The Sun. — London, England, 1840-05-29 00:00:00

0 no. EVVNING EDITION. for Shropshire. He cordially supported the Corn laws, because he thought they were essential to the general interests of the country, but he was anxious that that protection should be enforced in as unobjectionable a manner as possible. The proposal now was for aCom mittee of Inquiry, and he was not prepared to resist it, hut he thought it ought to bo an inquiry whether the boon could be granted without loading to fraud, and with protection to the revenue. That ought, in his opinion, to be the motion ; but, as it stood, if the House were driven to a division, he would feel it his duty to vote for the motion of the Hon. Member for Hull. Mr. MARK PHILLIPS said he felt the import nce of the subject so much, that he had placed in the paper a notice of his intention to introduce a Bill during the present Session. He did not complain of tho Hon. Member for Hull having taken up the question, and he would shortly state his reasons for taking so much interest in the question. He thought they ought to give every possible scope to the enterprise of the merohants, but he never wished to do so in contravention of any existing law. Whenever a demand was made for sour the merchants were com pelled to go into the ports of the Baltic in order to sup ply the markets of the United States and the Brazils, and those voyages were attended with considerable ex pense and loss of time. He recollected hearing Mr. Poulett Thomson state, a few years ago, that owing to the deficiency in the crop in the United States there would have been a very considerable demand for flour from England, if, at the time, they had been permitted to manufacture corn in bond. Most of the seaports in America had no n.eans of converting grain into flour, and their supplies always came from the interior in the shape of flour. On that occasion it would have been of great advantage to the Americans, and a great conveni ence to their own merchants, if they had been permitted to supply the demand. Ile thought an arrangement could be mac;,© by Mich that object might be accom plished, wiisile at the mune time security was given that the rAenue would not be defrauded. It was a notorious fact t_-:at undo*. the new bonding system goods of the most valu able description were allowed to be transferred from Lon doe to Liverpool, or to any other part of the country which had the advantage of canal communication, without any loss whatever to the revenue. It had 'eeen stated, he believed, before that Committee, that no loss to Atte revenue had occurred from the abstraction of property in transit ; there had occasionally been losses by forfeviture of bonds on account of the ins - of& • eiency of the bonds given in the first instance, but thcrci had been no pilfering or abstraction of property tiering ifs transit. He could not conceive any great tlitßetalt v with respect to security in this case. It had itee n tried with respect to sugars which are refined in bond, ;Lai though at first there had been some practical dialculti es these had been overcome. With respect to the brea sa m anulactu'red, if the duty were to he paid et - pill t o thc present 2'o par cent. ad valorem, he thought it prob a ble great ralvantege would be derived by the im , nufaeturing interests. He was informed by a large 11 °'-'se t h at in the aiaking 410,000 printed calicoes they 1 "hl ions el bran that year.—Hear, hear, hear.) Bran inns an article that was ai ttays dear in manufacturing districts, • aeri i t Geittlemen would compare its price there and in • the qrianitural t:istricte, he thought they would find it to the i r atterest to introduce larger quantities there. Ile lase no doubt in his own mind that such restric . be ar m i g as he ietrodaced as would enable these menu feean es .o be carricil On with perfect security ; but a C etalittee y was the proper place for this to d properly settled. There was one other Argument h 3 tvOit:(l suggest, as it was important to give eery- inun(ieracnt to indostry within our reach. It 'scold be laund there were other branches of industry that were rc.aieted by it. He had thought, at one tine, cape, tnalau might be effected in aacks, but he tott e d be vain; iniitaken, iind that barrels must be cm ; so t'sn;• they would loins a new branch of trade, nearly, the toaperage, which r:ou4 give e mployment to a large a unhi rof ieilividuas. Ali this, however, (V. 44 naLttte' i ir conAerath a by the Comnattee, who, he triaitart, won:d agree on such measures as should hest giva'an ;P;ilT+l;:te t.o iadostrv.—( Hear.) Mr. E.'aTON vas satisfied coat the present motion was an attach. upon the Corn-laws by a side blow, and be cf.:aught ha should be hest ;service; the aarteuttural ititerest by opposha; it. ou itToN h a d no of jection to the Hon. I)l.s:tabor for Hull amusiog ItirnsAf with a Coat:hi:te e if 1:!;:e.J. tie heti ao doubt but that ire might do so wahrut ap aa -til ea . hat when he brought in a Bill fe ee d a et e n t h e ev id e nce cacao •%fore that Committee, i t svou:-.l.;n t e a i n t h e szme manner as the Bil; brought in iTLit • 1 ,, y /1 0 „. Friend Oelow the Member for ta ar r eiata a tv ai,n t v.. 35 permitted to he read a second taxa, Has .iraait they came to discuss tata proVi,iol , 2 by wLiet, it tri„ to guard against fraud, they se, re. not p e ran.tted to enter tipue the consideration o f then). far eal the motion that the Speaker ,lo leave the el air . pi-epaeatory to a...M.1g into Committee on the Bill, tta hoe. lid: o v onsite mustered all his ibrees cinch the Bit thrown out. Tuis was, in tact, the af:er P serious drama which had recently b een pea that launia) Tee lion. tincain ilaCi said that no new arguments lanai heel brought forward which had not been brought forwatd favOur of the former system, which had been fiend to be attended with fraud in its operation. Now 6:le was not the a - tonsure which had been brought for woad before. T'ae principle was different. With regard to sugar, when a certain quantity of raiv produce was taken into fiend. and a certain quantity of manufactured Auger, allowed to be exported, which teas assumed to be triie product the raw sugar, frauds took place ; the same thing ocaurred with regard to flour ; when it was asaumed thata certain qu an tity o f corn cou ld pro d uce a oertairl quantity of dour, which was to be the quantity exporud,—but that was not the principle now - preposee. Inc .; princ,p.e not, proposed wits that the whole of the maaalactured :article produced from the raw material .should be exported, —the same principle had been applied tto sugec, r.t4o.;'ace found to answer. lie believed his ahion h Friend Alight amuse himself with a Committee if liked, but that when he brought forward his practical hicasure be WOlll.l LAI he would be defeated. Col. T. WOOD slid that many Hon. Gentlemen veil°, heel voted for thee second reading of the Bill of the Member for D artruouth had also voted for t he Soaelccr leaving elle Chair to go into Committee on that ceaule they be daved the inea.aare to be harmless 'xis rewarded the Corr.-laws, evhile they thought it would condue e to the advaagage of tam shipping interest, so that •rhe Hen. Mernuer for Bridport was nit quite justified au the , sc.cuaatiort he :had brought forward against all • -who h,rlt support. id tho'second reading of that Bill. .He hoped the Hausa ta . otrin allow an inquiry to he gone Tinto, because lie ;ars awe the measure would be found o tto uc perfectly harmless as. regarded the landed interest. Mr. G. PA I,MER. would oppose the motion, be • if cue. -conaented to a Committe e , th a t ,4Coramitta a would be :so appo.nted as to secure a ma • fasour of the: views of the lion. Member for Basidss, the eneasure proposed would materially cheer the consurnptio a of British corn. 'Air. IRVINE nee :t addressed the House, but in so ioet a tone of voice, that we could not hear a single sentence he uttered- We understood him, however, to support the motion. Mr. VILLIERS wisha to make an observation, in consequence of his non. Friend the Member for Hull laying revealed a prirate communication that had taken e i r iee b e tween them. His Hon. Friend certainly told . u) that his intention was to constitute the Committee ene'rely of country gentlemen ; but he had referred to what had taken place betweep them, with a view of unduly influencing the judgment of the House at his (Mr. Til,'.ere') expense. His Hon. Friend had recom. mended hi, emotion, on the ground that he (Mr. Villiers' bad said tht reFqsal of the motion would throw odium on the other side. That disclosure was not correct. YnC - on!y question I ,etween him and his Hon. Friend was as to the time ; and he had recommended the motion to be brought on after the House had refused his (Mr. Villiers' motion) which they were sure to do, i; was very unpopular. Hii 1 - I:,n. Friend then said, " Oh, I An sure to carry it, for Lord this and Lord that, and Sir Charles the other, have promised me their support." All that he (Mr. Villiers) had said vra,, 14at •11 . Ltlid not consider the objection was as to the dTetaiis, but as to meddling with the Corn-laws at all ; and that, as no Opposition was to he offered to t 5 motion, his lion. Friend had better bring in a Bill art „, Q , lie never beg ge d V ial to w i thhold his motion on acMunt of casting odium on the other side. It might do Mime good,, and he did not see how it cotild prej Alice anybody. Air. jIUTT, after the extraordinary speech of his Hon. Friend, the Member for Wolverhampton— (Laoghter)—must make en observation. It was true this was a private conversation, but his Hon. Frien4 had stated, two years ago, in that House, that his op jection to this Bill was, that it would remove from the Corn-laws a portion of that odium which he thought they justly &served. Mr. VILLIERS—No. lir. H U TT—That was the impression on his mind. If he had misunderstood his Hon. Friend, he must re turn tlie compliment by saying his Honourable yriend hai most egregiously misuiederstoad him.