The Sun. — London, England, 1832-05-31 00:00:00

.31 , - ,-. . . eltnei. , whish sh ou ld, an d t h ose cr i mes w hi c h s h ou ld r oot, 1 , :k00 iisiterrapitally. It was desirable that the punish ."=..., attlt - shonld remain with reference to certain offences com ,V,JrniOed during the night, but that it should not extenil to A a tb'ik Saine offences when perpetra•ed in the day. t'iill re.pect to horse-stealing, he thought that a limitation ;should be put to the exportation of That anima!, by w .i c h the off ence !n i g ht b e greatly checked. Parti cu l ar orts might be named from which alone hors es s h ou ld b e, ex -1 1 ported, and a book might be k , pt, in which a descliptloo of their marks, &c. should be entered. Execution for that off e nc e very rarely occurred. H e recollected butl one n London. That was the case of Probert ; and he suf. tered for former crimes rather than for stealing the horse, since the offence was committed under the least aggrava tion that it was possible to imagine. It was necessary that the law should he altered, when they saw witnesises, jurors, and judres, all combining to deprive it of its selves rity. The law would be lieu r administered if a lighter and more certain punishment were affixed to certain crimes. He thought that the brand might lie introduced Iseneficially. A culprit would carry that stain with him is whatever country lie went ; and the fear of such a disgrace would operate as a preventive of crime. Mr. G. LAMB said, that with regard to the crimes contemplated by this B:11, there had latterly Lean, in gene neral, no increase. Horse and cattle stealing, which was generally effected by gang., and not by isolated individuals, was not so prevalent as it had been. With respect to pri vately stealing, there had been some increase, but not a very material one. Those who looked to the pipers that were laid on the table would perceive that the increase was very small indeed. As to female malefactors, there was no increase. Indeed, since 1829 there had been a positive decrease, and it roust, he consolatory to the House to know that the female portion of society wia in a sound and wholesome state.—(A laugh.) With respect to abolishing the punishment of death for stealing above the value of Si., he had, when his Hon. Friend brought in the Bill, doub•ed the propriety of such a measure. He, however, was now of opinion that such an alteration was advisable. That was the only crime on the statute-book, the punish ment of which depended on the criterion of value, and he thought that it had better be removed. The Right Hon. Bart. had adverted to the aggravated crime of servants robbing their masters. But still let them bring forwatd whatever case they would, the capital punishment de pended on the stealing over the amount of 51., although a robbery of less amount might be attended with circum. stances of greater atrocity. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Weymouth, that nothing could he more dis. gusting than the shifts to which jurymen were obliged to have recourse, for the purpose of lowering the value of pro perty stolen to a certain sum ; and therefore the system ought to be altered. It had been suggested, that by raising the value to 1001., and awarding capital punishment only to those who stole to that amount, the difficulty which juries now felt in convicting would be removed. But he o ejected to this, because he (lid not think that, in any case, th e value should be the criterion of punishment. If they sholiehed the punishment of dealt in every case except in thre w where the public feeling went along with them, lie did not think that they would be going too f ir. He was ready to vote for the whole Bill. Mr. SHAW dill not recollect any instance in Ireland where horse-stealing had been capitally punished. He tho ug ht the best and safest course was to Adopt a smaller and a more certain punishment (ban was at present receg ni eI. He should support the Bill. Mr. J. CAMPBELL had paid great attention to this subject, and he was of opinion that the measure now pro posed would be found beneficial. If was an error to sup pose, that when these laws were first framed it was not intended that they should be carried into effect. If they looked to the reigns of Queen Anne, of George I. and 11., And the earlier part of the reign of George 111., they would find that the punishment under those laws was rieor ously enforced. But the change which hail since been effected in public feeling, rendered an alteration ne•essary. Horse-stealing had, for a great number of years, been rarely punished capitally. He recollected but one in stance. The prisoner was convicted at Staffird ; but he had no idea that the criminal would be left for ixecution, and he heard of his fate with absolute horror. He did not approve of the idea of branding criminals. Such a mark would effectually prevent them, however reformed they might become, from mixing in society. Mr. LENNARD said, that the observations made by the Right Hon. Baronet opposite pointed to a great defect in our mode of legislation—namely, that of cl iseing a va riety of crimes, differing in degree, under one common de• nomination. For instance, in burglary, it seemed absurd that he who entered a house armed at night, prepared to commit murder, if necessary, in the execution of his pur pose, should come under the same class of offenders as a child would, who, after dark, should break a pane t.i gin. 61.1.1 55,1 i a , 1 Ac. 1",..:., •..... r _-:-.4. ~7, worthy the attention of Government, and he hoped that something would be done to improve the laws, by making t' . e punishments enacted by them bear some proportion to the nature and character of the ci inie. With respect to the particular crime which had been alluded to principally in the course of the dehate,— namely, the crime of stealing in a dwelling-house, —h e admitted there were cases of aggravation, such as were stated by the Right Hon. Baronet ; but still it must be re collected, that the crime was not one likely to lead to per sonal violence ; and as be was averse to making the amount of value a criterion in case of life, he should sup port the Bill in its present state. With reference to what had been stated by the Right Hon. Baronet in regard to secondary punishments, he thought the difficulty of mak ing them effective had been over-rated. In the case of Mr. Fauntleroy, of whom it had been said, that under any system of secondary punishments he would be living in luxury, he would ask, could no law be devised which should prevent that ? and, further, how could these luxuries be obtained, when it was known that the commis sion of such an offence as that for which he suffered his property would have been forfeited? He felt a great ob jection to the present law, on account of the large discre tion vested by it in the judge. Practically, the law was exactly in the same state as if it were to be enacted that the punishment for the crimes of horse-stealing, sheep stealing, and stealing in a dwelling-house, should be trans portation, but with a