely, and would probebly defeat their object. He suggested the pro priety of dissenting altogether from them, and at some future time, and at a more fitting opportunity, a new Bill could be introduced, for the purpose of more effectually carrying the proposed amendments into operation. Mr. ENVART, under the circumstances, would not press the Lords' amendments on the House. The amendments were then severally put and nega tived. A Committee was then appointed to draw up the rea sons to be offered in a conference with the Lords for dis agreeing with the amendments. The Committee with drew for that purpose. MESSAGE FROM THE LORDS. A message from the Lords announced that their Lord ships had agreed to several Bills, among which were the Gloucester Canal Bill, and the General Cemetery Bill. Mr. GOULBURN wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, whether, on the presentation of the Rev. Mr. Plunkett, which bad lately taken place, to the Deanery of Down, the recommendations of the Ec clesiastical Commissioners had beer acted on. The Deanery consisted of six separate Rectories—one of the value of 12,0001., and the others varying from 1501. to 500/. per annum. As the population of Protestant s was consider able, it was recommended that some arrangement should be made by forming them into six separate benefices. On a former occasion he had asked this question, but the Lord Chancellor of Ireland not being then in this country, the Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Stanley) hid not been able to acquire the means of correctly ascertaining the facts. He hoped, however, that the arrival of the Noble Lord in this country had afforded the Right Hon. Gen tleman an opportunity of consulting him, and that a satis factory answer could now be given. Mr. STANLEY entirely agreed with the general prin ciple of the recommendation ; but from the extremely v,,lu minous documents connected with this case, his Ma jesty's Government had not been able to advert to it at the time of the presentation. The present De in of Down had given up a living of considerably greater value, but he was autborizid to state, although it might occasion a still further surrender of income, that the present incumbent would have no objec , ion that the Legislature should carry into effect the step proposed by the Commissioners ; and Government, he thought, were bound to comply with their recommendation. Alderman WOOD wished to know whether the Court of Inquiry had been instituted in relation to the Court martial on the private Somerville. Lord ALTHORP stated, in answer, that the Com mander-in- Chir-f was about to institute a Court of Inquiry into the circumstances of that court-martial, and he cer)d assure the Hon. Member that that court would be so con stituted, and its proceedings so conducted, at to give srttis• faction to the public.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME withdrew the notice which h e b a d g i ver , of a motion which he had intended to have brought for ward on Tuesday next. Sir J. HOBHOUSE moved that the petition wi icl: had been presentod in relation to the inquiry into the ease of Somerville be printed. It was of great importance that the Curt of Inquiry should be in possession of that document. Mr. ROBINSON wished to ask the Noble Lord op posite, at whose expense, and at whose orders that splendid toy, the frigate to the King of Prussia,- had been ordered. Lord ALTHORP could only say that no order for at,) thing of the kind had been given by the Treasury. Sir B. MARTIN said that there had been a mistake on this subject, which it would be right to explain, particu larly as regarded the amount of the expense incurred. fife papers had stated that this little frigate had c st 720,0001., whereas be apprehended that the expense was, at the outside, not more than 6001. It bad been bttilt at the desire of the King, expressed to the First Lord of the Admiralty. Mr. DIXON wished to know in what state the island of St. Lucie had been placed by tie order in council ? It appeared that a state of the greatest commercial distress prevailed in that island. Lord HOWICK said there bad been no accounts of a recent date received from St. Lucie, hut when the last came away the factories were not in operation. Lord ALTHORP then moved the order of the day for the House to resolve into a Committee of Supply. CCNBIITTEE OF SUPPLY. The House then resolved into a Committee of