—( A laugh.) With regard to the motion before the House, he benel to state it. was his determination to deal honestly vri!h all parties. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Hoes-, divided. Tire numbers wore— For tire motion Against 4 *Al...jority in favour of the app3lnt :vent of a Committee --72 PR.EVENTION OF BRIBERY AND; - J TREATING. tin our return to the gallery, we found ~'rd JOHN RUSSELL mov i ng t e r l eave to btin B:11 -* for the better prevention di bribery and treat fle, wished to state what he had net before stated, 01 ; the previous occasion he bad not made Hi) on the sub;eet, that it was his intention to in orovision into the Bill, concernin 2 bribery and t h e :part of the candidate. When it was ,-,, v ious to an election bribery and treating, treading, was going on, any candidate :ce that the other cir:didate, by . THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 2), 1840. himself or his agents, was carrying on the practices of bribery and treating ; and if that fact should afterwards be proved before a Committee of the House of Commons then, as in the case of a party who was not possessed of a qualification before the election, the votes given for such candidate after the notice had been served should be void. It was very usual that when one party had begun these practices, and a small majority only could decide the election, then the other party resorted to the same means—the one party pitted themselves against the other—corrupt practices wore common, and both parties were so earn mated that they found it impossible the one to proceed against the other, and so the whole transactions were veiled ever. By his provision he intended to give a party an interest—if he was not himself guilty of these practices—an interest to sift the transactions before a Committee. Those transactions were notorious in many cases, yet, no one having an interest in them, not a word was said against the practices on the election, and thus the representation- in that House became corrupt. The other clauses in the Bill he had before ex plained, and it was unnecessary to trouble the House further upon them. He was most happy to see the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Wynn) present. His attention had been gives to the prevention of such practices during a long period, and he trusted the Right Hon. Gentleman would afford him that assistance he was so well able to g i ve .—( Hear, hear.) What ever suggestion came from the Right Hon. Gentleman would meet with the utmost attention. Mr. WYNN (who was nearly inaudible in the Gal lery) said the Bill should havehis utmost attention, but the provision last alluded to struck him as being of a most dangerous tendency. A candidate finding an elec tion going against him would immediately resort to the provision of tbe Bill, and give notice against his opponent, upon the mere chance of what might turn up in his fa vour at a future period. Besides, at a contested elec tion, the serving of such a notice would dishearten the friends of either party against whom the notice was given. He would be most ready to give his utmost as sistance to discourage the practices of bribery and treat ing, but he was afraid the danger of such a provision as the Noble Lord had alluded to would be greater than leaving the law as it then stood. Mr. WARBURTON—UnIess the Bill of the No. ble Lord provided for carrying on an investigation into bribery and treating, independent of the candidates, and not at their expense, he (Mr. W.) was afraid that it would be of but little use. Lord JOHN RUSSELL—It does. Mr. Nie A RBURTON was glad to hear it. He would not quarrel with the Bill of the Noble Lord if it would do any good whatever, but there could be no effectual cure for bribery so long as there was open voting. Colonel SI BTHORP thought the Noble Lord ought to define what he meant by bribery. He (Co!. Sibthorp) had sat in the House for many years, but he never could find out what bribery was.—(A laugh.) Theo as to treating, did the Noble Lord intend to put an end to the rites of common hospitality ?—( Hear.) Supposing a tradesman should wait upon him at a dis tauce ea, say six or seven miles, to tender him his vote, the man might be infirm, or the weather incle ment, yet was he (Colonel Sibthorp) to refuse to admit that man into his house, or to treat him with common hospitality, under the fear of being charged with treating? 6,- say that he was walk ing through the town or, country, and he was to see a lean lying en a bed of sickness, and surrounded be half fentisl;ing children, was he to be debarred from tlte ex e: vise of common humanity merely because the man was a voter ? The Bill altogether required explanation. :r ROBERT PEEL said the Noble Lord had omitted to state what course he intended should be pur sued in the event of an Election Committee adjudging upon these matters sent for investigation making a spe cial regert to the Hou se t h at t h ere were c i rcumstances deeply affecting, the purity of that borouelt— clot they showed such prevalence of corrup tion that some steps might be necessary to punish the berough. In the event of such a special report, the House ought to instruct the Committee to conduct its investigation on public grounds, and at the public cost. The disclosure of disgraceful facts might nave a powerful efFect in preventing such practices. 'Vhetever could possibly prevent bribery ought to re ceive the support of the House ; and if it could be defined what a bribe really vies, notwithstanding his great objection to the multiplication of oaths, he would agree to require the party coming to the table to swear that, neither by himself nor his agents, had he been guilty of bribery. Then, with respect to treating, that would be found a matter of the utmost difficulty ; and he agreed with his Right Honourable Friend, that the provision intended to be in:rodueed by the Noble Lord required the utmost consideration. Supposing that prevision were to become the Jew of the lend, it would lead to almost universal charges of 'v:ribery being made. It would be a bad principle for legislation, fo r t h e i nev i ta bl e consequence Would be thnt there would be the charge of bribery, and as n natural consequence, a counter-charg e from the other side. His objection would not apply if the charge was ho nestly made, but without a penalty being attached to a false charge, they would be civing a legislative sanc tion tc indiscriminate charges of bribery. Even where two candidates were equally conscious of bribery, and, therefore, each refrained from petitioning, because afraid of recrimination—any single elector might re ject the agreement and expose the corruption.—(Hear.) It would, however, be hard to entrap within the letter of the law those who were sincerely desirous of obey in its spirit.—(Hear.) To any positive prohibition o treating, he (Sir R. Peel) would not object, i It were accompanied with a clear and distinct definition, —(Hear.) To forbid all treating whatsoever would evi dently be going too far, for it would prevent the com mon and innocent rites of hospitality.—(Hear.) But might not the prohibition be applied, within a limited period before or at the election, to all treating—allowing, however, after the polling, to any voters who might wish openly—(Hear) —to avail himself of it, nmessary SUS tenanco and refreshment, accompanied by strict prohi bition of anything more.—(Hear.) Bribery, be:Tond all doubt, was discreditable and disgraceful to all parties concerned, and tended to lower the character of the House,—(Hear.) To prevent that was not so difficult as to prevent treating ; there the difficulty lay between confounding honest and innocent hospitality with cri minal corruption. In any practical measure for the sup_ pression of this corrupt treating he would cordially concur Colonel WOOD said no measure as to treating would be judicious which precluded rational and requi site refreshment to the voters.—( Hear.) Was it not going too far to say that country voters, for instance, fArmers—forty-shilling freeholders, perhaps—who had walked 10 or 15 miles to vote, should have no refresh ment. Might not all danger of corruption be obviated by providing that after polling the voters should have tickets from the Sheriff fbr necessary refreshment, to be charged to the candidates ? Mr. TURNER said Hon. Gentlemen opposite seemed to forget that the elector bad a duty to his country to discharge, which he should be ready to do with any sacrifice to himself,—(oh, oh, and hear, hear.) Hon. Gentlemen were not at all aggrandizing their constituencies by representing that they required com pensation in refreshment for the trouble of exercising the franchise, which, unless they were prepared to exert with perfect independence, they ought not to have.— (Hear, hear.) At the same time, care should be taken not to exe!ude such innocent hospitality as a Member might, after his election, be disposed to afford his supporters, as he himself had given a dinner to six or seven hundred of his friends after his return. Still the I constituencies ought not to expect such things as re muneration for their sacrifices in exercising the suffrage. Colonel WOOD—Why, then, did you give them the election dinner ?—(Hear.) Sir C. KNIGHTLEY said it was all very fine theorizing to talk of the poor voter's losing a day's work, and walking ten or fifteen miles to support a candidate, who was not to give him the most necessary refreshment, hut it was not just nor liberal.—(Hear.) Mr. BRINES said he thought electors should feel themselves disgraced by accepting such gratuitiesill (Oh, oh.) He believed that those constituencies would feel so, who were yet untainted by the wages of cor ruption—(Hear)—of which they, who once partook, acquired a taste that must be satisfied—( Hear, hear.) In the large county constituencies it would be impos sible to furnish such refreshments—(Hear, hear)—and he bad never met with these who required them.