proviso that that the judge at his discretion might increase the punishment to death. Would the House consent now to enact such a law ? if it would not, why retain a law which in practice did the same thing ? Allusion had been made to the difficulty of find ing prosecutors. He believed that the Bill of his Hon. Friend tended to remove that difficulty by making the enactments of the law more conformable to the feeling and humane spirit of the people of this country. Mr. C. FERGUSSON expressed his approbation of the provisions of the Bill. That the offences which it contem plated were formerly in almost all instances capitally punished, was proved by this fact, that for thirty years after the laws relating to those offences were passed, two thirds of the capital punishments that took place were fur offences committed under them. But, sixty years after wards, those laws were so stronely opposed to the feelings and sentiments of the age, that the executions for stealing from the person. and stealing in dwelling-houses, &c , only amounted to one-eighth of the whole number. He agreed with the Hon. Member for Dublin, that the adoption of a moderate, but certain punishment, was the only efficacious mode for the prevention and repression of crime. He would take from the Judges the very extensive discretion which they at present possessed, which could only be done by an accurate classification of crime and a just apportion ment of punishment. It had been observed by Dr. Paley, " that the great beauty of the law of England was, that it sa•ept into the net of crime every act that could possibly be considered criminal." That doctrine had, however, been completely demolished by Sir Samuel Romilly, who forcibly pointed out the evils of our complex system of criminal law. At present the Judge hail the option, in many cases, of transporting felons for seven or fourteen years, or of sentencing them to a short imprisonment. The injudiciousness of leaving such a discretion in the power of the Judge was clearly proved by a case which occurred in Norfolk, and which was related by Sir Samuel Romilly. It appeared that a robbery had been committed by two p. rsons ; one of them was taken, and the other escaped. The captured felon was tried bef re Lord Lough borough, and convicted, The Learned Judge did not consider the offence a very heinous one, and he only sen tenced the convict to a few months' imprisonment. The man who absconded afterwards gave himself up. He was tried before Mr. Justice Gould, convicted, and sentenced to seven years' transportation. What a source of reflec tion must it be for the little public amongst whom this oc currence took place, when they saw that, whilst the one criminal was looking through the bars of his prison, the other was on his way to Botany Bay, each being equally guilty. He thought that the appointment of a public pro secutor, such as existed in Scotland, would be productive of beneficial consequences. Mr. CRANIPTON said, that the cruelty which charac terized our statute law formed no part of the common of the land, and that the only object which would justify the severity of our criminal I l, s , 3—namely, the diminution of crime,—had not been attained in this country. Mr. HUME was most happy to find that this Bill was about being passed into a I itv. The example of the United States of America should long ago have taught ui a wi,e and practical lesson on this subject. There they, executed, except in cases of murder; and the milder pusishruents which were substituted in the sti'act w that of death, had been found to produce much better effects than the severer laws which existed in this country. fle did not think that secondary punishments had got a fair trial in this country. He was sure that if secondar ) punishments were more strictly enforced in New South Wale ,, ,--that if, instead of its being in the power of the Governor there, or of persons in the Colonial-office at home, to liven to applicitions on the part of convicts, and to commute, or to remit, their sentences, every intl . - eithisl transported for seven or fourteen years to New South Wales was certain of being kept to hard labour for h e whole of that period,—he was sure, be repeated, that if such a system as that were acted upon, secondary punish ments would in most cases, be found abundantly sufficient, and that the punishment of death might be almost alto gether dispensed with. Mr. E\VART concurred in the praise which the Hon. Member for Middlesex had bestowed on the American system, and expressed his hopes that in a short time we should follow the example of America, and in a great de gree abolish the use of capital punishment.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME wished to draw the attention of the Under Secretary of State, who was not in the House when he made his former observations, to the manner in which the Governor of New South Wales exercised his power as to the remission of second try pranishments in that colony. Instead of persons who had been brought up in a respectable class of life being at all entitled, when trans ported to New South Wales, to he treated in a way dif ferent from that in which other convicts were treated, it appeared to him, that if any thing they should be sub jected to a still severer punishment.— (Hear.) He was convinced that nine out of ten of the "gentlemen" con viers who were sent out there, escaped in a great degree the punishment due to their offences, and the result was, that transportation had little or no beneficial effect what ever. If Government put an end to such a state of things, and if it took care to exclude no individuals from punish ment except fit and proper objects for mercy, he was quite certain that the secondary punishment of transportation would be found in most instances to be amply sufficient. II • hoped the attention of the Noble Lord opposite (Lord Althorp) would be directed to this point. Mr. LAMB said, that the matter to which his Hon. Friend referred more properly came under the jurisdiction of the Colonial-office. He, for one, did not think that transportation to New South Wales was a punishment at all fitting for persons who had moved in the rank of gen tlemen. Such persons, it might be supposed, were, gene rally speaking, possessed of acute feelings, and to them it must be a refuge and a solace, instead of being punished at home, where they were stung with shame and oppressed with disgrace, to be sent out to a distant colony- like New South Wales. He thought it would be a much better plan to have such persons punished at hotre,—(Hear, hear,)— and he was of opinion that at all events when sent to New South Wales, they should be treated precisely like other convicts. The Bill then went through Committee, and the House having resumed, the Report was ordered to be received to 11101701 V. KING'S COUNTY ASSIZES BILL. Lord TULLA3IORE moved the committal of this Bill. Mr. M. O'FERRALL moved that it be committed to a Select Committee upstairs. Mr. CRAMPTON seconded the Amendment. Lord TFLIAMORE opposed the Amendment, and supported