Supply. SUPPLY OF WATER TO THE METROPOLIS Lord ALTHORP in moving that 1,000/. should be granted to his Majesty for civil contingencies, stated that complaints having been made of the supply of water to the Metropolis, the late Govern ment had instituted inquiries into the subject through a Committee, of which Sir Francis Burdett was the Chair man, and it was the opinion of that Committee that a survey should be made for the purpose of ascertaining the best means of giving an efficient supply. The late Go vernment, however, thought that the expense of that survey was too great, and it wa , not proceeded with; soon after the present Government bad come into office, ap plications were made for the purpose of having the survey proceeded with. Ministers thinking it a matter highly deserving of consideration, had consulted with Mr. Tel ford, who had estimated the expense of the survey at 3,000/., but not to exceed 5,000/. He should therefore move that a sum not exceeding 1,0001. should be granted to his Majesty, in order to defray part of that expense. Sir ROBERT PEEL deprecated the payment by the public for a survey of this kind, thinking that a supply of water for the metropolis was likely to be much better managed when it was in the hands of individuals, where some competition would take place. Another objection which he had to the vote was, that as soon as the Go vernment took up the subject, the exertions of the Water Companies would cease, so that instead of conferring a benefit, it would be creating an evil. The Hon. Baronet had made this offer, and the Government having accepted it and acted on it, he thought there was no course to pur sue but to insist on the fulfilment of his bargain. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH BILL. Mr. C. WYNN stated that their Lordships had agreed to a conference respecting the amendments of this Bill, and a Committee was despatched accordingly. On their return Mr. C. Wynn stated that they had met a deputation of their Lordships in the Painted Chamber, and that their Lordships had consented to take into consideration these amendments on Monday next. WATER FOR THE METROPOLIS. The Committee resumed. Sir F. BURDETT thought the Water Companies ought to pay the expense of the survey ; and he considered that the House should have complied with the recommendation of the Chairman of their own Committee, by whom the the propriety of the survey was suggested. The object proposed—namely, that of supplying the metropolis with pure water—was of the greatest import ince ; and we understood the Hon. Bironet to intimate, that rather than see the object frustrated, be would eventually consent to pay the expense of the survey himself. Mr. ROBINSON thought so much money should not be voted for the completion of a survey, from which it was doubt , ul if any practical benefit would result. Mr. S. RICE defended the vote. The former Govern matt had given information to private trustees as to the best means of employing their capital in the making of roads through the north-west of England, and through South Wales ; and though the money thus expended had, in the first instance, benefited private individuals, it had ultimately proved a great public advantage. The Right Hod. Gentleman was wrong, therefore, in supposing that there was no precedent for this sort of vote. But the pre cedent went further ; fur in the case of Dublin,to which the Right Hon. Gentleman had alluded, the Government had not only given the information, but had gone far to supplying the water itself to Dublin. He thought it would he improper to cast the expense of this upon the lion. Baronet, and he objected to the principle of casting a public duty upon a private individual. Mr. WARBURTON objected to the inquiry being fur ther pursued at the public expense—at least if it was to lie conducted in the way in which it had hitherto been. Mr. GOULBURN objected to the proposed survey, for he did not believe that any ulterior result could be obtained from it beneficial to the public, for the Companies would not avail themselves of the suggestions that the report might furnish. Mr. V. SMITH thought that the money would be well expended in carrying into effect an object which Commit tees and Commissioners had equally recommended. Mr. BRISCOE should vote for the motion, as he thought the inquiry might be productive of great public benefit. He believed that the Water Companies would take