— Leave given to bring in the Bill. RELIEF FROM OATHS. Mr. HAWES moved for leave to bring in a Bill to substitute, in the case of persons having a conscientious objection to an oath, an affirmation. The Bill was carefully framed to exclude every possibility of fraud, requiring th at app li cat i on f or re li e f should have been m th a e d p e ar t moiNuoirh. ,GwOhiliehLwßaUs accordingly t i 7 y re h e ad m t o o n d th e s po b se e . fore any matter arose on which N cord sa in id gly he ag s r h ee o d ul t d o not oppose the TRADE WIT kV \.. Mr. COLQUHOUN then l aidhe l had to draw the attention of the House to ot the injuries which British merchants now sustained , of of redress, from the non-fulfilment by the Dutch t termsi of the treaty arranginm I s e s shouldwerAeu commerce proenlati„eiy be within introduced. ro d u J c a e v d a . , h t British he v e ry yearand contravened r e y:i which l a rl, n itil d : i, ,eh se t t e t wo li en n i g npircittiive . the v " io ations complained the treaty was made. rn H oi c :itranco was made in actld. ) ? -1, and l i r n c s n ta e n w t e i yd demandedinlB2s the e ted his re monstrance Mr. Canning of should be remedied. His death monstrance being effected, but in 18 1 3 :7 ‘ t i . Association in London, by Mr. Larpe n t b East India , rought forw ar I energetic remonstrances on the then position of ,• They called the attention of the tue Javas.Governmentas l i the I,; was 0 f avoura b le op- 1 ;u,v-elrlieeltihleinadpetialdkielnlziace, and t o ld t h em, h to ,,g t o h t e iat d i e u y is y portunity for settling the quLstion. The Government I gave no satisfactory answer, but sail they were cm _ played in imports it negotiations with Belgium and 110I:and, and that this subj,ct would be incidentally i ! attralcci to. In 163%3 the remonstrances were re nev,ed, but still no answer was given. At the close of that Year, Use Association aria applied to the Neh!e Lord, who, instead of acting with the promptitude of Mr. Canning, said he must consult the Crown Counsel on the subject. He afterwards informed them the opi nion of the Crown Counsel was adverse to their claim, but the Association were not satisfied with his decision, and subsequently he believed the Noble Lord himself had come to a different conclusion. The subject was sub. sequently brought before the House, when the Noble Lord promised that Government would exert themselves on the subject, and that the treaty should be strictly enforced. He was sorry to say these promises were not fulfilled for a 41111 year afterwards. The Association informed the Noble Lord they were in a worse condi tion than before, from subsequent infractions of the treaty. The Dutch had previously admitted the violation of the treaty by a chan g e of tariff, and the Association again asked the Noble Lord how long, be would allow these violations to be continued, and the promises of redress were again repeated. In 1837, our negotiations being again going on with Hol land, the Association again renewed their application, and inquired what steps had been taken in the ques tion, when the Noble Lord informed them ho had no further information to give them. This was the sole result of his brilliant promises. Another application was made in 1838, when the Noble Lord informed them that the Dutch complained of violations of the treaty by the East India Company. On the sth March that year, the Noble Lord, in answer to a question by the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) said the Dutch Government complained of the East India Company, but had promised to observe the treaty in future, though he had read no official information on the subject. No step, however, was taken to compel the East India Company's observance of the treaty. The Noble Lord told the Association this was a bar to the settlement of the question, but took no steps whatever for its removal. But were one set of merchants to suffer a great loss in consequence of the misconduct of a totally different set of men ? What was the effect of this on the trade with Java ? He would satisfy the House of the importance of the trade by stating that our trade with Java, in the article of cotton alone, was, in 1835, 115,0001b5. of cotton, while that of the Dutch was 72,0001b5., ours being seven eighths of the whole ; hut in 1838 the case was much reversed, the trade then being 695,0001b5., but our imports to Java were only 270,000, being but one-third instead of seven-eighths of the whole. In 1837 the Dutch issued a new tariff, by which augmented duties of 25 per cent. were placed on British imports, which was the sole result of the interference of the Noble Lord. The Hon. Gentleman then read extracts from the treaty, and proceeded. On the south coast the Dutch had in 1835 raised the duties to seven per cent. on the impor tations of goods from Singapore, and now they had pro hibited them altogether. They had also concluded a treaty with the native Princes, which had almost en tirely excluded British goods. Then with regard to Sumatra, the trade of which was of great impertance to Singapore, the Dutch had concluded a treaty with the native powers, excluding many British manufactures, and laying an eeiormous duty upon salt ; and another of the native powers had complained that unless he were supported by elle British, he must succumb to Dutch interference. The consequence of all this had been an enormous decrease in the importation of British goods into Sumatra. Encroachment had followed encroach• ment on the part of the Dutch, and our trade hid become rests ii ited in ell parts of the Eastern Archipelago. Ho knew not what hopes the Noble Lord intended to hold out, but he trusted they would be realized in a mere efficient. manner than those formerly held out had been. The Hon. Member concluded by moving-- " That an hull-able Address be presented to her Majesty praying that she will be graciously pleased to direct that there be laid before this House, copies of all corn. munications from' British merchants addressed to the Board of Coateer or the Foreign Office, on the subject of the British trade with Java, with the answers to them, from the • - year 1832 to the year 1`839 Also—Copies of any communications on the same sub ject from tlie Foreign Office to the Board of Control, and from the - Board of Control to the Directors of the East India Company, with the answers, during the same period t. Also—Copies of any communications from British . merchants, or from the authorities in Sin capore or el where, addressed to the Foreign 011 ice, on the subject of any interference with British or native trade to tae island of Sumatra, or throughout the Eastern Ar eb ipelago." Sir E. K N,ATCHBULL seconded the motion. Lord PAL, MERSTON had no intention of °Grime any oppositiora to the motion, and therefore he did not feel himself e eal'ied upon to follow the Hon. Gentleman through all hi s details, although he must say that it ap peared to hirni that the lion. Gentleman had very im perfectly Linde rstood what had passed on the subject ; but as a goner al remark he would call the attention of the House to the course pursued on those subjects in general by the political party to which the Hon. Gen tleman belonge because they at one time came down to the House r aid accused the Government of apathy, indifference, al id inattention to the Commer;:ial interests of the count! y in not enforcing against every country in the world, the different claims for redress of individuals who. considered themselves aggrieved ; and when at last the British Government, having exhausted every means of - remonstrance and negotiation, ,thought it their duty to ettake strong measures to obtain redress from Foreign - Powers, who were the first to come dawn to the House ; Ind turn round and accuse them of rash ness, want of f aresight, and precipitation ? Why, those very gentleine a who before had accused them of apathy and indifferenc s. Ha meant that as a general observa tion with rega rd to this motion. There were, as he un derstood the I feel. Gentleman, two grounds of accusa tion against ti e Dutch Government. Ist. That they had not adhered to the stipulations of the Treaty of 1824, by which it had been agreed,-with regard to the subjects and ships of the two nations, that the duties to be levied es a the subjects and ships of foreign nations, should be double those levied on the ships and subjects of the nation in which the port was situated. I hat complaint had been remedied. The stipulations o f tile treaty had not been observed in the Dutch tariff, hut on a representation being made on the subject, negotiations had ensued, which ended in the adoption. .of a tariff, by which the stipulations of the treaty had toeen observed as regarded Java and its de pendencies. The Hon. Gentleman said that the parties concen led had not derived all the benefits from :hat change w hich they anticipated, which he believed to be the cast a ; because, in the apportionment of the duty accordire s to the provisions of the treaty, although it had been di: ;minished on some articles, it had been in creased on o'a hers. With regard to the other point, the British Goviernment had certainly construed the treaty in a manner' which led them to consider that the duty should depei id upon the origin of the goods, and not upon the cot entry of the ships in which they were im ported ; but that was a mere matter of intetpretation, and was, con te.quently, not so clear as the other ground of complaint„ .and when it was stated to the Duteli Go vernment t'nat such was the interpretation placed upon the treaty by the British Government, the Dutch Go vernment stater 1, that so far from that being the inter pretation whiith had been