the Bill. Mr. CRAMPTON said that the necessary consequence of removing the assizes to Tullamore would be, that the King's county would be put to the expense of building a Court-house. If the petitioners, however, were prepared to make out a case, they ought to have the opportunity. Mr. H. GRATTAN could not support the prayer of the petition. Mr. A. BARING thought it would he far better to adapt the law of Ireland to that of England, where the Lord Chancellor and Judges decided where the assizes should be held. This House was the worst tribunal for deciding the point, where there was a wrangling, not on the justice of the case, hut individual interests. Aster some observations from Mr. Campbell, Mr. Leader, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Shaw, Mr. Ponsonby, Sir M. W. Ridley, Mr. Rutliven, and Mr. R. Grant, the House divided, When there appeared-- For the original motion Against it 3B Majority against the amendment —l2 On returning to the gallery, the House was in Com mittee on the Bill. The House resumed, when the report was brought up, and ordered to be received on Friday next. COLONIAL SLAVERY COMMITTEE. Lord ALTIIORP stated to the House that the Com mittee to consider the important question of colonial slavery was to consist of the following Members, whose of the impartiality exercised in the selection :---Lord J. Russell, Sir Robert Peel, Sir J. Graham, Sir G. Murray, Mr. Goulburn, Mr. Buxton, Mr. Burge, Mr. W. Evans, Lord Sandon, Lord Howick, the Marquess of Chandos, Mr. A. Johnston, Mr. Marryatt, Mr. Bernal, Mr. Holmes, Dr. Lushington, Mr. Baring, Mr. F. Lewis, Lord Ebring ton, Mr. Carter, Mr. Littleton, Mr. Hodges, Mr. Ord, Mr. Fazakerley, and Mr. Alderman Thompson. EXCHEQUER COURT (SCOTLAND) BILL. The LORD-ADVOCATE moved that the House should resolve itself into a Committee on this Bill. Sir W. RAE objected to the change proposed by the Bill, on the ground that it would cause the interests of poor suitors to be neglected. The Learned Gentleman concluded by moving as an amendment that the Bill be re ferred to a Select Cotnnrittee, alleging that the subject had not yet been fully investigated. The LORD-ADVOCATE supported the Bill, and ob jected to the amendment on the ground that there had been already sufficient inquiry. It was rather singular that his Hon. and Learned Friend should objet to the measure on the ground of a want of inquiry, who had made, while he was in office, many greater alterations in the courts of late in Scotland without any inquiry whatever, Mr. PRINGLE supported the amendment. Mr. HUNT spoke a few words in favour of the orig na! question. Sir G CLERK objected to the constitutio❑ of the for. trier Committee, and supported the proposition fur further inquiry. Report to. Toe Bill then went through Committee. morrow (this day). THE REFORM (IRELAND) BILL was committed, pro forma, to be taken in further eons deration on Monday next. PRIVILEGE OF PARLIAMENT BILL. Mr. BARING moved the order of the (1,,y for the se cond reading of this Bill. He would take the discussion on the next stage, and hoped the House would agree to the present motion on that understanding. 111 r. LENNARD gave his hearty support to the Bill of the Hon. G ntleman, so far as it went to take away a privilege which it was neither useful nor creditable to the House to retain. But he was disappointed that the Bill did not extend to Peers as well as to Members of the House of Commons. It ought to be made to do so. On all for mer occasions, when the House of Commons relinquished a I,rivilege, the House of Peers did the some. It was well known that f ,ruierly privileges of Parliament and of Peerage extended to the lands, the goods, and the domes tics of Peers and Members of the House of Commons ; by degrees, these privileges had been restrained at the same time in the case both of Peers and Members. He thought a similar course should be pursued on the present occasion ; for he was sure, that so long as the present law of arrest continued, by which a poor trades man might be dragged away from his family and impri soned, no class of persons ought to claim an exemption, or be privileged to defraud his creditors with impunity. He hoped what he was saying would not be construed into any approval of the present law of arrest. He thought the present state of the law in that respect most objectionabl e , and he hoped that it would be soon changed ; but while it was suffered to exist, he thought all persons ought to he equally affected by it. He therefore hoped the Hun. Gen tleman would consent to give his Bill greater extension, so as to include Peers as well as Members of that House. After a few words to the same effect from Mr. Hum' and Mr. RL'THVEN, the House divided. For the second reading Against it --34 Majority The Bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed on Friday. Adjourned at Half.past Two o'clock. ROUSE OF LORDS, MAY 30. The Earl of SHAFTESBUKY took his seat, as Speaker, a little after five o'clock. MESSAGE FROM THE COMMONS. Mr. BERNAL and Mr. SCHONSWAR, and others from the Corntuon.,, brought up several private Bil:s, which were read a first time. CIVIL DEPARTMENTS OF THE NAVY BILL. Oa the motion of Lord AUCKLAND, this Bill as read a third time and passed. REFORM. The Earl of DERBY presented a petition from Wadi burn, signed by 8,353 inhabitants, praying their Lord ships to pass the Reform Bill, without curtailment of its essential provisions. The Earl of RADNOR presented a similar petition signed by the High Sheriff of Berks, but adopted at th. meeting of the freeholders of that county. Both of th above petitions were ordered to lie on the tible. SLAVERY. The Earl of ROSEBERY presented a petition, most numerously, and he believed most respectably signed, front Edinburgh, praying their Lordships to take into imm.diate consideration measures for the abolition or slavery in the Clonies, as soon as it could be done with safety. The petition was most moderate and tempe rate in its language, and was, therefore, highly de. serving of their Lordships' attention. He united with the citizens of Edinburgh, in their abhorrence of sl +very, but thought that if Parliament were at once to introduce a measure for the instantaneous abolition of slavery, it would probably lead to results most injurious, if not calamitous, to the slaves themselves, as well as to the security of the lives and property of the white in habitants. —Laid upon the table. BOROUGH OF HELSTON. Lord ELLENBOROUGH presented a petition from certain inhabitants of Helston, praying that the assessed taxes which were remitted to the yi omanry cavllry of that town might be taken into calculation in estima•ing the comparative value of Hi-Iston, with regard to other bi.rouhs in schedule A. His Lordship thought it very bald that the loyalty of the inhabitants of lid s:on should subject them to disfranchisement. Lord KENYON and the Duke of BUCKINGHAM sup ported the prayer of the petition, which was laid on the table. was a rotten borough, but knew no more of it than he had heard from the Noble Marquess. Of the