no steps to improve the supply of water if they did riot see the Government moving in the matter. He gave his sincere testimony of respect to the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Westminster, for his liberal offer, but thought that the House ought not to take advantage of the Hon. Baronet's generosity. Sir R. PEEL—When he had, during the time he was in office, been applied to for an order directing Mr. Telford to go on with the examination which was recommended by a Committee, he had declined to grant the order solely because it was irregular in any officer of the Government to incur any such expense upon the mere recommendation of Committee. He was not entitled to do so, till the recommendation had received the sanction of that House. L ,, rd ALTHORP certainly thought it desirable that something should be done, and unless the Government took up the matter, he feared that the survey would not be made. It was asked—What good would arise from the survey ? Why, this good—that the public would know that means did exist for furnishing them with better water than they were supplied with at present. If that infor mation was given, he was sure that there would he found plenty of individuals who,—if not for any other cause at least for their own benefit, would tike advantage of it. Sir R. PEEL, after what had passed, saw clearly in what way the vote would be carried, and he should not waste the time of the Committee by a division. He should only say now, that it would be a great advantage if Mr.Telford was called on to say in what state the survey was at pre sent, and what was the prospect of its being finished. . . Lord ALTHORP stated that the survey was in a very advanced state, and had been suspended only from what had taken place in the Committee on the former occasion. Mr. HUNT was astonished at the disposition shown to resist the trifling expense for the improvement of the Thames water, when millions and millions had been so freely voted away for other purposes not half so good. There was no doubt the Thames water was excellent, but then a great many things got into it that were very had, and, in his opinion, the money required would be well expended in trying to ascertain how that could be avoided. This was an expenditure for the good of the poor, and he should support it. He should now say a word as to the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Westminster. When he (Mr. Hunt) was in Ilchester Gaol, which be was at the time that this discussion first began, he thought that the Hon. Baronet's interference in the matter was very well, that it was doing something for his constituents in return for their electing him free of expense—that, in short, it was a good electioneering scheme ; but since then be had in vestigated the matter out of doors, and the result was that he thought the whole of the Hon. Baronet's conduct in the affair was such as to reflect the highest honour upon him. —(Hear, hear.) He hoped the Government would go on, and complete the inquiry as to improving the water. Mr. Alderman WOOD should support the motion. The discussion on this subject had already occasioned a great improvement in the water furnished to the metropolis. The vote was agreed to. The sum of 202,4821. 10.. 10d., was then voted fur the charge of the Disembodied Militia of the United Kin:- dm, from January, 1832, to March, 1833. The House resumed, the resolutions were reported, and ;Iv report was ordered to be received on Monday next. On the motion of Mr. S. RICE, it waR agreed that the House, at its rising, do adjourn to Monday. Mr. STANLEY presented a petition from the inha bitants of Tulin, praying that they might be allowed re presentatives. REFORM BILL (IRELAND). Mr. D. BROWNE (after an explanation with the Speaker) would move in the Committee the amendment, for which it had been his intention to move an instruction to the Committee. The House then went into the Committee. verbal eatimlit reading o,etndn amendments. On th h i an e d n l s l . ba lthcelalu2seths clause, Mr. to, with torn • Mr. STANLEY desired to propose an amendment, by which a great inconvenience would be removed in the fisting mode of registration. In every county a la ge number of the electors were compelled to travel to a g rya distance to give twenty-one days' notice to the Clerk ir, the Peace before they could register their qualification , . Now he proposed that the notice should be served up I the high constable of the barony in which the elector r. aid e d, and that the constable should be bound to transo.i the notice to the Cletk of the Peace.