hitherto placed upon it, the East India C, impany had within their territories, imme diately on the ratification of the treaty, adopted the interpret etion put upan it by the Dutch Government. He ,'found, on application to the East India Compan y that such was the case, and that they did not feel tht enselves called upon to alter their tariff ; and such being the case, he felt himself precluded from pressing that in te rpretation any further on the attention of the Dutch Go vernment. On this subject, when pro duced, the paper 's would speak for themselves. With regard to the et croachments of the Dutch authorities in the Indian sees, he was not aware that the case had been hitherto b naught under his attention. It was per fectly true tba.e the Government of Java had been ex tending their c' anquests, but that was not in violation of the treaty. By the treaty it was stipulated that neither party should ma doe any new conquests without the sanc tion of the Gov ernments at home ; and on application to the Court of the Hague, he had found that the con quests of the (3 overnor of Java had been sanctioned by the Dutch Gov ernment at home, and that, conse quently, there - was no ground for making any complaint on that sut,ject. He felt quite assured that he should he able to offer a satisfactory explanation of every one of these points when the papers should be produced. The motioa was then agreed to. MARRIAGE ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Mr. LAN GDALE felt it necessary to address a few observations t o the House regarding the Act for regu lating Marriae :es in England. By that Act there were two modes by which marriage might be contracted ; one by which, on etpplication to the Registrar, a certificate was granted in which it was only necessary to state where the ma Tinge was to be solemnized ; and by the other, which was by licence, the parties could only be married at some place of worship within the district in which one of the parties desirous of beingmarried resided; but by a rceent legal decision, it appeared that in the first case it was also necessary for the parties to be mar ried in a place of worship situated within the district in which they resit led. Nov it so happened that frequently there was no pla ate of worship belonging to the religion professed by the e parties within the district where they w a a t s, th t e hat it m eg an is y tr D arts sse o n fli te c r e s resided. were obliged be !I b m e se m citi a e rr n i c e e d without any religious ceremony whatever ; and with re gard to the Catholics, who were obliged to be married by their own , olergy, they were placed in a worse situation than: they were before the passing of the Act. He pre posed to remedy this by introducing a Bill enacteq ; that no Registrar shalt give a certificate tar the solemnization of marriage out of his own (listrc t, but if the parties proved to him that there was no ;dace of worship within that district of the persuasion to which they belonged, that then he should grant a certificate for the solemnization of the marriag e the place of worship belonging, to the re ligion professc d by the parties nearest to the district in which the p'zties resided. He, therefore moved for leave to bring is a Bill to explain and amend an Act of 6 and 7Williaaa IV., iutituled an Act for Marriages iu E ng l and :' in 'N u l l re. Bill,Go U b u L t ß t t I , J o R u would t e n a o u t t o oppose ebsrsianrgy i i ng n lcoisl;iting on the, subject. Mr. SHAW thought if the law were changed for the future it might, perhaps, affect the validity of mar riages heretofore contracted. He merely threw this out as a suggestion. Dr. LUSHINGTON said that although parties might be punished for violating the Act, the violation of the Act did not affect the validity of the marriage. If he had the slightest conception that the Bill would affect the validity of marriages formerly contracted, knowing the tremendous effects that might be pro duced from any doubts of that sort, he should have felt it his duty to come down to the House and state that effect, let the Bill have proceeded from what part of the House it might. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he thought it was certainly necessary that no doubt should be thrown on former marriages by any provision of the Bill. He therefore wished that the words " residing in or near," should be more exactly defined, as the word " near " was too vague in its present form. He had, however, no objectian to the bringing in of the Bill. Leave was given to bring in the Bill. DEFINITION OF THE FRANCHISE (IRE LAND). Mr. PIGOT moved for leave to bring in a Bill " to remove doubts with respect to the qualification of voters -in Ireland, for the election of Members to serve in Parliament, and to create a Tribunal of Appeal." The Hon. Gentlemen then proceeded to say that the object of the Bill he was about to introduce, was first to ascertain and settle by a distinct definition the law with respect to the value of tenements to which the Reform Act had annexed the franchise in Ireland ; and, secondly, to establish a Court of Appeal corresponding, in a considerable degree, to that which was to be established is this country. With respect to the first of these objects doubts had existed from the period almost immediately following the passing of the Reform Act, which rendered it indispensably necessary that the law should be settled on the subject. Differ ences of opinion had arisen on the question among those who had charge of the administration of the law, and those differences still continued to exist. That the construction which some had put on the Act was op posed to the intention of at least many of those who had taken an active part in the framing of it, and passing it through both Houses of Parliament, was a matter which, he believed, had been abundantly proved. In deed the very phraseology of the Act created an absolute impossibility of reconciling the construction put upon it, with the manner in which it had been framed. It follows in its provisions, and almost in its very terms the section of the Act passed in the year 1829, and which accompanied the Act for the relief of Roman Catholics. That Act contained two distinct sections, prescribing, in the first place, what the claimant for the franchise must prove ; and, secondly, what the Judge was to do in examining into the claim. In each of those sections, after direct ing that the claimant was to bring forward his title, the Statute went on to say, that he should prove that the property which he held, and out of which he was to re gister, was of a value which a solvent tenant could ply over and above that rent. In a schedule to that Sta tute there is an oath which is prescribed as part of the process of registration, which it would be incumbent on the claimant to take. After swearing that be was a possessor of a certain amount of property, the oath contained a distinct passage to the effect that a solvent. and responsible tenant could afford to pay the amount for which the claimant registered over and above the rent.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Thus there were three passages in the Act which contained the provision to which he had alluded. Then in a distinct schedule of the Act there was a prescribed form of an oath which is to be administered to the jury who are to try the claim, for, by the Act of Parliament, whenever a claim was rejected by the original tribunal, he was en titled to appeal not to the Judges, but to a jury over which a Judge presided. Tee oath in question was to the effect that the jury should well and truly try whether the claimant had the property in respect of which he put forward his claim. Instead, however, of directing that, he was to establish a value which a good and responsible tenant could afford to pay over and above the rent ; he was directed to establish that he hail a beneficial interest in the property according to the value prescribed by the Act, which value is a beneficial interest to the amount of 10/. per annum. An oath is prescribed in a schedule to the Reform Act corresponding to the oath pre,cribi d by the schedule of the former stet Lite. In the Act of 1829 the juror's oath is prescribed in a distinct schedule ; and what is the nature of that oath ? In that oath no form is prescribed by which that particular cviestion at issue is to be tried by the jury. There was a variance between the freehold and leasehold tenures in the two Acts. Great difficulties thus arose, and though he was far from wishing to impeach the inte grity or capacity of those who had charge of the admi nistration of the law in Ireland, ho could not but feel that when the law relating to the franchise was left un defined, it was impossible to say what results might fol low.—(Hear, hear.) No one could deny that it was of the utmost impertan.:e that the question should be finally settled, and he certainly thought that the pre sent utatc of the law, as it regarded the franchise, was a dishonour to the nation. In 1835 an attempt was made to introduce a Bill on the subject, but it was not sent up to the other House. In 1836 a measure was also introduced into that House, but did not pass into a law. That last measure had been introduced by a Noble and lamented Friend of his (Lord Ce ments), who enjoyed the esteem of every one, and who certainly could not be accused of any desire to intro. duce a measure which could do injustice to any parties. In the Bill which he (Mr. Pigot) was about to intro duce, he proposed to remedy the evil to which he had alluded. Another portion of the Bill related to the tribunal of appeal. In the Bill which the Noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonies, was about to introduce for England, the appeal was to be made to three bar risters ; and a very serious question arose with respect to the establishment of a similar tribunal in Ire land. The laws in both countries are essentially and almost distinctly the same as it as regarded real property, on which to a large extent the franchise depended. It would, the re f ore , b e certa i nly most de sirable, with a view to securing en un if orm i ty of deci sion in both countries, that they should have one com mon tribunal. He would, therefore, propose that two barristers should be appointed for Ireland, as a court of appeal—that they should sit in Dublin—and that they should have the assistance of one of the three Judges of Appeal in this country. If the proposed system would work well for England he thought that they had every reason to expect that it would week equally well in Ireland ; and he, therefore, begged leave to submit it to the consideration of the House. Mr. SH AW wished to know by whom the tribunal was to be appointed ? Mr. PICOT—By the Speaker (as we understood). Mr. LITTON objected to the provision of the Bill of his Hon. and Learned Friend. He believed that under any circumstances the Judges of the land would form the fittest tribunal for trying cases of ap , peal.