character of the freemen he knew nothing; but taking them to be worthy of the high eulogiurn pronounced upon them by the Noble Marquess, one could not help being sorry that per sons whose character had been lauded in such magnificent terms should be disfranchised. If they had exercised their franchise in such a spirited and excellent manner, and d-served to be characterized in such such high and magnificent terms, was it not a pity that they should be disfranchised ? H., who thought that nomination bo roughs were good for something, was glad that the Nob!. Marquess bail found reason to eulogise to highly, at least, this one nomination borough. The Marquess of CLEVELAND repeated that the freemen of Camelford had acted in a most noble and most disinterested manner. Lord ELLENBOROUGH—Suppose it to be so, that was a reason why they should not be disfranchised. It was agreed that Camelford should stand in schedule A, and that Castle Rising, Norfolk ; Fowt y, Cornwall ; East Looe, Cornwall ; West Looe, Cornwall ; Heeler', Yorkshire ; Hindon, Wilts; Highatn Ferrers, Northamp ton ; Newport, Cornwall ; Newton, Lancashire ; New ton, Isle of Wight; Plympton, Devonshire ; Queen borough, Kent; New Romney, Kent; Old Sarum, Wilts; Seaford, Sussex ; Tregony, Cornwall; Wen dover, Bucks ; Wootto❑ Basset, Wilts ; Yarmouth, Is'e of Wight; Whitechurch, Hants; and Winchelsea, Sussex; should also stand part of the schedule. On the question being put as to whether Ilchester should stand part of the schedule, Lord ELLENBOROUGH asked whether the Noble Marquess had not a word to say in favour of Ilchester? It had been consolatory to him to hear the Noble Mar quess speak in such terms of the freemen of the nomina-• tio❑ borough of Camelford; and were not the freemen of Ilchester, with whom the Noble Marquess had likewise an intimate connexion, equally honourable? He would be glad to hear the Noble Marquess speak in equally high terms of the nomination borough of Ilchester. The Marquess of CLEVELAND had not intended to say a word on the subject, had he not been thus called upon. He had to say then of Ilchester, that it was not pi operly a nomination borough. He did mean to say that his recommendation would have no weight there ; but he knew he had no power to nominate the Members for that borough, and if he had recommended an Anti- Reform Candidate, he was persuaded the freemen would have re jected him. Besides, Ilchester was a place of considerable importance. It was reckoned the chief town of the county of Somerset, and it was the place where the county gaol was situate, and where the sentences on criminals were ex ecuted ; and he had at one time thought that if the neigh• bourine parish had been joined to it, the place might have been kept out of the sche rule, and held entitled to return at least one Member. But it was not a great manu'ac turing place, and perhaps wanted other requisites to entitle it to retain the franchise. It haul a population of six thousand, and paid 1,4001. of assessed taxes ; and if some places in the neighbourhood had been added, it would be a place of considerable trade ; hut he did not mean to object to its remaining in the clause. Lord ELLENBOROUGH—What the Noble Marquess said was of considerable importance. He said that this was not a nomination borough, so that it appeared that all the places in schedule A were not nomination boroughs. This and some other places inserted in the schedule were c tpable of extension. and might be placed in schedule 13. He did not know what importance ought to be ascribed to the circumstance of criminals being executed in the town, but he thought that it might be proper to postpone the question as to this town till after further inquiry. It was agreed that Ilchester, it, Somersetshire, should stand part . of the schedule; and also East Grinste id, Sussex. On the question being put as to whether Minehead should stand part of the schedule, Lord ELLENBOROUGH observed, that on the rigid principle laid down by Ministers, Minehead, in Somerset shire, was properly laid dawn in schedule A; and yet this rigid adherence to the principle sometimes produced great injustice; for some places were in schedule B, which, for rn my reasons, ought to be in schedule A rather than Mine head. His Lordship also observed, that the country of Somerset had by far too few Members, in proportion to the counties of Devon, Wilts, and Dorset. Lord KlNG—Minehead was completely a decayed town. A great proportion of it had been burnt, and it was alto gether a nomination borough. After a few words from the Lord Chancellor, the Mar quess of Lansdowne, and the Ein of Malmesbury, it was agreed that Minehead should stand part of the schedule. On the question being put as to whether Appleby, i❑ Westmorland, should stand part of the schedule, Lord ELLENBOROUGH contended that it was for e v e, atuultl retain the fran chise in preference to Westbury. Indeed he considered that Appleby hid a better right to one Member than any place in schedule B. The LORD CHANCELLOR remarked, it was neces sary to draw the line somewhere even at the expense of apparent partiality ; and at all events, he could not see what right Appleby had to a Member when it was evi dent, from the Returns, that it could not form a constitu ency of 300 ten-pound voters. After a conversation, in which the Lord Chancellor, Lord Durham, and Lord Ellenborough took a part, Ap pleby was ordered to stand part of the clause; as were also Lostwithiel and Fligham Ferrets. On the motion that Atnersham stand part of the clause, The Duke of BUCKINGHAM observed, that the Commissioners had omitted two of the principal houses in the town—the Rectory and the Manor-house. If they had been inserted, Amersham, according to the principle of the Bill, would be entitled to one Member. Lord DURHAM defended the fidelity and impartiality of the Commissioners; and observed that the Rectory was halt a mile out of the town, and had never been entitled to a vote, and that the Manor-house was, in fact, part of the Rectory. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM had been given to un derstand that the Rectory was not at the alleged dist Ince from the town ; and Lord BOSTON said that it was no thing like the eighth of a mile. The Earl of RADNOR produced the map of the Ord nance Survey, to show that; it was half a mile. Amerahom was then ordered to stand part of the clause. The whole of schedule A having thus been gone through, the clause was ordered to stand part of the Bill. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY proceeded to read the second clause, viz.:— " And be it enacted, that each of the Boroughs enume rated in Schedule B to this Act annexed, shall, from and after the end of this present Paliament, return one Mem ber, and no more, to serve in Parliament." The Earl of HADDINGTON said, that he knew there was no practical use in opposing the clause, and therefore that his only object in rising was to satisfy his own mind by entering his protest against its adoption. It had been argued that, when they went a considerable way in en franchising, they should go a considt r tble way in dis franchising ; but surely it was a question in what manner that disfranchisement should take place. Perhaps the rule of combining population and the assessed taxes might as a general rule be satisfactory; and yet, in particular instances, it might be very unsatisfactory ; as, for ex ample, in the case of the borough to which the Noble Duke bad recently adverted; in which it appeared that the exclusion of a single house might determine the question whether or not a borough should return a Mem ber. The same might be the case with many of the boroughs in schedule B. Some of them were sepa rated from the boroughs in schedule A by such a narrow line of distinction, that when the subject came to be calmly investigated, it would be difficult to say why there should be any difference in their treatment. A considerable proportion of the boroughs in schedule B deserved a place in schedule A, as much as many of the boroughs in that schedule, and had been saved only by an arbitrary and unsatisfactory rule. But he had greater objection than that to schedule B. Some of the boroughs which it contained might with propriety (according to the principle of the Bill) have been inserted in schedule A; but there were others which were treated very harshly by being placed in schedule B, and which had a right to two Members. If the principle of disfran chisement which the Bill applied to the boroughs in sche dule A were applied to the boroughs in schedule B, all those boroughs should be added to schedule A, and there should be no schedule B. Were the boroughs in schedule B nomination boroughs or not ? If they were nomination boroughs, why were they left with one Member? If they were not nomination boroughs, why was one Member taken Irons them ? Concurring with his Noble Friend that sche• Jule B was the weakest part of the Bill, he should say— ❑ot content to its adoption. The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that there must be some criterion,—some line drawn ; and that no criterion,—no line could be better than those adopted in the Bill. The Earl of MALMESBURY maintained, that the principle of confining boroughs to the return of a single Member was objectionable, as leading to contests whi c h weal(' be avoided if there were two Members. Lord WHARNCLIFFE concurred in the opinion which had just been expressed by his Noble Friend. The Committee then proceeded with schedule B; and P e teistield, Ashburton, St. Ives, Westbury, 'Wareham, Woohtock, Malmc.bury, LiJskeard, Reignite, Hythe) BOROUGH OF AMERSHAII. Lord KENYON explained. Earl GREY said the only time for considering such a statement would be in Commi , tee on schedule A. The motion was then negatived without a division. The Marquess of CLEVELAND presented a petition from the town of Stockton-upon-Tees, praying for power under the Reform Bill of sending Members to Parliament. Earl GREY presented a petition from Thurlow, and another from Dumbarton, praying that the Reform Bill might be passed into a law ; also a petition from Rumsey, in the county of Northampton, praying the House to give their sanction to the system of education introduced into Ireland by- the Government. His Lordship next pre sented a petition from Ros., praying their Lordships to take into consideration the Criminal Laws. Earl RODEN moved for certain returns respecting the Irish schools, which had been laid on the table of the House of Commons. To be laid on their Lordships' table. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM gays notice of his in tention on Tuesday to present a petitio❑ from the magis tracy and gentry of Queen's County, Ireland, calling the attention of the House to the state of that country. As it was of great consequence, and as the discussion upon this petition might involve not only the consideration of Queen's County, but the present stfts., os st. e of Ireland momentarily becoming worse and worse, he thought it right to give this notice, and also to move that their Lordships be summoned for that day. ANTI-REFORM INTRIGUES. - - --- The Earl of MUNSTER slid he — hop,d that their Lordships would allow him a few moments, in order to explain his political conduct during the late discussions on the Reform 13i1. There was no one who ever appeared before their Lordships, had more reason to claim their in dulgent consideration, and there was no one who felt more than he did the difficulties in which he stood, and he would not now trespass on their Lordships' considera tion but for the grossest misrepresentations that had been put forth respecting him ; and he trusted that he should be able, by a short explanation, to convince their Lordships of the injustice of those misrepresentations. He must pre mise that his opinions had always been what are called liberal, and all who knew him knew that he had long looked forward to a moderate Reform as a just and neces sary measure; and it was known to many, that in October, 1830, he had advocated a moderate Reform, which, if then attended to, would have relieved the country from the difficulties in which it now stood ; but he confessed that the extent of this measure had alarmed him. In that E - loLse, however, and holding these opinions, he felt it impossible hut that he must support the measure, and for one simple reason, and that was, that if he did not support it, he might produce d false impression as to the opinions of one to whom he owed all, and in doing so, that he might assist in producing those results which they hid all lately seen with so much pain. lie trusted that he had now satisfied their Lordships on that part of his conduct ; but being on his legs, perhaps their Lord ships would allow him to allude to the aspersions which had been cast upon him out of doors. At first he bad thought eaem not worthy of his notice, considering, like the eastern author, that they were calumnies which would he refuted by his past character, or by future events ; but t' ey had been so generally disseminated, that he felt he could not avoid remarking upon them. It had been said that he had unhandsomely and ungenerously intrigued to sap the Government of the Noble Earl opposite. It was absolutely impossible that he should have done so, because for six months before circumstances had put it out of his power to say one word upon the subject. He apo'ogized for having detained their Lordships with this explanation, but he felt it to be a duty he owed to himself to state these few words, that he might place himself well with their Lordships and with the coun!ry. REFORM BILL. Earl GREY moved the Order of the Day for going into the Committee on the Reform Bill. The House went into Committee accordingly. The Coaanittee proceeded with the disfranchising part of the Bill, and the boroughs in schedule A were read, and the question put as to each, whether they should be disfranchised; and it was agreed that Aldborough, in Suf folk; Aldborough, in Yorkshire; Great Bedwin, in Wilts; Beeralston, in Devonshire; Bishop's Castle, Sa lop ; Blechingley, Surrey; Boroughbridge, Yorkshire ; Bossiny, Cornwall ; Bramber, Su•sex ; Oakhampton, Devonshire ; Saltash, Cornwall ; Dunwich, Surrey ; Gat ton, Surrey; Newport, Cornwall, should stand in the dis franchisement clause. On the question being put as to Camelford, in Cornwall, The Marquess of CLEVELAND observed, that as be was so intimately connected with Camelford, he would, in justice to the freemen of Camelford, take the opportunity of saying a few words. Alter the decided opinion which he had given in favour of the Bill and all its clauses, he, of course, did not mean to object to the proposition that Camelford should stand in schedule A. H e approved of the Bill, and wished that it should piss as it came from the other House ; and lie, in an evecial manner, approved of schedule A. But be felt it to be but bare justice to the freemen• of Camelford to declare that they had acted in a most honourable manner. At the last general election, when two friends of his went down to that borough, they went there i❑ the Reform interest, and were received with the utmost joy. He knew that Camelford was one of those places which bad been called rotten boroughs, but the freemen were, notwithstanding, decided supporters of Reform, although it was injurious to their Own individual interests. They welcomed his friends with the utmost cordiality, and said that they hoped it would be the last time that they would have to return representativ es to Par liament, although they were aware that the passing of the Bill would deprive them of their peculiar advantages. They were glad to sacrifice their own privileges for the general advantage of the country. This was the senti ment expressed by one and all of them, and he thought it but just to state this much, as it redounded very highly to their credit. Lord .ELLENLOROUGH—IIe knew that Camelfoid Lord KENYON presented a petition from the borough of Amersham, complaining that the boundary of the bo rough taken in the Reform Bill had excluded the manor-house and another building or two, which would have saved it from disfranchisement. Several boroughs which were to be saved were not of so great importance as Amersham. 'The petition having been read, Lord KENYON moved that the petitioners be allowed to prove their case at the bar of the House. Earl GREY did not think that a case had been made out to justify their Lordships acceding to the prayer of the petition. Lord KENYON said the case only rested upon the statements of those from whom he had received the peti tion ; but if their case were established—and it could only be established by a hearing of Counsel at the bar— Amersham would be taken out of schedule A and placid in schedule B. The Earl of SHAFTESBURY was putting the ques tion, when Lord ELLENBOROUGII said, as an arbitrary rule had been laid down by his Majesty's Ministers, even if the allegations of the petitions were established, no advantage would arise to them. Lord KING said that the same calculations had been mare, and the same statements brought forward and urged in another place by a celebrated arithmetician relative to Amersham, hut as this course had been aban doned by him, they had very good reason to infer that Ueut. Drummond's calculations proceeded upon the right principle. The Duke of BUCKINGHAM said, the question was ' not whether the calculations of Lieut. Drummond were more or less correct, but the fact was, in relation to Amer sham, that if the manor which was situate in the parish were included in the calculation, it would be entitled to representation. Lord DURHAM could not see any end to a discussion of this nature upon a petition ; it could serve but only to delay. Droitwich, Launceston, Shaftesbury, Thirsk, &e. were or dered to stand parts of the clause. On the motion that Christchurch stand part of the clause. Lord ELLENBOROUGH contended that they ought to proceed no further. They had formerly enfranchised to the number of a hundred and thirty Members, they h now disfranchised to the same amount. On the face of the Bill there was no ground for proceeding further, espe cially after the vote to which the Committee had in tilt first instance come. The LORD CHANCELLOR denied that it was ever understood that the enfranchisement and the disfranchise ment were to be precisely of the same amount. The Bill proceeded on the principle that certain boroughs which had fallen into decay should be wholly disfranchised, and that certain other boroughs should send only one Member to Parliament. That principle, the v..te to which the Noble Baron alluded, had in no way injured. Lord ELLENBOROUGH maintained that there were many grounds for not going any further. The Earl of MALMESIHTRY observed that if Christ church had been treated as Lymington ha I been, it would have the privilege of returniog two Members. After a few words from the LORD CHANCELLOR, Christchurch was ordered to stand put of the clause, as were also Horsham and Great Grimsby. On the motion that Caine stand part of the clause, The Earl of MALMESBURY maintained that Caine had superior claims to Chippenham, and moved that Chip penham be substituted for Caine. The LORD CHANCELLOR observed that the rule which had been applied to other boroughs mint be applied to Caine. The Earl of MALMESBURY referred to various off. cial returns to substantiate his statement. Caine was then ordered to stand part of the clause; a! were also Arundel, Rye, Clithero, and (after a abort con. versation between Lord ELLENBOHOUGH and Lord DUR. HAM) Morpeth. - . On the motion that Helston stand part of the clause, Lord ELLENBOROUGH referred to the petition which had been presented from the inhabitants of llelston, and observed that it was well deserving their Lordships' no tice. In that petition it was stated that the town of Hel ston pad in a•sessed taxes no less a sum than 9551. ; and that it was only by the deduction which had been made of 731. for the horses of the Yeomanry corps, that the place was comprehended within the operation of this clause; thus making their patriotism the ground of their punish ment. The Commissioners had spoken in high terms of the place. In that opinion he concurred, and thought that no place was more fit to return two Members. The LORD CHANCELLOR, in reply to the objection of the Noble Baron, said, that many of the persons who now kept that number of horses which, if taxed, might bring Helston within the rule, would probably discontinue the expense when they were called on to pay for them as private individu ils. After a few words from the Earl of MALMESBURY, Lord ELLENIIOROUGHE. and the Earl of RADNOR, Helton was ordered to stand part of the schedule; as were also Northallerton and Wallingford. On the question that Dartmouth be wide! to the schedule, The Earl of HADDINGTON complained of the in justice of adding a place of so much trade, population, and rising importance, to the boroughs in schedule B. Dart mouth, indeed, was one of those which approached to near to the line that it was difficult to say why it could be placed there under the Government principle, lor, al though it paid less assesse3 taxes, it had a much greater number of inhabitants and ten-pound houses than many of those boroughs which were to retain two Members The shipping amounted to 20,000 tons, and the custom duties were above 3,000/, a year. Lord DURHAM admitted that Dartmouth approached the line very closely, but, for the reasons already stated, it would give rise to numberless claims, if they ware to de part from the rule already laid down. Dartmouth was added to the schedule. The clause was then added to the Bill. Schedule A was added to the Bill without opposition. Schedule B was also added to the Bill without opposition. The preamble was agreed to.