The Sun. — London, England, 1847-02-11 00:00:00

those from thirteen to eighteen worked the full period of adults, the transition from a state of partial?. midi vity to a state of labour was injurious, and a practice that ought to be remedied if it were possible.—(Hear.) With reference to adult labour, he could not coucur in the view taken by the Hon. Gentleman as to the mortality oc casioned in the manufacturing districts by the presentho t u h r e e of labour. He adverted to documents already before public to prove his statements, but there were also statistics to prove incontestably that in large to wns, where there were no manufactories, there existed an eq ual of mortality. He considered , however, that an amount advantage would be derived from a decrease o f the hours cf labour, by allowing some time at least to the labourers—not to say a word about recreation—but for receiving mental and reli giou 3 instruction, which was:virtually denied to them by the present system. With regard to women, he considered there was a great disadvantage in their being brought away from their homes ; as, in his opinion, it was destructive of domestic and social economy. With regard to health, he did not consider that the Hon. Member was justified in stating that the hours of employment were so very pernicious as he stated before. The mortality in large crowded towns, as compared with extensive rural districts, did not present any such difference. (The Right Honourable Gentleman then read a number of documents to prove his statements, and showing that in Maidstone, York, Northampton, Wolverhampton, Coventry, and Nottingham, there was no difference in the bills of mortality, as compared with Mac cleafield, Preston, and Chester and Liverpool. The increase of mortality was solely owing to crowded lodgings and per sonal uncleanliness. Facts certainly existed which demanded the serious attention of the Government, and called upon,;them for remedial measures. He had stated that the opinions which he had expressed were his own individual opinions. The Noble Lord, in his answer to certain questions, stated what he thought to be essential for the general agreement of a Goyem meat, but he at the same time claimed for the members of his Government freedom of opinion as to matters of detail. Now, the present question was one which was essentially a matter of detail. He had given his vote on former occasions for shortening the hours of factory labour, and he would have no objection to an eleven hours' Bill. He did not doubt ' that a difference of opinion between the members of the Government might exist upon the present question. He maintained his opinion, which he bad never shrunk from avowing. He was not insensible to the difficulties and the magnitude of the interests involved. They should proceed with caution, and with great deliberation, if they attempted to touch them. He should vote for a second reading of the Bill, but he should vote against the prospective clause, to limit at the end of a year the period of labour to ten hours. He was not prepared to ge further than what he stated, or to agree to any Bill which would not be modified according to the manner he proposed. Mr. BANKES said he did not advocate the present Bill for the purpose of giving any opposition to the Government. He was rejoiced that some members of the Government were in favour cf a modification of the present system. Although they were net prepared to go the whole extent which the Hon. Member for Oldham required, he was authorised to state that those who sought for a ten hours' Bill, would not be contented with an eleven hours' Bill, but if it was the pleasure of the Government to pass such a measure it would be a matter of satisfaction to them, as it was a step in a right direction ; and with reference to the success of an experiment it might not be unsatisfactory to have a trial for a year or two of such a measure before the public. He concurred in the regret expressed by the Right Hon. Baronet, that this matter bad not been made a subject of private regulation, but he could not say that he, for one, was disappointed. But he had high authority for saying that such a result had been expected by one of the principal opponents of the measure. He did not theu see the Hon. Gentleman in his place, but he believed him to be in an adjoining chamber; he alluded to the Member for Dur ham. (At this moment Mr. Bright entered the House, and took his seat amid considerable laughter.) On the 23d of May the lion. Member for Durham stated in his place that the proper mode of proceeding would be for the operatives to seek a private arrangement with the em ployers ; and he admitted that they ought to have by some • means or another an alteration in the present sys tem, which he said they would have had had other means been taken to procure them. Now, would the lion. Member for Durham say that those means had failed? Had there been even a proposal from the manufac turers to the operatives? The lion. Member had been the subject of many questions by reason of the high and prominent position in ivi:ieli he had placed himself as candidate fur one of the great manufacturing cities of the empire Amongst other qtestions which were put to him, as lately as the month of December last there was this—" Do you consider that time should be allowed for education, with regard to young persons employed in manufactories? " In answer to this question, the lion. Member said—" Well, I am quite certain that men who work ten hours are more likely to he educated than those who work twelve bouts. I only differ as to tie means of effecting such an arrangement. If it were the fact that no effort had been made for this pur pose what chance was there that that arrangement would be made now. There had been time for making the experiment, and since the Hon. Member saint that it ought to have been done, what