—(Hear.) Mr. O'CONNELL said that the amendment was higt.l) satisfactory, and would effect a great improvement in the• registration.--(Hear.) After a few words from Mr. CRAMPTON and 11r. WAL LACE, the clause was agreed to. The 13'h clause, after some vet hal amendments, w.s also ;7,, eed to. On Clause 14, Nlr. WALLACE moved an amendment, the object of which was to prevent the interference in the business of registration of any persons except those claim ing to be electors, or their attorneys. Mr. O'CONNELL supported the amendment. Mr. S. RICE said, it would have the effect of repro ducing the evil which it was intended to prevent. Mr. CRANIPTON observed, that the amendment would not limit the interference with registration, whirl; might pr..ceed just as extensively under the amendment as under the original clause. After some further conversation, Mr. O'CONNELL on the following day should transmit to the Learned Solicitor-General for Ireland ti:e words which his Hon. and Learned Friend (Mr. Wallace) had used, and he pro posed to introduce ; and if they were approved of by the promoters of the Bill, they might be inserted on the bring ing up of the report. Clauses 15, 16, and 17, were then agreed to. On Clause IS, Mr. O'CONNELL objected to greater facilities being enjoyed by 40s. freeholders in towns that were not open to freeholders in counties. This was concurred in by Mr. WALLACE and others ; and after a few words from Lord ALTHORP and Mr. STANLEY', it was agreed that words should be introduced to effect the object which the Hon. and Learned Gentle man had in view. Mr. D. BROWNE begged to relate an instance of the mode in which the registry of the 40s. freeholders was occasionally conducted in Ireland. Seven hundred of them were, in a town in Mayo, registered by two magis trates in one day. But how was this? They were brought up in batches of 10, and the clerk wiped the book in one lull swoop agminst the lips of all.—(Hear, and laughter.) Clauses 19, 20, 21, and 22, were agreed to without any remark. The 23d Clause, with a verbal amendment, was then agreed to. Clauses 24, 25, 26, and 27, were agreed to without amendments. Clause 28 was agreed to after some verb4l amendments. Clause 29 was agreed to without amendment. On the motion that Clause 30 be agreed to, Mr. O'CONNELL said, that care should be taken that no one should be able to vote on the production of a Cer tificate of Registry that had been granted to another man. He recollected more than one instance in which this had been attempted. On one occasion in particular, when he was acting as assessor, a man came up with a certificate granted to a person named John Moran. The certificae was signed with a cross for John Moran; but it was,sus pected that the certificate had not keen originally granted to the person who then bore it, and he was informed that the man who presented it was not an illiterate man. In order to determine that point, be said to the man, " John Moran write your name." The man took up a pen and wrote " Thomas O'Brien."---(A loud laugh.) To prevent this sort of fraud, he recotnniended the annual publication of the list of voters as in England. Lord ALTHORP saw no great objection to this annual publication of the list ; but he wished the Irish Members to wait, in order to see how that plan worked in England before it was introduced into Ireland. He believed it was a good plan, but he wished it to be tried here first. After some discusiion the clause was agreed to, as was clause 30. In moving clause 31 Mr. STANLEY could have de sired to dispense with the qualification oath but that there were certain jealousies to be consulted, and the oath would not substantially be a grievance. Several Members on both sides expressed their desire to have the oath dispensed with, and Mr. STANLEY said it should be considered before the bringing up of the report. The clauses up to 41 were agreed to without observation. Upon clause 42 there was a conversation as to fixing candidates more strictly with the liability to the expense of hustings and taking the poll, but the clause was passed as it stood. Clauses 43, 44, and 45 were passed. On clause 46 being propos.ll, Mr. JEPHSON moved an amendment having the effect of institut , ng several polling places, in