—The title of the Bill was agreed to. The House then resumed, and the report of the Com. mittee on the Bill was ordered to be brought up on Fri day next. Their Lordships immediately afterwards adjourned, at a quarter to ten, until Friday. LIST OF THE MINORITY AGAINST THE SECOND READING OF THE PRIVI LEGE OF PARLIAMENT BILL. M.Namara I Wise I Tellers—Hunt Mullins I Lambert Walker THE KING'S COURT AND LEVEE Yesterday, at two o'clock, his MAJESTY held a Court in his Palace in St. James's. An Order in Council was agreed upon at the Privy Council for the Archbishop of CANTERBURY to prepare a Prayer to be used in all Churches and Chapels, to return thanks to Almighty God for the abatement of the grievous disease with which this kingdom has lately been visited. The Earl of MCLGRAYE was introduced to the Counci and sworn in a member. The Noble Earl took his seal at the Board accordingly. The Hon. WILLIAM BATHURST attended as Clerk of the Council. His MAJESTY gave audiences to the Field Officer in the Waiting effective and s ,CaaottleilooenoefGl gavet ohoiefd three a th su e dti ic G ekn u ßci a ene r sg d li , tvmo iv e_i _nht Waiting, gi m oi ,ef a e :leao a rti%g r iG e ua p eru o sgas r ur t ,:o o s: t: of W I C TN L ic' A eIi N KE I S t IT I N c E A GR a , DE, the Duke of DEVONSHIRE, the Earl of ALBEMARLE, the LORD CHANCELLO R , Sir JAMES GRA. HAM, Viscount PALMERSTON, Viscount GRANVILLE, and the Marquess of LANSDOWNE. His MAJESTY held a Levee, at which Lord Lfr,Fonn was presented by the Marquess of WINCHESTER, on his being re-appiinted a Lord of the Bedchamber. The Earl of MULGRAVE was presented by Viscount GonEatcar, when the Noble Earl took leave of his MA JESTY previous to his departure for Jamaica. At the Entrée Levee were— The Russian, Netherlands, and French Ambassadors; the Neapolitan, Bavarian, Prussian, Spanish, Wirtemberg, Mexican, and Hanoverian Ministers; the United States Charge d'Affaires; Prince Paul Lieven ; the Archbishop of Canterbury ; the Bishop of Worcester, Clerk of the Closet; the Lord President, the Lord Privy Seal, the First Lord of the Treasury, the Secretaries of State for the Home, Foreign, and Colonial Departments, the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, the First Lord of the Admiralty, the President of the Board of Control the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, the Paymaster of the Forces, the Secretary of State for Ireland, the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, the Groom of the Stole, the Cap tain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen Pensioners, the Captain of the Yeoman Guard, the Commander of the Forces; Viscount Cwmhermerr, Gold Stick in Wait ing ; the Treasurer of the Household, the Comptroller of the Household, the Master of the Ceremonies, the Judge of the Arches' Conrt ; the Dean of Hereford, Deputy Clerk of the Closet ; Lord James O'Bryen, Lord in s W ir ai l t v in i g; ili. Sr G i om H m t.n : y Fiel ll d l o ac ffi k‘ e v e o r ml in , I G va r i o t o in m g. ; in ao Nai d V Ai t a in c g e ; Stephenson, Page of Honour. At the General Levee were— DUKES—Rutland, Wellington, Richmond EARLS—Mulgrave, Eldon, Oxford, Radnor. VISCOUNTS—Granville, Beresford, Ashbrook, Boling. broke. LORDS—Li!ford, Clinton, Cranstoun, Eliot. BlSHOPS—Worcester, Lincoln. RIGHT HONOURABLES—Sir John Nichol!, Charles Grant. 110 NOURABLES.—Charles Robert St. John, Captain Poulett, R.N. SlRS—George Campbell, Robert Inglis, Shuckburgh, G. Seymour, Francis Shuckburgh. Reverend Mr. James Balfour. MEssmuas--Malkin, Alfred Lewis, Fenton Scott, Buller, Frankland, Robert Burrell, Fox, Edward Ellice, Stratton Marsbam, J. Barrow, J. B. Danbur, Bagwell, Geo. F. Jones, Henry Wells, Ashurst, Lushington, E lw. Heneage, George Heneage, Henry Howard, Dutton, W. 11. Irby, F. Cooper, Throckmorton. ADMIRALS—S'r H. Digby, K.C.8., Cunningham, Stuart, Campbell, Page, Hon. Sir H. Blackwood. GENERALS-Sir Richard Jones, K.C.8., Shrapnel, Reed, Sir R. Donkin. COLONELS-Sir Charles Thornton, Kirkwood, asG r A ay r , ci lo y n . NV. W. Burrowes, Sir John May, Payne, Dauhen e) , , tage, Sir C. Broke Vere, Arnold, Sir Neil Douglas, Brooke, Broughton, Chaplin, Savage. j° Hyde, James, Wright. ll C l A A rrl7 — NSfil n l e ild , m y, R.N., Edward Mildrnay,Warde, ' Carew, R.N. Flood, P. Fisher, R.N., Wainwright Lynar, Brenton, R.N., Laugharne, R.N., Chads, R.N., Inglefield, R.N., M 43, Bowyer, R.N., Alexander Gordon, R.N., Meynell, R N., Sykes, R.N., Dacres, R.N., Carroll, R.N., Aylmer, R.N., W. H. Shippard, Coghlan, R.N. t R. James, C. Dunn, R.N., Thomas Hedge, C. Thomson, R.N., R . L N C :. E , 3l u ll , a E A vS A d D s Rose, S W. A. Willis, R.N., Augustus Tr. cey, R.N., John Tulford, R.N., 11. A. Nutt; Cornet P. B. Turnor ; Ensigns Paws , 11. Lacy ; Sub-Lieutenant J. R. B. Hale. The following presented Addresses to his Majesty The Duke of Rutland, from the Inhabitants of the tot and neighbourhood of Leicester, expressing their , horrence of the inflammatory language and conduct the Political Unionists, and thanking his Majesty his constitution regard to the independence of Peerage, signed by about 1,200 ; from the Nobili Gentry, Clergy, Freeholders, and other Inhabitants the county of Leicester, to the same effect, signed about 2,350. The Earl of Radnor, from the county of Berks, thank his Majesty for continuin g in office his present Ministe The Earl of Eldon, from 324. of the Practitioners in Courts of Law and Equity, imploring his Majesty to yield to any proposal by increasing the Members the House of Lords for the purpose of carrying any p ticular measure to destroy that important branch of I Legislature. Lieut.