chance he again asked remained that it would be done at all? The lion. Member fur Durham wa now a candidate—undoubtedly h e h ad every rig ht to be so—for the representation of one of the largest and most commercial cities iu the country, the city of Manchester. lie might not have been in the House when a petition was presented, signed by 200,000 persons residing there, and with the leave of the House he would read the prayer of that petition. The petitioners said that they deeply sympathised with the factory workers in that large and important manufacturing city, many of whom were of tender years, shut up in a close room for a period in each day that was quite incompatible with their nature, and they added that, owing to the long hours of labour, these young persons were debarred from all means of enjoying the bene fits of religious or secular education ; that, in consequence of the long hours of which the petitioners complained, the fac tory operatives were in a worse position than any other artizans, by which their physical frame was deteriorated, and if no relaxation were afforded, they would be mere representatives of the human body, without any of the vigour which should accompany it. They prayed therefore that the Legislature would pass a ten hours' Bill without further delay. These sentiments emanated from 200,000 persons, whom the lion. Member for Durham sought to represent hi Parliament. True, they had no votes, but they were still the persons whose opinions and feelings he would represent. If the Hon. Member would, therefore, wish to please his future constituents, let him vote for this Bill, and thus render himself a more worthy candidate for their suffrages than be was at present.—(Hear, hear, and laughter.) The lion. Member said last year that this was a fit and proper measure, which ought to be by sonic means adopted. There might be persons in Manchester, perhaps, more powerful than the individuals whose names were appended to this petition, but lie would not for a moment suppose that this consideration would influence his ccaidnet now. He bad, however, to recollect that it was the expressed opinion of the Hon. Member that this measure ought to pale; and, as it could not pass in the way of adjust ment and regulation between the employers and the operatives, he (Mr. Bankes) called upon the Hon. Member now to fulfil the pledge which he gave, and to carry out the measure by the only means left open, namely, a legislative enactment.— (Hear, hear.) There bad been circulated a pamphlet, which, although published two years before, had only been sent to him that day. That pamphlet contained grave charges against a most honourable person, and containing such charges, he thought that it ought to have been circulated earlier, if at all. It was entitled " A Report of the Central Committee of the Association of Millownersengaged in the cotton trade." Now, he (Mr. Bankes) would not allude to the personal charges which that circular contained against this honour able person, but he would to one passage which he happened to glance at, for he had had no time to examine carefully the contents of the document. That passage stated, " It is useless to discuss whether the present arrangement of twelve hours for five days, and nine hours on Satur day, is precisely the best limitation fur labour; it is the limit which Parliament has long since established," &c. Now, the House would permit him to ask why it was" use less to discuss?" Could there be a better occupation of their time than to discuss whether that which was found a benefit to the people to a certain extent should not be further ex tended, if any further additional benefit could be conferred? Could they be better employed than extending a measure which had been already found good still further ? The quotation went on, " Usage and habit has accommodated itself to this period." Why that was said of the slave trade; " usage and habit" had existed there for a long time, but that was no reason why that habit and usage should be permitted to continue.—(Bear, hear.) "On the continued certainty of this limitation, the master manufac turer had based his calculation of profitable returns." Why what right had the master manufacturer to base his calcu lationson this limitation ? Had not this been a constant subject of inquiry, of proper inquiry year after year ? Had it not been constantly agitated in that House, and most justly agitated? Was there any reason why the master manufacturers, when the former law was passed, should speculate upon no further alteration of the law in all time coming? The Honourable Mem ber for Montrose had been pleased to say that he had got one besetting sin, and that was his universal advocacy of all reductions in taxation and retrenchments in expenditure. But the Hon. Member had another besetting sin, and that was his determination to look with such intensity on one side of a question, that he omitted altogether to look at the other.—( Hear, hear.) Now, when the Hon. Member for Mont rose supported the former Bill of 1824, he doubtless thought it the concentration of all human wisdom—(Hear, hear, and laughter)—but he forgot that there Acts limiting factory labour had been passed—passed with complete triumph—Acts reducing the labour cf these under thirteen years of age from 74 hours a week to 36, and persons above that age from 74 to 69. All these concessions had been universally admitted, by every one but the Hon. Member for Montrose, to be attended with the happiest suc cess, without any counterbalancing inconvenience to any of the parties interested. But, said the Hon. Member for Mon trose, these persons are blind to their own interests; but if they were ignorant it was the duty of the Hon. member to educate and prepare them properly. At that time, when an extended measure of education was being in troduced into the other house of