the same manner as those eructed for taking the poll in England. After some unimportant conversation, on the suggestion of Lord KILLEEN and Mr. STANLEY the amendment was withdrawn,with the understanding that a clause embodying the amendment should be proposed on the bringing up of the Report. The clause was then agreed to, as also were clauses 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, and 53, without comment. Clauses 54 and 55 were postponed, on the motion of Mr. STANLEY. The 56A, 57th, 58th, and 59th clauses were agreed to. Clauses from 60 to 66 inclusive were, on the motion of Mr. STANLEY, struck out of the Bill. Clauses 67 and 68 were then agreed to without discus sion. _ The Bill was then reported. Report to be further con sidered on Monday next. Mr. STANLEY intimated his intention of taking the Report at five o'clock on Monday, in order that it might be gone through, if possible, early in the evening, and so not to interfere with the adjourned debate on the tithe question. FORGERY BILL. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in moving the post ponement of the Commiitee on the Forgery Bill until Friday next, stated he had received some communications from places in Scotland and Ireland, all concurring in the propriety of extending the measure to those countries. To such a course he saw no possible objection, and his Learned Friend and the law advisers of each country were activtly engaged in framing the requisite alterations.—( Heir, hear.) Mr. 'WYSE expressed his satisfaction at hearing the intention of the Hon. and Learned Gentleman. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the House adjourned at Three o'clock. The Tories of Bristol have commenced a can vass for Mr. MILES, one of their clique. The reformers are, however, able, by three to one, if they act iii time, to return the present Members, Messrs. BAILLIE and FRO. THEROE. ARNOLD'S DRAMATIC STORIES.—We are requested to state that this Work will be published on Mon day next, by Messrs. Comm RN and BENTLEY. COntaltB " Goodwin and Goda," a Tale of the Danish Invasion— " Alberie the Goddess," " The Impostor," and " Schelm kind," German Romances—" Leonessa," an Italian Tale— " Life in Death," and " The Conscript and his Dog,' French Stories. SIR WALTER SCOTT.—The answer to in quiries this morning was, that Sir WALTER had passed rather a tranquil night, and remained about the same as yestesday—the worthy Baronet has lately become very anxious to quit London, and to be conveyed to Abbotsford in Scotland, within thirty miles of Edinburgh. His Phy. sicians, in order to relieve his mind have deemed it neces sary that his wishes should be complied with, and arrange.: meats are now being made for his conveyance thither immediately. A steam-boat will be engaged for the express purpose. It is not certain whether he will not be removed either this afternoon or to-morrow. CORONER'S I NQUEST.—Yesterday an In questin g those t 0 was aebxoeuets h sh e , lidma,n.db when On adjournment, (I n j s o il u no r tno n d : yc e wa n pmtause t e , t,:tdolahlrg, b airr e w:i f e before dd Mr. CARTTA R , Coroner for Kent, at the Ordnance Arms, Lewisham road, Greenwich, nn the body of THOMAL SUAINEI a : rat-catcher, aged 40 years, who came by his death,_ n a was alleged, by being thrown down by a man, while t i It ap state of intoxication, and killed up in the B , P N ° VII known peared in evidence that the deceased, wh h o e w h a abit of drink in Greenwich and Lewisham, u nnat g gsi h avlf a e L att h e e f ,ytrawwwiwannoying a ge : t! the former gave him ~ rat-catching at a gentlemart's fine, drunk. He was returning h.oi when he met with rh whom begged him to desist ; but the grossly slight push, and never spoke more. On picking him down, up, h was hanging out of his mouth, lie bled profusely tongue from r i nose, and appeared quite dead. A and bonnet-boxes , crowd soon collected, and the pedlar was given in charg, e ss a l s y ed ab c u o s n e t . inoing to the Police, and detained. Mr. BROWN, of Lewisham, Mr. ROGERS, of Blackheath, and other medical ger.t!e -e hpih::: n ( I : y e a ne e began men, said they had opened the body, ant i we,„f „ pin ,„, the deceased died from apoplexy, brought on by excess , , drinking. There was a quantity of extravasated bloc' , on the brain.