-General Sir Richard Jones, K.C.B. ; Mr. Frar land, of Muntham, Deputy Lieutenant of Sussex ; A J. B. Dauhuz, of Offington House, Magistrate for county of Sussex ; the Rev. James Balfour, an d IV Gorge Frederick Jones, with a Loyal Address fri Worthing. Mr. Datibuz was presented by Sir R. Jon , V scount Beresford, from the Magistrates, Clergy, Inhabit its of Ashbourn and its vicinity, expressi their admiration of the firmness and resolution lei which his M jests has rejected the insidious advice I a most unprecedented and unconstitutional extension the Peerage. The Duke of Wellington, from Lisburn, signed by 3,21 persons, against the Reform Bill, and also against t measure of Reform applicable to Ireland. From the Gentlemen, C ergy, Landholders, and other habitants of South Holderness, in Yot kshire, tbankil his .Maj- , sty for not consenting to sanction the destre tion of the Legislative rights and independence of d House of Lord., signed by 165 persons. The following were presented to the King : Mr. Fenton Scott, Deputy-Lieutenant of the West Ridic of Yorkshire, by the Eatl of Harewood. Mr. Bull, r, on his marriage, by Lord Clinton. Captain Mildmay, R.N., on his marriage, by Lord Elio Mr. Bagwell, by the Earl of Listowel. Hon. Charles Robert St. John, by Viscount Bolingbrol. , Mr. Rob..rt Burrell, by Lord Willoughby. Sir G. Campbell, of Edenwood, by the Lord Chancellor , Mr. J. Barrow, on going abroad, by the Earl of Camper down. Mr. Stratton Marsham, Deputy Lieutenant of the coned , of Norfolk, by the E arl of Albemarle. Mr. Malkin, by the Right Hon. Charles Grant. Mr. Alfred Lewis, on his return from abroad, by L' 4l Francis Shuckburgh, Bart. Major James, by Major-General Sir R. Scott, K.C.B. Mr. E (ward Ellice, by Mr. Ellice. Mr. Fox, attache to his Majesty's mission at Brussels, of his return from Brussels, by Lord Holland. Captain Brenton, R.N., to present the report of the ciety for the Suppression of Juvenile Vagrancy. Major J .nes, on promotion, by the Hon. General M ea de , Captain Laugharne, R.N., on promotion, by c a ptali Bowles, R.N. Captain Ward e n Flood, by Viscount Beresford. Commander Langford, R.N., by Lord J. O'Bryen. Capt. Peter Fisher, R. N , on return from Foreign S e rvice Lieut. Hodge, by Lieut.-General Sir George Anson. Lieut. John Fulford, R.N., by Sir J. M. Hardy. Commander N. James C. Dunn, R.N., by Sir J. Grahare Captain Wainwright Lynar, High Sheriff Elect of the cir: of Dublin, by the Earl of Roden. Lieut.-Colonel W. N. I3urrowes, on promotion, by V° count Beresford. Lieut.-Colonel Kirkwood, on his appointment to the 61t 1 Regiment, by Lieut.-General Sir William Pringle. Lieut. A. Tracy, R.N., by Lord A. Beauclerk. Lieut, IV. A. Willis, R.N , on his return from abroad, b the Earl of Munster. Cornet P. Broke Tumor, by Colonel Lygon. Mr. Henry Wells, R.N., by Sir T. Hardy. Lieut. IL A. Nuit, by Colonel Sir Richard Armstrong. Lieut. Charles Thomson, R.N., by Sir T. Hardy. Ensign R. Lscy, on his appointment to the 84th Reg' ment, by Colonel Savage. Ensign Paterson, by General Lord Lynedoch. Lieut.-Gen. Sir R. Dunkin, on his marriage, by Lord lOC Sub-Lieutenant J. R. B. Hale, on his appointment to the Ist Life Guards, by Colonel Lygon. Le After on i t n h e Levee council, h to is m Aaje a l keh s received repo h report of the e e Recorder convicts tally convicted at Justice Hall, in the Old Bailey, at th e April Sessions. The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice a t ' tended the King in receiving the report, as did those Cs' binet Ministers and Great Officers of State who were pre_: sent at the L evee an d P r i vy Council, with the exception ul Earl Grey, who had retired. Their Majesties and party took an airing in pony phil e : ton., in Bu s hy- par k , on Tuesday afternoon, and dined a' the Queen's Lodge, and returned to town at night. The Queen, attended by Miss Eden, left town a bout, eleven o ' c l oc k yesterday morning, to visit her niece, the , Princess Louise, at the Palace at Windsor. The Duchess of Kent and the Princes, Victoria walked. and drove in Hyde -park for some time yesterday. Ti,e Queen was expected to honour the concert of cient Music last evening with her presence. RECORDER'S REPORT. Yesterday the Recorder made his report to his Majesty of the following persons under sentence of death in New'' gate, convicted a t th e l ast A pr il Sessions, viz.:—Michae l M‘Dollogh, 36, forgery; William Crofts, 29, and Joe Mills, 34, stealing in a dwelling-house; Alexander ffarnif' ton, 19, and John Godwin, 36, horse-stealing; Jana° Boswell, 21, and William Hancock, 20, highway robbery; William Jone., 22, Jane Rayman, 29, Ann Graham, 45 ' Henry Williams, 26, John Davis, 22, Edward Milliner' alias Thomas Lilly, 22, Henry Sly, 14, John Whitetail , 22, and John Druitt, 27, housebreaking; John Grave°' 20, sheep-stealing. All of whom his Majesty was gra ciously p l ease d to resp i te during his Royal pleasure, except John Druitt, who is left for execution on Tuesday next. FEMALE FASHIONS FOR JUNE. (From La Belle AssenthMe for June.) WALKING DRESS. A printed muslin dress, of a new pattern, called m ousse' line Arndltl.i.te; th e corsage, m a d e up t o th e t h roat , and close to the shape, is so cut that the pattern fortes chevrons on the bust. The lower part of the sleeve lit e quite close to the arm, the upper part is very wide froGt the , houlder to the elblw, and arranged in bouffants bI stripes of the dress placed longitudinally. A tulle ruche, bniders the t o p o f t h e corsage. Ceinture of watered riband, with a plain gold buckle. Bonnet of white watered Bros de Naples, trimmed with green g au ze rt^ bands, a deep fall of blonde lace set on at the edge of the brim, and blonde lace mentonnieres meeting under the chin, (From the World of Fashion.) MORNING DRESS. A pelisse dress composed of gros de Naples: it is 3 bright shade of fawn colour ; the skirt is open from the it waist d iip t i o th e a y,a l bottom, ttie a of the ed white in cambric frontund under r t thecorners ; dress. High corsage made to fit the shape, and with a pelerine of a net*.' form, trimmed with rich silk fringe to correspond. We should observe that the fronts and border of the dress are edged with fringe. Sleeve a FEipagnole. The capote is of white gros de Naples, of quite a new form, trimmed with Pomona green gauze, and sprigs of water lilies with their foliage. MORNING AND P ROMENADE DRESS. A high dress of French grey gros de Naples. The corsage is made to sit close to the shape; the upper part of the sleeve is boutfanted in a new manner by bands of the same material, the lower part fits the arm. Rice S t raw bonnet, trimmed with sprigs of white blossoms and their foliage, and gauze ribands to correspond with the dress. The lining of the brim also to correspond. GENTLEMEN'S FASHIONS. (From the Gentleman's Magazine.) At this moment there is nothing new in coats; they are now principally of black cloth, so also are redingotes. These last either cross a little or are trimmed with a single row of buttons. Some redingotes are made with a pock e t On the breast. One of the most novel that we have seen for some time has lately appeared. The skirts did not reach lomer than the knee, and there Was a p oc ket placed lengthways on each side of the hip in front, the edges meet without crossing; the lappels had the same shape as those worn for uniforms,, and the collar was straight. The dress had much the appearance of a mili tary great coat. ARTICLES FOR PA NTA LOONS AND WAISTCOATS.--There are a great many new materials fur pantaloons ; the meet remarkable is a very stout one of twilled thread. There are also some chequered, and others a petites cotes. We see also pantaloons in velours a eke; these last are alwaY. grey. Figured silks for waistcoats must have the ground and lie pattern of the same colour, whether it is light grey or mourning grey,