Parliament, surely some arrangement should be made by which the artisan in com mon with all classes in the country might be benefited. The measure (as far as the factory workman was con cerned) was an insult to him, for they provided a large fund for educational purposes, from the benefits of which he would be altogether debarred. The Honour able Member for Durham had admitted that the man who wor k e d ten h ours had more time for the purposes or education than the man who worked twelve hours. Had tallae?alaHneywhaosa,•orked twelve hours any time for education at he required twoorinpelled to devote twelve hours to work, and for education be ieursfor meals—where then could the time pass an equalcalm the Hon. Member for Montrose had a fo un d ? • he," You cannot," said for the limitation of labour, because the labourers a a w re of different conditions in life. One has a father and ilieuther, and anot h er i s not burdened with eith er ." ( Mr. Bankes) said, give them all the advantage of the lysaree lawfxt,lvie'eencotahlde onesee no distinction that could be ear edoeul remember that labourer• and the other. The liousT before them they when this measure: was first brought physical in were shocked at the recital of the cruepltii,eysn deformities the factories; they had heard of the which resulted from the nature of the empl oyment. (Mr. Banke s ) had always heard and read thoilisintatatetUi lie with much pain, and with a belief that, while the inanuVB were not guilty of the cruelties imp ut e de turers orthem, the offences themselves were greatly exaggerated; but neither could he shut his eyes to the consequences which would follow the want of education. lle could not be bli n d to the physical, as well as the moral deterioration which would result froni this course; anii if Government did n o t appiy the remedy, to whom were they to look for it? He was of opinion that this was the fitting opportunity for the enactment of such a me asure. If they passed that Bill at this period it would entail no inconvenience on the manufacturer. The Hon. Member for Durham ffect a measure had been unable to carry into which he himself declared was fit and proeper, and therefore it behoved the Government to interpose a nd rectify the grievance. He would give his cordial assent to t he second reading of the Bill. THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY MORNING, FEBRUARY 11, 1841. Mr. MARK PHILIPS said that the lion. Member for Durham had had a speech made at him as candidate for Manchester, perhaps the House would allow him as repre sentative for Manchester, in esse, to say a few words for him. He trusted it would not be considered he did not sympathise with the workmen in factories if he did not coincide in the opinion aof the Hon. Member who had last spoken, but he (Mr. Philips), as the representative of a vast commercial interest, could not let his feelings run away with his better judgment. He thought that any interference between capital and labour would tend to the most mischievous consequences, for the House might depend upon it that one-tenth of the manufacturing power of this country could not be repressed without the workmen's wagessuffering in the same proportion. Why was the Government to stop short with reference to agricultural labours? He believed the present was such a departure from proper legislative interference, that he could nut but augur the most serious results from the adoptien of the measure.—(Hear, hear.) He did not like the proposed "nibbling," piece by piece, of the measure, such as that alluded to by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to reduce the hours to eleven in stead of ten. If the experiment were to be made, let it be made at once, upon a bold scale; he would much rather at once give his support to the ten hours' measure than to such a meddling system of legis lation proposed by those who had not the courage to go at once to the completion of the full measure, but who stopped at a sort of half-way house.—(Cheers.) He believed that great ignorance existed on the part of lion. Members with reference to the subject of factory labour. It was not for him to catechise Hon. Members on the subject ; if he did so, he might, in all probability, be told " that he had better mind his own business, and give them credit for the knowledge they possessed upon subjects which even the most experienced manufacturers and inhabitants of the district were unable to obtain." It was quite true that the measures which had been passed for the purpose of re stricting labour in some factories had been attended with some success ; but he begged most earnestly to protest against the arguments urged by the Right Hon. Baronet the Secre tary of State for the Home Department, that because partial success had attended the measures passed for the protection of women and children, that therefore future legislation for adults should be equally successful. With those views, seeing nothing but mischief attendant upon the passing of these measures, and not at all underrating the comforts of the working classes, or being one whit less desirous than the Hon. Gentleman who had last addressed the: House to see educe• tion afforded to the people, still he was obliged to weigh carefully both sides of the question, and he had come to the conclusion that nothing but mischief would result from the interference by the Legislature in the large manufacturing districts of the country. Lord JOHN MANNERS was quite surprised to hear the Hon. Member for Montrose say that the present measure was advocated upon party grounds. He did not think such a charge ought to have been made. The slightest reflection upon the history of the question would sutlice to show that such a charge was totally unfounded. No one could look upon the pa,t history of the question without seeing that never was any question of great national polity supported upon such dis interested and lioneut able grounds, and carried on in such a manner as to be in every way worthy of the great cause itself.