—The Jury, after a long investigatiot, r turned a Verdict of " Death from Apoplexy;" and tl, hat-box-maker was then discharged out of custody. FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE. ST. JAMES'S-PALACE, JULY 4, 182.1. The King was this day pleased to confer the honour of Knight hood upon Major-General John Macleod, of the 78th Regiment of Highlanders, Companion of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath, and Military Knight Commander of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic Order. \VAR-OFFICE, JULY 6. Royal Regiment of Horse Guards—Lieut. Hon. G. C. W. Forester to be Captain, by purchase, vice Dashwood, who re tires ; Cornet Hon. H. Pitt to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Forester; Lord A. Paget, to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Pitt, July 6. 6th Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Cornet Hon. A. G. F. Jocelyn to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Campbell, who re. tires; James Henry Dickson, Gent. to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Jocelyn, July 6. tith Regiment of Foot—Easign J. E. Wetherall, from half pay Unattached, to be Ensign, vice A. Barry, who exchanges, July 6. 9th Foot—Captain E. L. Godfrey, from half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice J. Scargill, who exchanges, receiving the dif ference, July 6. 13th Foot—Major W. H. Dennie to be Lieutenant-Colonel, by purchase, vice Elton, who retires, July 6. 15th Foot—Captain J. Macpherson to be Major, by purchase, vice Dennie; Lieut. J. G. D. Taylor to be Captain. by purshase, vice Macpherson ; Ensign 11. G. Hughes to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Taylor; T. G. Gisborue, Gent, to b.?. Ensign, by purchase, vice Hughes, July 6. 25th Foot.—Lieut. Henry Elton, from half-pay 22d Light Dragoons, to be Lieutenant, vice John Simon Greene, who ex change, July 6. 56th Foot —Capt. J. Birch, from half-pay 90th Foot, to be Captain, vice George Hogg, who exchanges, July 6. 60th Foot—Capt. R. Rumley, from 66th Foot, to be Captain, vice Marlton, who exchanges, July 6. 66th Foot—Capt. F. Marlton, from the 60th Foot, to be Cap tain, vice Rumley, who exchanges, July 6. 96th Foot—Capt. J. Stewart (2cl), from half-pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice M. Sherer, who exchanges, receiving the differ ence, July 6. ls West India Regiment—Lieut. J. R. Grant, from the 2d West India Regiment, to be Lieutenant, Vice Pattison, who exchanges. 2d West India Regiment—Lieut. A. H. Pattison, from the Ist West India Regiment, to be Lieutenant, vice Grant, who ex. changes. UNATTACHED—Lieut. J. Ward, from the Ist Foot, to be Captain of Infantry, by purchase, July 6. MEMORANDA. —Brevet Major N. Fuchs, half-pay Meuron's Regiment, has been allowed to retire from the service by the sale of an Unattached Company, July 6. The Christian names of Captain Eaton, of the 29th Foot, are Christopher Edward, and not Christopher Jefferson. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, JULY 3. Royal Regiment of Artillery. First Lieut. E. Trevor, to be Second Captain, vice Baker, re tired upon half-pay; Second Lieut. J. H. Francklyn to be First Lieutenant, vice Trevor, June 23; Gentleman Cadet S. B. Hornby to be Second Lieutenant, vice Hinchliffe, promoted; Gentleman Cadet St. John T. Browne to be Second Lieutenant, vice Tapp, promoted ; Gentleman Cadet C. Bingham to be ditto, vice Poulden, promoted; Gentleman Cadet H. S. Rowan, to be ditto, vice M'Coy, promoted; Gentleman Cadet J. N. A. Freese to be ditto, vice Omraaney, promoted; Gentleman Cadet }. D. Cleaveland to be ditto, vice Grant, promoted ; Gentleman Cadet H. Murray to be:ditto, vice Sinclair, deceased; Gentleman Cadet C. Smith to be ditto, vice Coffin, promoted; Gentleman Cadet H. A. Turner to be ditto, vice Mitchell, promoted, June 20, Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Flint.. Flintshire Yeomanry Cavalry. F. C. Philips, Gent., to be Lieutenant, June 26. Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Oxford. First Regiment of Oxfordshire Yeomanry Cavalry. H. Fawney, Gent., to be Cornet, vice Edington, appointed Regimental Paymaster, May 25. DECLARATIONS OF INSOLVENCY. HENRY YOUNG, Southampton, builder. -- WILLIAM LATHAM, Stow park, Lincolnshire, farmer. BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED. THOMAS COVENEY, Benenden, Kent, farmer. BANKRUPTS. WILLIAM SUMMERS, Wilson-street, Finsbury-square, bricklayer, to surrender July 17, and August 17, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Gregory and Sons, Wax Chandlers' Hall Maiden-lane. JAMES BETHUNE BOSTOCK and THOMAS HENRY MUSGRAVE, Wenlock Basin, City-road, screw-manufacturers, July - 18, and August 17, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Teesdale, Symes, and Weston, Fenchurch-street. JOHN CLARK, Godalming, Surrey, linen-draper, July 17, and August 17, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turner, Basing-lane, Bread-street, Cheapside. THOMA'S SAUN DERS, jun. Austin-friars, merchant, July 13, and August 17, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Wilde and Co., College-hill, Queen-street, Cheapside. WILLIAM OGDEN, Heywood, Lancashire, cotton-spinner, July 24, and Aug. 17, at nine, at the Palace Inn, Manchester. Makinson and Sanders, Temple; and Atkinson and Birch, Manchester. SYLVESTER COLEM AN and MOSES CHAPMAN, Liver pool, silversmiths, July 26, and Aug. 17, at one, at the Claren don-buildings, Liverpool. 'Popham and Son, Liverpool ; and Adlington, Gregory, and Faulkner, Bedford-row. JOHNATHAN BOX A I.L, Brighthelmstone, Sussex, hotel keeper, July 23, and Aug. 17, at twelve, at the Star and Garter Inn, Brighthelmstone. Freeman and Bothamley, Coleman street; and Benson and Freeman, Brighton. EDWARD COBB, Manchester, commission-agent, July 18, 19,and Aug. 17, atone, at the Star Inn, Manchester Adlington, Gregory, and Faulkner, Bedford-row ; and Coates, Manchester. JOHN ALLCOCK and WILLIAM WILSON, Jermyn street, St. James's, tailors, July 16, at twelve, and August 17, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Jackson, New Inn. ANDREW HOOD, Darlington-place, Southwark-bridge-road, spirit-dealer, July 16, at eleven, and August 17, at ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Wilde, College-hill. WILLIAM SELL, St. Martin's-lane, bookseller, July 14, at twelve, and August 17, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turner, Basing-lane, Bread-street, Cheapside. CHRLES SAXE, Conduit-street, Hanover-square, tailor, July 20, at half-past eleven, and August 17, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Young, Poland-street, Oxford-street. DIVIDENDS. B. and I. L. Solomon, Bristol, cabinet-makers, July 30, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy-P. Philips, Hungerford-market, oyster-merchant, July 30, at two, at the Court of Bankruptcy- J. Bartholomew, Derby, upholsterer, July 27, at half-past ten, at the Court of Bankruptcy-J. W. Sherwood, Newgate-street, cheesemonger, July '27, at three, at the Court of Bankruptcy--' J. Hudson, Oxford-street, tobacconist, July 27, at three, at the Court of Bankruptcy-G. Draper, Whitechapel High-street, victualler, July 30, at twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy- T. Cresswell, Cross-lane, St. Mary at Hill, fish-factor, July 30, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy-H. Wood, Jermyn-street, upholsterer, Aug. 1, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy-. J. Osborne, jun., Colchester, common-carrier, July 27, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy-W. Tickner, Tenterden, Kent, July 27, at eleven, at the White Lion Inn, Tenterden-J. Neale. Liverpool, merchant, July 27, at one, at the Office of Mr. C. Bardswell, solicitor, Liverpool-W. Hynde, Liverpool, mer chant, July 30, at one, at the Office of Messrs. Pritt, Clay, and Swift, Liverpool-T. Barrow, Manchester, and G. Geddes, Stockport, commission-agents, Aug. 10, at nine, at the Palace Inn, Manchester-S. Nuttall, Heywood, Lancashire, grocer, July 30, at eleven, at the Office of Mr. Payne, solicitor, Liver pool-K. Atkinson, Hornington, Yorkshire, oil-manufacturer, July 31, at eleven, at the Falcon Inn York-J. Wagstaff, Den ton, Manchester, hat-manufacturer, July 30, at two, at the Star Inn, Manchester-H. Stuart, Worcester, wine -merchant, July 30, at twelve, at the Guildhall Coffee-house, Worcester-W. C. and J. Daughtrey, Kidderminster, carpet-manufacturers, July 30, at the White Hart Inn, Hartlebury, Worcestershire-R. Back house, Liverpool, innkeeper, July 28, at one, at the Office of Mr. Leather, solicitor, Liverpool-F. Arnitt, Thirsk, Yorkshire, draper, July 30, at nine, at the York Hotel, Manchester-J. Saxon, and W. Royston, Handforth, Cheshire, paper-dealers, July 31, at nine, at the Star Inn, Manchester-S. Hodson, Sale of Glossop, Derbyshire, cotton-spinner, July 30, at nine, at the Albion Hotel, Manchester-J. and P. Fenton and H. Beaver, Manchester, merchants, July 