—(Hear, hear.) He was also of opinion that the very title of the Bill was an insult to the adminis tration of justice, for it was introduced on the supposi tion that the law was at present unsettled as regarded the beneficial interest of claimants. It appeared to him, however, that the law on the subject had been definitely arranged by the decision of the l Judges, who had come to the opinion that the beneficial interest was such as a solvent tenant could pay over and above the rent. If, therefore, the decision of ten Judges to two be the law of the land, he was justified in asserting that the present Bill was an insult upon the administration of justice.—(No, no.) An Hon. Member said that was not the decision of the Judges, but he asserted that it was ; and if the Hon. and Learned Member for Dublin had been in his place, he was prepared to show that that Hon. and Learned Member had mis-stated the judgment of the Judges. If they thought that the mi nority of the Judges were not bound to abide by the decision of the majority, he would refer Hon. Members to ")If opinions , pt ihneio thatin House the ou t o the m did minority m o a ry were nj i o t _ t o the letter which had Yu been written on th a t very s b- i r e it c y t ....4 by Chief Justice Bushe to Lord Denm an , and his reply, bound e i n s g t 00 f t g h i a v,, t e R t we h aa e yd the wwa e think it too great a trespass upon its time, he would read the correspondence with great pleasure. [The Hon. and Learned Member then read the letter of Chief Justice Bushe, with the answer of Lord Den man, in which the Noble and Learned Lord stated that the Judges of England were of opinion that the minority were bound by the opinions of the majority.] The Irish Judges, cn the receipt of that letter met in Easter Term, and again decided by a majority of 10 to 2, that the same rule should be observed in Ireland. Now, he would remind the House of the case of the unfortunate Mr. Frost, and the deci sion which had been come to on that point, In chief Justice Tindal's letter to Lord Notmanby, the principle that the minority were bound bv the decision of the majority, was fully borne out. Hon. Gentlemen could not after such instances venture to say that the Bill now before the House was anything but an insult upon the administration of justice in Ireland. He contended that if the law was thus decided and laid down, the House should at one reject the Bill. Under these circumstances, although he did not mean to divide the House against the Bill on the present occasion, lie should give his humble o o sition to it . If the Hon. and Lea r ned M em b er forp Clonmel proposed openly and fairly to alter the Reform Bill, let him do so, but let him not in that underhand way atterept a blow at the administration of justice in Ireland. Sir DENHAM N ORREYS feared.that the Bill of his Hon. and Learned Friend would leave th franchise in Ireland still in doubt and obscurity. Tile same harrassiug, and vexations' and contra dictory evidence would be resorted to, and the tenant r y wo uld still be inclined to consider their land lords as their enamies and their opponents.—( Hear, he a r.) H e regretted that the Hon. and Learned Gentlemen who hod devoted himself to the considera tion of Irish affairs with a zeal which he had never seen evinced by any other Solicitor-Geeeral for Ireland, had not grappled fully with the difficuties of the case. Now that the Poor-law Act had been introduced into Ire land he would suggest to the Hon. and Learned Gen- , tleman whether it would not be advis.lble to adopt some standard of rating under that Bill, and thereby do away with the doubts and contradictory decisions which had so frequently occurred on the subject of the fran chise.—(Hear, hear.) He merely threw out these re marks for the consideration of his Hon. and Learned Friend. Mr. LUCAS did not think the present stage of the measure the best fitted for discussion, but he would just observe that the mode of determining the franchise was a question of the utmost importance to the elec tors, the candidates, and the country at large. He fully concurred in the observations of the Ho nourable Member for Mallow, and he feared that the Honourable and Learned Member for Clonmel was about to give his sanction to a definition of value which would create mischief and occa sion injury to all parties in Ireland.—(Hear.) The clause opened the door as widely as possible to temptation on one hand and to intimidation on the other. It would not be possible for the Right Hon. Gentleman to propose in his Bill any means of fairly ascertaining what was called the beneficial interest. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that as far as he un derstood the letter of Chief Justice Bushe to Lord Denman, the first inquiry was what was the course of the Judges in England in criminal cases when points were 7 . 'aserved for the consideration of the twelve Judges? The second question was what was the course usually pursued in cases of appeal from the Assistant- Barristers ? In the first place, Lord Denman gave a positive answer, which agreed entirely with that given by Chief Justice Tindal ; but he (Lord J. R.) thought that in regard to the second part of the question the Learned Lord did not give any answer whatever. The Learned Lord did not at all touch the question of the franchise, in which the House was more con cerned than the Courts of Law. He would not assent to any settlement of the question of the franchise, which would leave to the Judges of England and Ireland the power of determining who were to be voters for Members of that House, without reference to the opinions of the House it-elf. With respect to the question of the bene ficial interest, the decision of the Judges seemed to him to be opposed to the intentions of Parliament in passing the I.w under which the decisions were given. In the House of Lords, the Duke of Richmond and the Marquis of Lansdowne stated their views of a beneficial interest, in a sense quite cpposed to that of the Judges; and there was another authority, very soon after the passing of the Reform Act, when the question of the franchise was tried before a Committee of the House on the question of the election for Monmouth county. In that case, the decision of the barrister against the voter was put aside, and the vote of Laurence Farren wis declared to be a good vote. Supposing that the Judges in Ireland had been unanimous, he did not think that would be sufficient to take the question of the Parliamentary franchise out of the hands of that House; nor could he see why the House should be less ready on the present occasion to determine what its own views of the franchise were. It was the object of the measure of his Learned Friend to bring into effect the original inten tions of the Reform Sill.—(Hear.) An Hon. Friend of his behind him had said, and he thought with good grounds, that there should be a certain instead of an un certain test, so that there should be no doubt upon one side or the other. He thought that in a case so important as the claim fur a vote for a representative in Parliament, the law ought not to be pushed beyond a fair interpretation. He thought, however, that the interpretation ought not to be such as would reduce the franchise too much within the limits to which it was the intention of the Reform Act to extend it; and he thought that, • from all the facts before him, he could advise his Learned Friend to go further than he had done. Mr. SHAW did not mean to offer any objection to the introduction of the Bill, but be could not help protesting against some of the doctrines of the Noble Lord who had just sat down. Ile wished the questions submitted by Chief Justice Bushe to Lord Damian, being in themselves per fectly distinct, should not be confounded. He would ask, did the Noble Lord mean to say that the judicial tribunals of this country were not bound by the decision of the majority of the Judges? As a Judge of an Inferior Court, he would just as readily make a decision against a statute as against an opinion of a ma jority of the Judges. He agreed with the Noble Lord that it was right for the House to retain in its own hands the power of deciding all questions relating to the election of its Members ; but the House having passed an Act of Parliament, must leave to the Judges of the land the discretion of construing that Act. He had the greatest possible objection to the measure, arid the time at which it was :introduced.