—(Cheers.) The great cause had been going on fur years, though warrior after warrior had fallen in the glorious struggle. Sir Robert Peel first advocated the question, died, and left the cause to the care of Sir J. Hobhouse ; he carried it on for some time, until it was taken up by Mr. Saddler. That great advocate of the cause died, and left the conduct of it to Mr. Oastler ; he, in his turn, gave place to Lord Ashley, who carried on the war to the very verge of victory, when circumstances oc curred which prevented his proceeding further with the measure, and he resigned his glorious charge to the Honourable Member for Oldham (Mr. Fielden). Still they found the same resolute, indomitable persever ance in the great cause. And now, iu this year, 1817, they found the great question again brought forward, and boldly advocated by its indefatigable supporter, the Hon. Member F for Oldham (Mr. ielden).—(Cheers.) Well did Lord Ashley say in that House, and truly, " that it was possible, nay, probable, that the efforts of her Majesty's Ministers would be successful, and that they would carry their motion, but for how long? If the Government would wish their victory to be complete, they must extinguish those senti ments which had given rise to his." In that sentiment was to be found the feeling which nurtured and fed the in domitable courage of the supporters of this measure.— (Cheers.) And so long as men had eyes to weep, souls to pray, hearts to feel, voices to raise, and hands to lift up, so long would the struggle be continued, until the arduous contest was consummat,d by the glory of a triumphant victory. The Right Hon. Baronet, the Secretary of State for (lie Home Department, had used what he called "old arguments," thine arguments were year by year becoming weaker and walker. an:l be hoped those arguments, the fallacy of which bad been so long exploded, would be consigned at once " to the tomb of all the Captnets."—(Cheers.) The present was the most favourable time for the passing of this law, in con sequence of the depressed state of trade in the manufacturing districts and the high prices of corn. Th e m ill' s were now working short time. When, however,:the current set in the other way, if this measure were passed, then stability and security would be the result, instead of a wild, insane, and reckless re-action, which had before been the bane of the prosperity of our manufacturing districts.— (Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord then went on to quote (rem the circular of Messrs. Parkisson and Taylor, to the effect that stocks were daily accumulating, and would before long press heavily upon the market, even in the face of increasing prices in the raw material. This state of things would no doubt be followed by a serious de pression. What w as the effect of these rapid alternations of prosperity and depression in the condition of the workman ? —during one week he had nothing to do, and the text week he was torn and racked by fatigue. In such a state, was it possible for the working man to contract habits of sobriety or forethought, or to perform his duty to his country and the society in which he moved?—(Loud cheers.) It had been said by the opponents of this measure, that so much week could not be done in twelve hours as in ten; (even if it were so, the great practical result would be, that if this Bill were passed it would spread a larger amount of labour over the working classes, and thereby equalise the amount to be performed. It had also been said that it was wrong to interfere in manufacturing speculations. Nothing could be a more decisive refutation of that argument than the declared official value of the exports of the country, as given in a work recently published by Mr M'Culloch, from which it appeared that in 1831 the total value of the cotton exports amounted to 17,182,736!., in 1832 it amounted to 17,344,5761., but in the year 1842 the declared value of the cotton exported was 21,770,1271. This would at once dispose of the argument of the mischief of legislative interference in manufacturing enterprise (fur since the year 1832 the hours of labour had been reduced fier all pereoas above 13 years of age front 74 to 69 hours, for all persons under 13 they had been reduced from 74 to 36, and in every case the best possible results had followed the adop tion of the measures.—(Hear.) Looking then at the past, and relying upon practical experience for the future, they were justified in calling upon the opponents of this Bill to make out a most irresistible case, to demonstrate by facts and figures, which could admit of no dispute or cavil, that the wages of the workmen would fall in consequence of the passing of this measure, which was another of the arguments used by the opponents of the measure.—(Cheers.) But, even if this fall of wages were to take place, it would be in some sort compensated by giving to the workmen facilities for household economy, and fur the mental and moral improvement of the inmates of the cottage.