27, at nine, at the Star Inn, Man chester. CERTIFICATES, JULY 27. J. Clark, Storer-street, Mile-End Old Town, Stepney, licensed victualler—E. Devin, Liverpool, music-seller—W. Fernley, Stockport, Cheshire, cotton-spinner—J. Rogers, Northampton square, Clerkenwell, engraver—E. Mace, sen., Osnaburgstreet, Regent's Park, coach-wheelwright—W. Selkirk, Birmingham, letter-cutter—T. Greenhill, Great Dover-street, flour-dealer-- . E. Murdoch, Rayleigh, Essex, scrivener—W. H. Gardiner, Nor' ton-folgate, ironmonger—E. Gowland, Great Dover street, South wark, apothecary-4. Shaw, Gracechurch-street, cheesemonger --J. Dillon, Mincing-lane, wine-broker—J. B. Lawson, Notting ham, hosier—S. Mottershead, Manchester, cotton spinner. PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED. N. Worthington and J. Allen, Piccadilly, opticians—S. and W. Haynes, Oxford-buildings, Oxford-street, whitesmiths—J. Wright and T. Flint, tailors—J. Phillipson and J. Cox, Croydon. corn-dealers—J. S. Turnley and Co., Garden-row, London-road , mahogany-merchants—E. Chambers and J. Tomes, jun., Wer. ton-upon-Avon, Gloucestershire, far mers —J. Se a les and rz• Shearmur, Clement's-lane, Strand, pill-box-manufacturers—A• and S. Arrowsmith, Soho-square, geographers—R. Haswell an' s , H. Meyer, Piccadilly, candl e - manu f acturers —F . K. B ar nes and W. 0. Gwyer, Bristol, timb er - merc h an t s —E. Roberts and J. Adlard, Tooley-street, slate merchants—C. Payne and J. FO Ol4 Stratford, Essex, silk-printers —C. G. Cope and T. Cutler, 11.rir mingham, snuff-manufacturers--S. Gregory, jun., and Penny, Frome, Se wood, Sosnersetshire, common-brewers- -. • Whiteehurch and W. W. Ireland, St. Martin's-court, St. Martin' s ' lane, woollen-drapers —S. Seward and J. Doke, Liverpool, win e ,: merchants—C. S. Middleton and Co. Gibraltar—J. Crozer a nd H. Watson, Alnwick, Northumberland, gardeners and nursery men—F. Barnes and T. K. Baker, Fenchurch-street, irorimor; gers—S. Sadler and Co. Watling-street, warehousemen— , ' Dawson and J. C. Baker, Didinarton, Gloucestershire, drapers H. Wigan and J. Ward, Wigan, Lancashire, mordaunt facturers—E. Lynch and J. Tetlow, Manchester, plas.t.riX j . Miller and J. Marshall, Northampton, wine-merF"'" Barras and J. Taylor, Broad-street, Bloomsbury, tobacconists. h FORTUNE HUNTING.—Te novel s o ca lled of am humorouse dia tel y. Ta ,eswaer are hear, un d e b r e s La d d y to fo b r e s w ee ij e l cha racter, and to display the various impostures and schemes of a thorough-paced a dventurer in search of a monied wife. The tale is not very flittering to the fair sex, some P a u l b m i o i c s a t . t all in o i members of which are placed in no very dignified situations. b y ann A n m n :2; e i ca gentleman t s l e n tn in a n e b namede a u t h i f it t poems,ANTesdvirtietdt Chl)ri a nd the w ell-known WASHINGTON IRVING, the Penny yazine makes the following judicious observations " Th e exhibition of actual specimens of American tast e and literature will tend to counteract the mischieva ° effects of those caricatures of American life and inanne rs with which some authors have of late amused the spies and prejudice if the British public. It is important to remove the illusion produced by writers of talent, W h° ' prof e s s i ng to delineate n ttional peculiarities truly, exfig" aerate and misrepresent them : regardless, and perhaP a , " unconscious, that by using ridicule and sarcasm on sue subjects, they are renewing antipathies which never bad a rational existence, and which years of friendly intercours' had almost annihilated ; and are detaching from us the syln e pathies of those who, by descent, community of free in stitutions (though differently modifie,i), and identity t language, must naturally be well disposed towards t 1 During an intimacy of some years' standing,' says Nira'° ington Irving to Samuel Rogers, have uniformly re marked a liberal interest on your part in the rising cha racter and fortunes of my country, and a kind dispa sitia to promote the success of American talent, whether en gaged in literature or the arts. I am induced, therefore} as a tribute of gratitude, as well as a general testimost ial respect and friendship, to lay before you the present v ,: ) er lume, in which, for the first tim e , are collected tog et ` e the fugitive productions of one o f o u r living poets, wrd writings are deservedly p opu l ar t h roug h ou t the Va l e States.'