—( Loud cheering.) Nothing could be more unfair or uocandid than the manner of its introduction. Toe objection made by the other side to the Bill of his Noble Friend the Member for North Lan e zshire, was that it contained no provision for regulating the franchise. The same objection applied to the Bais (:.f the Hon. and Learned Solicitor-General for Ireland. Ha brought in two Bilis—one of which hsd relation to the registration alone, as was the ca..e with his Noble Friend's Bill. Then the Hon. and Learned Gentleman brought in another and distinct Bill on the subject of the franchise. —( Hear, hear.) That was not fair conduct. It convinced hint that neither of those Bills was brought in for the sake of itself, but that they were both brought in for the sake of impeding the Bill of his Noble Friend.-- ( Cheers from the Opposition.) There could have been no objection to this Bill, as a Franchise Bill, if it. had been brought in separately ; but if it was to effect so great an improvement, why was it not brought in sooner? If it was important to regulate the question of appeal, why, he would ask, was not that regulation put into the Registra tion Bill ? Why should it be coupled with another mea sure that was likely to ensure its defeat ? To the provi sions of this Bill he had the greatest objection, as he be lieved sleet it was impossible to give so good an appeal as the We which at present existed in Ireland, if it was only p-operly carried out. He thought it far better to give die decision in these cases to the Assistant-Barristers, with an appeal to the Judges, than to adopt tny other course. In conclusion, he must rrotest against a Bill like the pre sent being brought forward at the present period of the Session. Mr. MORGAN J. O'CONNELL hoped the Bill would be showed to go on, as he was convinced the more it was discussed the more the House would be convinced that it carried cut the true intention of the Reform Bill. Mr. WAKLE Y expressed a hope that the Noble Lord would reconsider the subject, with a view of adopting the suggestion thrown out by the Honourable Member for Mallow. The Noble Lord in the first part of his speech had stated his conviction that the question ought to be settled, and it was not consistent with the high bearing of the Noble Lord to shrink from introducing that which he believed would put an cod to all dispute, merely because he was afraid it might not be adopted. He trusted the Noble Lord would come manfully forward and adopt the suggestion of the Hon. Member for Mallow, leaving those who opposed him to bear the contumely they deserved. He trusted the Bill would net be brought in that night, but that the Hen. and Learned Gentleman would delay its introduction, for the purpose of intro ducing a clause to meet the suggestion which had been thrown out. Mr. PIG OT replied. Ile must deprecate the state ments that had been made by the Hon. and Learned Mem ber for Coleraine against the Judges of Ireland, because they had acted according to what their own judgments dictated was the proper course to pursue. The character of the Judges of Ireland was their best shield from such im putations, and he thought it would have been far better taste to hare refrained from them. Leave was then given to bring in the Bill. On the motion of Mr. G. PA LME R, the House wetit into Committee, and leave was given to bring in a Bill to continue the Act for preventing Timber Ships loading upon deck. CLERGY RESERVES (CANADA). Lord JOHN RUSSELL, in bringing before the House a Bill for the settlement of the Clergy Reserve question, said it was unnecessary for him to state the evils which the state of that question had inflicted upon Ca nada, in consequence of the uncertainty in which the ques tion had been left under the Act of 1791, or the disputes and dissensions which had arisen in the provinces for the want of a permanent settlement of the question. With all these points the douse was familiar. The only explana tion necessary was with regard to the present state of the question, and one or two provisions of his Bill, which differed from that which had received the sanction of the Legislature of Upper Canada. The Governor-General of Canada, acting upon his general instructions, recom mended the settlement of that question upon his arrival in the province. He found strong objections entertained by one party against the funds arising from the sale of the Clergy Reserves being appropriated to any other than Church purposes, while on the other hand there was an other equally strong party who were very anxious that those funds should be applied to the purposes of education. To reconcile those different parties be proposed a Bill which bad received the sanction of a considerable majority, both of the Legislative Council and the Assembly, belonging to the Church of England. That was the man ner in which the measure had obtained the assent of the Legislature of Upper Canada. When the Bill arrived in this country doubts were entertained whether the Colonial Legislature had not exceeded their powers, and the House of Lords had caused questions to be put to the Judges, their answers to which showed that they had exceeded their powers, aeci therefore the Royal Assent could riot be given to it. Under these circumstances it became necessary to intreduce a Bill into Parliament to settle the question. In seine respects he could not follow all the provisions ap proved of by the Assembly.—(Hear.) The general principle of the Bill was that the whole of the resources should be sold, that one-fourth of the sum so raised should be appropriated to the Church of Eng land, one-f ourt h to t h e Church of Scotland, and the re. mainder to Protestant Dissenters of all denominations. The Judges were asked other questions, and in their answers they declared, in the first place, that the term Protestant clergy did not apply exclusively to the clergy of the Church o f E ng l and—that it included the clergy of the Church o f S cotland, and they further stated they did not intend to say that the ministers of other Protestant Churches were not included. As far as the Bill passed in, Upper Canad a , it p rov id e d f or t h e c l ergy c f the Churches of England and Scotland, they conformed to the spirit of the Act 1791 ; but the Legislature of Upper Canada went further, and applied a part of the funds so to be raised to the Catholic faith, which, it appeared, was intended to be excluded fro:n any participation by the Act of 1791. The e,qh&ic clergy in Uppper Canada were pieced upon a different footing front their brethren in Lower Canada, who wtre provided for by tithes. That was one reason why they should participate in these funds; another reason was that the Roman Catholics had shown themselves very much at tached to the Crown of England during the late disturb ances, therefore the exclusion under a new law wculd be considered invidious, and but a poor recompense for their faith and loyalty under very trying circumstances, and very few i n t h e P rovince were f oun d t o o b jec t to it. There were some elaums in the Bill received from Canada it would be inconvenient to follow. The first was the formation of a Commission for taking a new census of those belonging I to the Churches of England and Soothed, and, in four to other deno m i nat i on:. years aft er , one o f t h ose belonging Ile thought this question had better be settled once for all. In his opinion, taking the census at different times would only produce great rivalry and strife. Another provision of the law which he considered rather objectionable, was that which regulated the mode in which the sums were to be disposed of to the variowr Churches. He proposed that the one-fourth to be given to the Church of England should be paid to the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, of which the Archbishop of Canterbury was at the head—which was a body that raised very considerable sums for main taining public worship in the colonies—they were a body in which the Church of England had faith. The other fourth he proposed should be given to the Presbyte rian Synod representing the Church of Scotland in the province. With regard to the remainder, as there was a difficulty in defining the various denominations which had been recognised by law, he proposed that the distribution of the funds belonging to them should be left to the Go vernor and Legislative Council. If those lands were sold the great objection of the want of cultivation—of the want of roads, and of the means of communication between one farm and the other would cease, and that which had been a bone of contention, and the source of much discord for many years, would be finally settled. Of course he con sidered it entirely out of the question that they should establish either the Church of England or the Church of Scotland with any superiority over other denominations. The only question was, how this fund should be distributed io that manner most likely to promote peace, and so put an end to discontent am!. disturbance. With these views he would move for leave. to bring in a Bill to provide for the sale of the Clergy Reserves in the province of Upper Canada, and for the di'stribution of the proceeds thereof. Mr. GOULBURN asked if the Catholic Clergy would be included in the Bill ? Lord J. RUSSELL—Yes. Mr. GOULBURN said the Judges had decided that they came not within the words of the Act of 1791. Was it the intention of the Noble Lord, then, that they should have a share of the funds under this Bill, or merely the provision which they had long received ? Lord J. RUSSELL said it was not proposed to declare or explain the enactments of the Act of 1791, but to make entirely a new legislation on the subject.