—(Hear, hear.) The people working in the fac tories were told that, with the repeal of the corn-laws, the chief element of their expenses would be materially reduced. (Hear, hear.) How those promises had been fulfilled, the present prices would abundantly testify. If the corn-laws were to reduce the food of the people at least one-third, surely they were entitled to have their hours of labour relaxed. He was willing to leave this matter to be decided by the practical experience of the operatives themselves, but yet it was a difficult question, and one on which it would be difficult for them to deal with their employers. Fortunately, Lancashire and York shire were riot exclusively populated by manufacturers; ethers lived in them who were competent to judge by their knowledge of the condition of the operatives. There were intelligent Dissenting ministers—there were the Dean of Manchester, the Vicar of Leeds, the Rector of Brad ford, all of whom were competent arbitrators, to whom he should feel satisfied to leave the decision of the matter. Now, when they came forward and told them that for the sake of their spiritual health it was necessary to pass this Bill, and when the surgeons in the large towns said it was necessary for the improvement of their physical condition, and when they and the landed proprie tors were unanimously of this opinion, he considered it was incumbent on the House to comply with their wishes. He had been entrusted with a letter on the subject from Mr. Fletcher, the well-known surgeon of Bury, which set forth the great mortality that to k place amongst those employed in factories, compared with those engaged in other occopa tions. It stated that out of every 100 deaths a fraction over 61 were children under two years of age; that the mor tality amongst those employed 10 hours in fac tories was 33 1 ,4 per cent., whilst it was but 20 in other occupations. From a report which was presented to the House in 1834 he found that out of 1,000 deaths iu Man chester, 424 were children tinder two years of age; that in Liverpool the number of children under two years of age, out of 1,000 deaths, was but 362 ; whilst in London, out of 1,000 deaths, only 303 were infants under that age. (Hear, hear.) This showed the great want of sanatory improvements, and that the mortality against these child ren would be less if they were taken more care of by their parents. The subject had been submitted to them in every possible way : they bad been shown how the homes of factory workers were left comfortless, in consequence of the protracted; hours: of lab o ur—h ow th e S axon mother refused to be comforted because her children could not par take of it—( Hear, hear)—but then when one died she knew that it had ceased to suffer from prolonged and severe toil, and that it had gone to join the army of innocents in heaven.—(Hear, hear.) He would ask the House whether a sufficient case had not been made out for passing the measure ?—(Hear, hear.) It was in vain for them to provide parks and athenaeums for the recreation and instruction of the people, if they did not at the same time provide them with a few hours to par take of their advantages. They were agreed to the end :it was the means only that were objectionable ; but if he thought there was a reasonable chance of an arrangement being come to between the masters and their labourers he might possibly alter his opinion, especially if 1,000 manufacturers in Lanca shire would sign a bond to reduce their hours within the limit he thought necessary, and pay down a quarter of a million as the guarantee that they would fulfil the condi tions.—(Hear.) But he should think the acute labourers dupes if they consented to any arrangement unless they had ample security that it would be carried out. That House was not in the habit of waiting until rival steamers in the Thames had agreed to regulate their speed in the pool, to adopt measures to compel them to do so, supposing such a step were necessary ; or until master builders agreed to improve the sanatory regula tions of the houses they build ; chimney-sweepers not to use climbing-boys; proprietors of collieries and butties to prevent the harnessing of naked women.—( Hear, hear.) They did not stop until the proprietors of slaves in the West Indies could make some arrangement with their slaves for their emancipation ; in these and a thousand other instances they did not want for the parties to come forward, but brought the "imperial majesty of the law," to whom all were subject—the lowest as well as the greatest— and which has for its object the vindication of the rights of t t hese o r d a i ne d by God."—(Hear.) It was all very well for ttdoctrines of th at sc h oo l of philosophy to which he belonged e e m. M em b er f or Montrose to say, in accordance with that they ought not to interfere, and to allow the labourers to re m an ai a n le a a t is _t a h t e mercy of their employers; but were interfere, he w, 1 ,3 a o t rs to do nothing? If they were not to with various kings loss to understand why they had in terferedit. the interference propstiings,and were continuing to interfere. let theta point out to I,lbY the Bill be not satisfactory, a less objectionable they could, a more advisable, a mode of intervention, or which operatives carne reasons for interference. lied em safe,or noble or came betore them and declared I ST legislation on the subjecttbi, had been pro ductive Unless l the i t h e f i a r e p te a good, and that or that pdamange.rreelv7ernild result to no need of A rt .l. th H e e subjectollgh t the o f proposedinterference,thedesired them from it, they were to almost to apologise for touching this after the eloquent speech of the Honourable Gentleman the Member for Edinburgh last year.—(Hear, hear.) He was glad that that city had, by its representative, spoken in favour of the Bill.—(Hear, hear.) In a late number of the Edinburgh Review he found an article, from which be would read two or three passages which appeared to him " germane to the matter." It stated that the question, like others, must be argued upon its own merits, and that the time had arrived when the argument in favour of the reduction of the hours of labour in factories to ten hours, could not be answered by mere general doctrines. Now, he put it to the candour of the House whether that proof had not been furnished? The Honourable Gentleman talked of Russia, and Germany, and America, but since 109 no person under sixteen years of age, in Germany or Prussia, was allowed to work more than ten hours.—(Hear.) Throughout Prussia the average hours of work of all classes was 11 ; and then the case in America to which he referred was not a good example in favour of his argument, as the committee came to the opinion they did owing to the pressure of circumstances which could not be controlled.—(Hear.) What country entered most into competition with us. Was it not America? They compelled the Americans, against their wills, to employ their labourers longer than they desired, by enforcing their competition. He considered that the statements which he had taken the liberty to read must satisfy every gentleman that their foreign trade had not suffered from a reduction in the hours of labour, and no case had been made out to show that their foreign trade would suffer. He would there fore submit that the time had arrived, for the sake of the working men, and for the sake of the working women of the north of England, and also for the sake of the master manu facturers themselves, that this great question should be finally set at rest. He would ask that House of Commons was it prepared to throw back to another Parliament the settle ment ofthe question which had enlisted in its favour the affec tions of the working men and women—which came to them supported by the opinions of the clergy,themedical profession, and all the enlightened and impartial, which was based upon the experience of the past, and which appealed to past results for future beneficial effects? Would the House of Commons reject such a measure as the present, because some Honourable Gentlemen are pleased to assert that it does not altogether steer with their notions of political economy ? He trusted not ; but should it be so, and should the House come to a conclusion adverse to the second reading of the Bill, the Gentlemen on his side of the House would retire from the contest undismayed and undeterred, cheered and encouraged by the reflection that they had done their duty, and that the Tory gentlemen of England had maintained their historical position—(Laughter)—and had, consistently with it, fought the battle of the poor against the rich, of their poorer fellow-subjects against the mighty and the strong.— (Hear, hear.) He trusted that the Bill would pass into a law, and that this protracted struggle would now be terminated ; and if such was the case, he could assure the House the measure would be received by a grateful and loyal people amidst the accla mations of millions. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that if the Noble Lord had abstained from those allusions which he had deprecated in the commencement of his speech, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would not have addressed the House. He had been willing to believe that the question might have been discussed without any party feeling being expressed. And if the Noble Lord did take credit for his party, he would surely allow him to claim, for the Gentle men with whom he acted, the merit of a measure which gave to the mass of the people the main article of subsistence at the cheapest possible rate. He did not wish to pursue the subject further, or to say much upon the present question, which had been so repeatedly before the House. On the last occasion that the Bill was before the House, it was opposed by the Government as a Government measure. His Noble Friend near him, and the Right Hon. Baronet near him, would support the measure under certain modifica tions, but he supported the same opinion upon the present as upon former occasions. And he considered himself bound to stand up and declare himself, so that the question might not go forth with the weight of Government authority. He was as much a friend to the poor man as any Gentleman in that House, and if lie were disposed to overlook the immense interests which were involved, and to consult those only of the working man, he would not give his consent to such a measure, as lie believed it would be most injurious in its results. Ile had no hesitation in granting a limitation to the hours of labour for children, but he would oppose any interference with those of adults. By such a measure they would take away one-sixth part of the earnings of the labourer. By diminishing the hours for labour they would increase the cost of production, and that cost would either fall upon the profits of the manufacturer or the wages of the artizan. He would take the cases of the different mills. In the first mill all the operatives signed in favour of long hours; in the second mill, 16i) signed in favour of long hours, and 75 against it ; in the third, 59 only signed for long hours; and al though an announcement was made by the masters, that in the month of October following they should commence working short time, before that day of working short time came the workmen sent a deputation to the owners request ing that they should work for long hours. In the fourth mill it was agreed also to work for long hours; for in consequence of working short hours the wages of the people would have been reduced. In ore mill many of the operatives were so anxious to earn high wages, that they continued working at tea time when their hours were re duced. These parties worked by piece work, and in their anxiety; they worked during the half-hour allotted for tea, thus working the same time as before, only in a smaller compass. In these instances the experiment had been fairly tried, and the question bad been fairly put to the workmen, and they preferred long hours with high wages. If any of the operatives were anxious for. short hours it was in the full belief, and in which belief they would be disappointed, that they would continue to reseive the same amount of wages. In another mill which he would mention 400 hands all signed in favour of long hours, and in another a majority of 50, in a thi r d a ma j o rity of 40, in a fourth a majority of 50, and in a fifth a majority of 103, signed in favour of long hours. In a