—( Heir, hear.) Of course, the distribution as to other sects would be pro portioned to their number. There was to be no fixed pro vision for any Churches but those of England and Scotland. Air. GOULBURN begged it to be understood that his objection arose, not from unwillingness to agree to nny provision for the Catholic clergy, but from a belief that by the Act of 1791 they were expressly excluded from the provision arising out of these funds. Mr. PLUM PTRE concurred in hoping that the pro. vision, if any, for the Catholic clergy in Canada, would be made out of other funds. Lard J. RUSSELL had no doubt these funds were not meant in 1791 for other than Protestant clergy, but the lands remained quite wild and useless, and the intentions of the Parliament of 1791 having thus proved inoperative, Parliament now could alter the destination of the lands, Mr. G OULB URN could not admit the justice of the Noble Lord's reasoning. Mr. L ABOUCEIE RE was apprehensive that the Right Hon. Gentleman's remarks were calculated to raise an unfounded prejudice against the Bill. The Parliament of 1791 had carefully introduced a provision, empowering the Legislature of Canada to alter the management of the lands. Mr. GOUL BURN still was not satisfiel Mr. PAKINGTON was so impressed with the impor tance of this question being settled, that he would not oppose the Bill now. But he feared he should not be able to assent to it hereafter in all its provisions. He feared that if these funds were so divided among different and r:umerous sects, they would be utterly inadequate to the support of sound religious instruction in Canada. Besiles, the Church of Romo was far wealthier in Canada than that of England. Leave was given to bring in the Bill. SUTTON COLDFIELD SCHOOL. Major CHETWYND moved for a certain return rela tive to this school, the former return not having been sa tiafactory. Sir E. WILMOT said he knew the Master of •the school, wit.) would not object, if required by the Houst to make the return, but as he deemed it much too inqmisi tor]al, lie should oppose it. After a few words from Mr. WA KLE Y, Au HON. MEMBER moved that the House be coup ted, when Oleic being but 39 Members present, th e House adjourned at Twelve o'Clock. HENRY VINCENT. PETITION OE THE MEMBERS OF THE RADICAL CUE. The following is the petitiOn presented to the House of Commons, by Mr. Sergeant Talfourd, on Wednesday 7. The Petition of the undersigned Members of the Radi cal Club, Humbly showeth, That Mr. Henry Vincent was convicted at the last Assizes held at Monmouth of conspiring, to effect changes in the Government by ill gal means, and for an unlawful assembly. That the Special Jury " recommended Mr. Vincent to mercy,, on account of the long imprisonment he had undergone. " That, in consequence of such recommendation, tb e Learned Judge sentenced Mr. Vincent to an imprisonment of twelve months from the day of his conviction, foux months of his previous sentence being then unexpi red. That, notwithstanding the merciful intentions of the Learned Judge and the Jury, the said Henry Vincent has been sent from Monmouth to the General Penitentiary at Nlillhank, and is there subjected to the rigorous disci' 'line of that prison. That his respectable clothing has been taken from 'aim. That he is clothed in the prison dress. That he is sub jected to exist upon the prison diet. That, as your l'eti tioners are informed, be is shut up day and night in a cell, excepting a short period in every twenty-four he ears. That his books have been taken from him, and he is de barred the use of pens, ink, and paper. That he is cut off from all intercourse with his reTectablc friends rind relatives, except as the following extract from the printed regulations of the gaol allows:— " That upon coming to the Penitential) , he may 'trite one letter to his friends. After having been in the Pe nitentiary four months, he may write again ; and so 0... n to the end of his imprisonment, a letter or visit every 'four months. fie may receive a letter or visit every :four months." That to the preceding regulation is added a notice in the following words, viz ;—" The permission to write and receive letters is given to the prisoners for' the purpose of enabling them to keep up a connexion with, the respectable part of their friends, to whom it is hoped they may be reunited when they shall be restored to so ciety, and not that they may bear the news of the day, with which they can have no concern." That the words in the preceding extract show?. as plainly as it is possible words can show, that the Peniten tiary discipline was and is intended for depraved persons, who have committed the most degrading crimes, and are connected with oth er s i m il ar l y depraved persons, and not for persons convicted of offences which are of a political nature, and whose connexions in life are not clegr,--cled criminals, That Mr. Vincent has no such connexions. That it cannot be necessary to his being restored to so ciety at the end of his imprisonment, that he should un dergo Penitentiary discipline ; and that your petitioners believe that it is unusual to subject persons convicted of such offences to Penitentiary discipline. Your petition ers therefore pray that your Honourable House will pleas,.! to take the allegations contained in this petition into your serious consideration, and cause such steps to be taken as may lead to the removal of Mr. Vincent from the General Penitentiary to some other prison, in which the rules may not subject him to the restraints and privations of which your petitioners complain. JOSEPH HUME, 6, Bryanston-square. FRANCIS PLACE, No. 21, Brompton , square. H. S. CHAPMAN, 2, Tillotson-place. &c. &c. &c. JOHN THOROGOOD. To the Honourable the Commons of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled, The Petition of John Thorogood, of Chelmsford, in the county of Essex, shoemaker, Showetli,—That your petitioner dissents from the doe trines and ritual of the Church of England as by law established, and holds it incompatible with Christian liberty, that the expenses of a religious service to which he is unable to conform should be levied upon him. That your petitioner, following his conscientious convic tions, feels it his imperative duty to entreat your Honour able House not to grant to ecclesiastics any of the public money, so as to enable them to extend the means of their persecuting power—a power so contrary to the Christian religion, and of which they ought to be deprived by an immediate separation of the Church from th© State --a power which has been exercised towards your petitioner in a most unrighteous and tyrannical manner, by imprisoning him for life for refusing to pay five shillings and sixpence towards the repair of a Church to which he does not belong. That your petitioner respectfully trusts your Honourable House will act like an assembly of honourable men, and not treat his incarceration and sutforin,gs of sixteen months' continuance, in a damp and unhealthy prison, with unfeeling levity and derision, such conduct ill becoming an Assembly of Legislators—Legislators, some of whose ar eestors suffered on the scaffold rather than sacrifice their religious principles. Your petitioner uses this plainness of speech towards your Honourable House, hoping you will seriously deli berate and prevent oppression and persecution like his being ever again inflicted on any of her Mjesty's faithful subjects. Chelmsford, May, 1840. The June Number of " Colburn's New Monthly Magazine and Humorist," edited by Theodore Hook, Esq., will contain the following interesting articles :—Fathers and Sims, by the Editor, illustrated by Phiz.—Maxims and Maxim-Mon r,,ers.—The Left-handed Marriage, by the lion. Mrs. Erskine Norton.—Piron ; or the Small Mistake.—Sketches from the Note Book of a Physician.—A Chapter on Gastronomy.—A West Country Crusade, by George Raymond, Esq.—The Wi dow Married, by Mrs. trollope, concluded._The Life and Times of Peter Priggins.—The Progress of Secret Poisoning. —Literature of the Month, fcc. Charles Kean has returned to England in excel lent health. He makes his first appearance as Hamlet, (at Mon day, at the Haymarket. PRINCE'S TIIEA TR E.—A Night in Granada was played last evening, and Fidelid postponed until to-night in consequence of her Majesty, who wishes to see Kreutzsr's opera, honouring the theatre with her presence. FISHING IN LOCH FI N E.—l record this evening's fishing, because it will, I doubt not, be long remem bered by th e wor th y h ostess of Cairndow :-22 cod-fish, of , frAn 6 to 361bs. each ; Id haddock, fair size ; 25 conger eels, of all si.'es; 30 whiting; It) bream ; turbot; . 7 skate 'en hake. This was a clay's fishing of two persons, in boat, in a narrow arm of Loeh Fy n e—unattended ,a , e ' -'s: n c t cr i t a : ir Y a a t lad to assist in the baiting—yet it will apper I t to the inn of Cairndow, there was not a fish r be I=ad b a u il t e t s h e e lf l ) l g hacl o ; ffe a r n e ( ( l i if a n t y h k sum fur a yti,:ftr3acr:;:(koi nut iitvhet been I,mocurcd. Sportviian Irclund and Sco tl and. EVENING EDITIONI___, MISSES iLEMING. Copy of Treasury Minute, dated I2th May, 1840 :-- My Lords have before them the following letter:— " Barochan, by Paisley, sth May, 18 40 • " Sir,—Our brother having got an accession of fortune, which will enable him to provide for us comfortably with out aid of our pensions, we therefore now resign them from this date. " We remain, &c., (Signed) " ELIZABETH FLEMING. CATHERINE FLEMINC. JANE FLEMING. " The Right Hon. F. T. Baring." Inform the Miss Flemings that my Lords accept with much satisfaction the resignation of their pensions. It appears that pensions of 491. per annum have been payable to e a c h o f t h ese t h ree l a di es , h av i ng b e en granted to them in 1792, in cons id erat i on o f th e s e rvices cf th eir any late father, wh o , a f ter b e i ng m •years in the army, be" came Colonel of a Vol unteer R eg i ment , an d an active Ma" gistrate in troubl e s ome ti mes , Their Lordships thi n k i t d ue to t h ese l a dies to reco rd has their sense of the hi g h an d h onoura bl e f ee li n g which induced them to r es i gn pens i ons grante d un d e r such c!r' cumstances, and they desi re th a t a co py o f this minute be laid before the Ho u s e o f C ommons . [An example 4rorthy of imitation.