sixth mill 246 signed for long hours, and 125 against them. It was his firm belief, that long hours were preferred by the workmen, as it was their conviction that a reduc tion of the time of work would be followed by a reduction of wages, and they were told that they did not consider the interest of the workmen when they demurred to a measure which would inflict an injury. He would, therefore, by no means accede to the request of the workinen, even if they were in favour of this measure much more generally than he believed them to be. He was really so little able to ad dress the House, that he would not venture to make many further remarks. The question concerned not only the interest of the artizans in the mills, the interest of the manufacturers, and the large interests of all persons dependent on the cotton mills, and of all dependent on the production of the raw ma terial consumed in the mills, and of all persons who were en g iged in the preparation of the material : it affected also all those employed in the after processes, and if they reduced the raw material consumed in the mills, and there became in censequence a deficiency in the production of the manufactured produce, the various stages it had to go through subsequently they would affect the interest, not only of the manufacturers themselves, but the interest of large bodies of men on either side, who - had no opportunity of expressing their opinions, but whose interest, nevertheless, was ma terially injured. He thought that these were con siderations of vast importance, which ought not to be left out of the question. He had taken it upon the nar rowest grounds—those grounds upon which they generally agreed, viz., that the interest of the workmen was materially affected, ad it was upon those grounds that he felt it to be his duty to oppose the measure. The Marquis of GRANBY said that the patient endurance of the operatives, and at the same time the conciliating tone they adopted towards their masters, would naturally cause a desire to grant their wish. The Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said that the wages of the bpera tives would be reduced. He was ready to admit that, if they reduced the number of hours the operative had to work, the master manufacturers would find it neces sary to make up the deficiency by employing more hands. He thought, likewise, that if they did employ more hands, the number of workpeople, as an inevitable conse quence of the principle of competition between the masters would be benefited. He thought that this measure would be conferring a great boon on the operatives in the manufacturing districts, and it would not at the same time materially re duce their wages. He: was for some time per plexed by the argument, that if they did not reduce the wages there would be no other means of raising the same quantity of manufactured produce as they did at present. He thought that with regard to the women who were now labouring twelve hours per day in those factories, the reduction of their hours of labour would not be followed by so material a reduction in the produce as was anticipated. The labour and wages would be more equally distributed over the surface of the manufacturing population, who would thereby be materially benefited. On these grounds he should give his support to the Bill. Dr. BOWRING saia that he acknowledged the philan thropy of the Noble Lord, but it would net be what was called philanthropy to suppport that which would bring misfortune upon the labouring community. The discussion was one which should be entered upon free from all prejudice, and with minds inaccessible to all facts likely to prejudice the judgment. He did not approve of the present measure, for he felt convinced that it would not be of any practical utility to the poor.—( Hear, hear.) He had heard one of the principal manufacturers in the borough he had the honour to represent offer to his workmen to engage them for eleven hours a day, but he did not attempt to disguise from them what the result of the altera tion would be. He told them that if they did not produce the same amount of work as in the twelve hours he could not be expected to pay them the same amount of wages. He (Dr. Bowring) understood that a large body of the most influential, the most intelligent, and the most wealthy manu facturers had been testing the consequences of the Bill should it become the law of the land, and they all agreed on this point, that it would occasion a general reduction in the value of produce in the cotton manufactures. He spoke not of the silk nor of the flax manufacture, but confined his attention to cotton alone, and the return showed a di minution in the value of production to the extent of 12i per cent. Now he might just inform Hon. Members that the value of the cotton manufactured in this country exceeded 30,000,0001.; the number of bales required for working up amounted to a million and a half, representing in value 15,000,000/. sterling, and before it left the manufactory the united cost of labour and capital would increase the sum to 30,000,000/. sterling. The statement added, as the result of a limitation of the hours of labour, that the annual loss would be from 1,800,0001. to 2,000,0001. sterling. Now he would inquire on whom this loss would fall. It ap peared to Lim that it could only be borne by one of three parties. The first was the consumer, and perhaps it might be more generally distributed in this way at the least amount of individual sacrifice; but the question was would the consumer pay this loss—would they rest con tented with the extra price which would be charged them. They had already, by their measures of last year, taught the people of the country that the only true principle was to bi that inth ethey cheapestevwere entitled andselliinttied to thehedearest benefitsmarli market. They eyhad decided that principle, and the le4le — had a right .to require that they should give effect to it.