—En, Son.] THE MARKETS COUNTRY CORN MARKETS. e ale' I Wheat. i Barley. Oats. I Beans. • , Per Quarter. s. to S. •S.to I. ft tO S. la.to s. .- ., 43 Boston B 42 rajntree 65 74 23 40 ,96 3. 26 40 .. 45 Brighton 6B 7° 33 45 27 22 42 4 ° 46 41 Cambridge — 67 —3;) 26 41 '''' a Chiche,ter 65 72 38 44 28 29 43 44 41 0 Dunmow ,67 73 35 42 20 34 36 42 42 „„, Grantham 6B 70 28 35 20 30 4 9 Grimsby 5B 70 35 39 22 26 42 44 ''''. 46 Hailsham 6B 72 26 32 22 22 4b •-• ...., Hitchin 64 70 32 44 24 33 25 3 11 ...,--. 43 Ipswich 62 70 36 32 0 4 23 38 40 .i• Lewes 67 72 43 22 28 34 46 --„ 46 Lynn 66 72 32 34 21 8042 44 48 ... Maidstone P9 76 36 39 26 52 40 5 0 ""-,,, 44 " Norwich Petworth Rom ford 56 74 34 42 22 32 36 44 3" 40 Sandwich 56 77 34 43 27 34 33 45 35 44 Thetford VVisbech Witham (35 76 22 40 20 33 36 40 5 3 • 44 46 Yarmouth 62 70 33 35 26 32 38 401 4. LIVERPOOL CORN MARKET.—May '2 to 1, • ; 04 ) WHEAT, English, White, per 70Ib. Red 9 0 " o 6 • Scotch, Welsh, and Manx -i 3 / 4 Irish, White 6 0 " 3 6 ------------ Red 5 5 1 1 3 Foreign OATS, English, Welsh, and Scotch, per 4ti 3 3 4 1 0 Irish Foreign . .. ... ~‘ 4 Ilaittr.v, English, Malting, per Imp. qu arter ...... ... • , •i 3 ' 4IS —. Scotch and Irish, pet Nibs. Feeding a t 4 0 51 Beitr,,i, English, per Imperial quarter 47 0 0 44 Irish, &c Foreign l'L46 asc, Englisn, per Imperial quarter 4l 0 , 4 4 0 ---Foreign FLotrit, English per 28015. 34 0 5,,i 0 L . ----- I OATNIc:AL, English and Irish, per 2401 b, :l4 0 - 4 - 0 6 I N I , IAN Coto:, prr 4801 b. ... ; ,,8 0 .„, 0 Rye, per Imperial quarter • 34 0 7 0 MALT, per Imperial quarter HULL CORN MARKET. -'Oh Wheat, White (per Quarter) (Zs. bas. cts• ORed s7s. ' I. s- b Foreign k 5!:,. r a s.''' Barley, Malting .325, Ms. S s6 ' iii 3. -o '. . Grinding , 245. '23. 4 ' 29-5 " Oats, British ' ' -s. Foreign (in bond) Beans Pease, Gm' Blue and White Linseed Flour (per sacky 733 4- 405 . f Ci s: ....: 2 4 174 -3 8 : ‘:2 , 5: 5: .• ' ' : ." 5 2 4- -4 0 3 1 : Rapdseed (per I() quarters) CHELTENHAM I.iARKET S. Per Bushel. 2. d. to s.d.l Per lb. %%rhea' 7 3 89 i Beef. ....................... ...• 6trlty 4 4 50 ' Mutton, .................... Oats 4d 50 Ve a l .. ............. . ........ Beasts . rease 6 0 6 6 Lamb ___ ............ d.tc^~: 7 6 el 6 7 1° Hay 31. 10s. to .11. 10s. per ton. CANTERRURI MARKET. Wheat, '72s. to 75, • to his, to 7 08. Old— Cs. t , o , Barley, Maltinig, 375. to 425. G r • n ding.. --s• r s' Oats 495: to 245. s . Beans ----. :39s to 425. Ohl 13s. to -- Pease .12s. to —.s. Grey 4t) '' to CIIEI.MSFORD RL.RKE T Wheat, White lieu Batley Cheralier . 3S Grinding - 30 31 Mazagan ......... C l l ; 67 to 3779 1 1 Beane°aP eas e , ts ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' 1.11:0; t o 4434:511 LEEDS CORN MARKET.—May IA Ws. to %'0 -d Wheat, Norfolk and Sitablk, tiOlb. 'York. and Lincoln. 691 b. Barley, Norfolk and Suffolk —". 355• 1t ) ;,' 8 ,.; c: - - Yorkshire and Lincolnshire 913. to., • 1 3 91i. -•— Grinding Beans Oats, Potatoe —lllealing, For. —4l. to--d •.. Eng. RII. to 17. - I• Per t load Shelling 3Ss. to 393 ' r e GUILDF MARET ' Wheat. Old (Per Lo ad)) 101. ORD to '2Ol. 08. K— Nrw RV. to - • 05 449 Barley (P I (Per fir.) .) ....... 4 405. t ° 4 1 o , t‘i Grey Pease, 425. to 445. - . DEVIZgS CORN MARKET. d 5 d. 0 Par Sack. s. d. e. d. „Per Quarter. • oto ,-. First Whea• - "0 0 to 37 0 Oatc 23 0, 0 Second ...... '3l 0 14 U Beans (per sack) 2l 0 55 0 :Hint - 0 0 --. darlcy 27 0 35 0 Bread (per ga11)... I 5 We have learnt that the Queen, on hearing of the death of Captain Otway, immediately wrote in her own hand g most kind and feeling note to Sir Robert and Lady Otwav, eV pres eos affliction. a n n a ,i n ni d Piro: Such e c un e c:ii Albert's b or e in r vi tea' rivet the spontaneous s p a ffa a ec n ct d st ioo sincere n g s e y ns m pi ye p ao a i thyi s h n i n g t l her h s v r for those who are the immediate objects of such kindness, but of all who hear them. „, r of ARMY AND NAVY._ Th e J une Nvinl,--- " The Un:ted S erv i ce J ourna l , and N aval and Military A l g a " zinc," will contain, among other iap —The Duke of Wel lington.—The Turkish Fleet.—The i Ca e m r .p s aign Euglan.d s in a series of letters, by an Officer of the - Q - Lleen' g ' Wooden Walls, the Victory, No. G.—Recollections of the Lr- e. petition to the Chesapeake, and against New Orleans, in the }Tars 1814-15, by an old Sub.—The British. Colonies considu as military posts, by Lieutenant-Colonel Walker• — e° e ;',l tines of an Old Soldier, by his Daughter.—Memoirs of Echva Costello, K. S. F., &c.—Confessions of a Spy, collected by . _ e ' of Affghanists.n,, Officer of the Navy.—Mr. Airy, Astronomer-Royal, on the e correction of the Compa ss in iron•built ships, with dir ection, for the guidance of co mman ders of such vessels. memoirs the late General Count Alt e n, and Rear.Admirai Henryn —Letter from Colonel Napier, respecting some 'statemen ts hie last volume of the Peninsular War.—Suggestions for 5 0 0 % . ring the services of British-born seamen in time of NV ar • servatiens on the Report of the Naval and Military Consnlissl°,l, e —The Royal Military College, with an account of the last l ination, and ge nera l remar k s on the institutien.—With a-- ii a the Naval and Military Intelligence of the Month, &e. FATAL ACCIDENT AT HANSARD'S PR INI ;; ING OFTICE —Yesterday morning, between seven and e's.l. o'clock, a man named Brown, wh o was employed in some re n i pairs now in progress at Messrs. Hansard's printing -46 'T Cross-lane, Lincoln's-inn-fields, was pa ss i ng under the se 3 " ° , ing at the moment that a bri c kl a y er ' s l a b ourer wa s aseendi`The high ladder with a hod of bricks, when unfortunately one °A le. bricks felon his bead, and he instantly fell, quite "is en ; l res t, He was conveyed to King's Coll ege Hospital, in Cal'eY -8- - where lie died immediately after his arrival. mos t CAUSES OF DEAFNESS.—Amon; the a , si t prevalent p re di s p os i ng causes o f di seases o f t h e e ar, are --- " .- 0 ,, of free ventilation, exposure to damp, or ts, sudden atmthe pherical changes, three of the most fatal agents with va" c n ot a poor in our crow d e d c iti es h ave to conten d . Th e re are to few persons, however, who voluntarily exposethenssie some of these evils, a n d w h o su ff er accor di ng ly. '", n-t,stant oye play-goers, f or exampl e , are li a bl e to the l as t o f the 21), fa I mentioned e v il s , an d th ey common l y b ecome ( l ea f, of wig i f ich io have lately had severa l cases i n me pr i vate prac tice: ate( ' exposure to the c hill n i g ht winds after leaving the over-heted, atmosphere of theatres, which are never properly witilauto, being the im me di a t e cause o f t h e attack. The tame sir ho stance is noticeable i u regar d to t h e bakers, a class of T ri--,s are aro peculiarly obno x i ous t o thi s ev il , and of whom thereAd„ numerous patients constantly at the dispensary.— Curtid's ace to the Deal: PLATE.—T. COX SAVORY, Sil v erstnit ll ": lo ; 47, Cornhill (Seven D oors f rom G racec h urc h , - s treet), at The best wrought Fiddle-Pattern Spooas and 17 re coav 7s. 2d. per ounce. The f o ll ow i ng are the weigh t ' at the mended, but the articles ma y be had. lighter Apr heavie r same price per ounce CI 'c Fiddle palter' s. - 0 ea. .a. 1 7 4 12 Table Spoons 12 Dessert ditto 12 Table Forks 20 a t 7 2 ... 10 15 0 •••'7 10 12 Dessert ditto 3 g 2 Gravy Spoons lO at 7 2 311 I ••• 31 , 1 Soup Ladle 4 Sauce ditto 4 Salt Spoons ( g ilt s t rong ) 1 6 ••• 2, 1 ! o 1 Fish Slic e 2lO '" 4 12 Tea Spoons ... 10 at 7 8 316 ••• 0 icdes i Pair Sugar Tongs (strong) 015 0 • 9i gir f it 4 c The Classic is a new pattern, much admired fo r 04 fpr elegance. Th e Fiddl e P attern is with the handle th e ue it • a fiddle, quite plain ; it has been approved, and in r e q more than thirty years. n ay • N. B.—Patt ern S poons can be sent into the c°ll B I R K. O u n ., th 7 e 7t 2 h s ß th eg i i n m st e . n, , t at of I a I s u o ll t;. the lady of Major N• Eve On the 26th inst., at Fulham, tho lady of the Nepean, of a (laughter. G. On the 27th i ns t., i n H ar l ey - s t reet, t h e l a d y o f —' derslay, Esq., of a daughter. b , the 124 On the 26th inst., in Brunswick-squa re , Brighton' of Rear-Admiral the Hon. M. J. Henniker, of a dauf,arico the On the 27th i ns t., a t Y or k-b u ildi ngs, Regent'' -mew• lady of Captain Ellis, 13th Light Dragoons, of a da w n;; Ve s eY' On the 26th inst., i n D over - s t reet, t h e Lady , of a daughter. f Cra f en On the 28th i ns t., in Mansfield-street, the rs. Filzharding e Berkeley, of a (lau g ht er . On the 27th inst., the lady o f the Rec. a r ' °f Whitehead's-grove, Chelsea, of a daughter. bo•ksc licfr, On the 25th inst., the wife of Mr. V. Elkins , Baker-street, Portman-square, of a (laughter. 0 0 o n t t i h i o e 25thl i ot s s t. t. s ic( e F k . ha v no( i ll a lrs my . , ' o f f . a .l s a o r l v i a cm. MARRIED. On the 26th inst., at St. James's church, Mary. ehdo : t t , daughter of the late Rev. E. Smedley, of Dulwich, B "" ). ' n d E. H. Hart, Captain 19th Bombay Native Infant r y , sec ° son of the late Rev. G. Hart, of Gie:ialla, Dc negal, Yireland• On the 26th inst., at Grantham, J. Butli n, Esq., of Wrte field House, Warwickshire , to Lucy, only (la ughter of the ' a Rev. J. G. Thompson, of White Roothieg, the On the .6th inst., at St. Thoma chnrc'h, Winchester, Bev. W. Williams, vicar of St, itartholorne; Hyde, to L3u" t A g neY, elde , t daughter of ',.n e Re v . 'l% Whit, incur:ll)oi minister of the chapel St. J o h n th e B a pti s t. in that city• On the 13th inst.,at Gravesend, DIED. ' • of Nr. On the :26;11 inst., at Chiswick, Dan Sainst ury Mannmg, I.llfie ' On the Ica • ' the J inst , Richard G. Hodgson, Esq., of - near Manchester d"0 • o f isiingt,.t,rr- terrace. Llizabat wt. London Pri n t : and Published by I%IIIRD° 1(01-*/° f No. 112, Strlaid, at The Sun Oboe, No. 112, Strand 'n the county of Middlesex.— Friday, _Way 29 ; 1(14% I I On I, e p y 01