—(Hear.) The consumers therefore would pay no portion of the 2,000,0001. sterling. But then they might say, "The manufacturers are gorged with enormous profits, the manufacturers must pay, and they are affluent and successful men, wrest, therefore, from them a portion of their ill-gotten gains." But was it the fact that the gains of the master manufac turers were so large as to enable them to continue manufacturing, when they by their legislation as acted from them an amount of 2,000,0001. sterling - - annually. It was not likely they would do so. and therefore after all the loss would fall upon the opera tives themselves. The Hon. and Learned Member then proceeded to show by the evidence of Mr. Gregg that the profits of the manufacturer, after deducting the 5 per cent. interest on his money, did not exceed 2 1 / 2 per cent. If the consumer and the capitalist would not pay, the burden must fall on the labour- ing Poinlation, and thus, instead of granting a boon, the House w ould, by passing this measure, take away from them the means of education and the ability to procure the comforts of existence. The workmen were, in effect, to be told that one-sixth of their earnings was to be withdrawn, and however willing they might be to work f or th e extra hour, the manufacturers would have no power to accede to their wishes by this enactment of the Government. He (Dr. Bow - ring) had during his whole lifetime been the advocate of the working man; he had ever sought to obtain for him an influence in that House of which he was as yet de prived ; his sympathies were all enlisted on his side, and it was for that, reason, it was because he thought the present measure was calculated to lower his condition that he would oppose the further progress of it. Mr. P. HOWARD, in rising to support the measure said that he would not detain the House with any lengthened observations. He could perceive that they were desirous of testing the question by a division, and he should therefore, not trespass for any time on their attention. The House had already seen that any arrange ment between the employers and the employed was out of the question, and it was therefore necessary for the Government and that House to legislate upon the subject. H e had hoped that the manufacturers of England would have copied the example of the (Lau ag ricultural party, who make a great sacrifi ce f ur t h e goo d o f country. little sacrifice, to offer som e t r ib ute on the altar of He would give his most cordial support their makethe c i someor un tr 3 —ghter)—Jnd he mi g h t yet ask them to to the second reading of the Bill. Mr. MUNTZ took the trouble to go to Manchester to sa tisfy himself of the position of the working classes and the manufacturers, and the result of his in spection was, that all the changes which had been made were entirely for the benefit of the manufacturers, and not for the workmen.—(Cheers.) The alteration in the speed of the machinery, and the number of spindles had been in creased threefold, and the quantity of work done was of course double. Though the manual labour employed was rather less. It was therefore self-evident that a young girl attending to those spindles must have an increased amount of duty to perform. The question was, was this a sort of labour for such persons? It was said the labour was not hard; granted. He would like to know how Hon. Members would like to be kept walk ing up and down a slippery floor for 13 hours, in an atm sphere ranging from 65 to 80 degrees? Why it would be bad enough to shut an Hon. Member up in a hothouse heated to 80 degrees, even if he had nothing to do.—( Cheers.) Why, the people of Birmingham would be ashamed to see such persons as these factory-girls in their town.—(Cheers.) Mr. BRIGHT—(Hear, hear.) Mr. MUNTZ—Did the Hon. Member suppose that nose but a cotton-spinner could tell whether a girl looked healthy or unhealthy?—(Laughter.) The Hon. Member himself got up a petition in the year 1833 in favour of the Ten Hours' Bill, and paid all the expenses of it himself. If the Hon. Member had altered his opinions since that time, he ought to explain the reason of his change to the House.—(Cheers.) The manufacturers complained of being compelled to work only ten hours a day; why, upon an average for the last ten years. no mills had worked more than ten hours a day; they could not, therefore, lose anything bythe passing of the present measure. It had been said that if any difference was made in the hours of labour a difference would also be made in the rate of wages. Was that so? The Hon. Member for Dur ham (Mr. Bright) paid for wages to his card-loom hands, in the year 1820, Bs. per week; in 1830, Bs.; in 1844, Bs. Gd. ; in 1846, 9s. Did this, then, bear out the assertions of those o m r a n a u o f m a c e t u rers other? n w . a s m o e n n 1 13 1 ; e f r a . i r t t o o e a s x k p l t a h i n e tloionth. eHmobuesre, how it was that such an amazing alteration had taken place since the year 1815, when only 6,000 bales a week of cotton were spun, and in the present year the quantity spun was 30,000 a week, being an increase of five times the quantity. It seemed extraordinary that while there should be this increase the value of the goods produced should have also been one-third less, contrary to the opinions of those "feelosephers " who maintain that nothing but the application of the principles of political economy should be allowed, and that all in terference should be deprecated, and yet that, in spite of the interference of the Government, there had been an increase in the rate of wages .paid to the workmen.—(Cheers.) The consumption of cotton was— In the year 1815 1846 The price of the raw material was— In 1815 ls. 7 1 / 2 d. per lb. 1846........... The selling price in 1815 3s. 3d. per lb. 1846 lod. per lb. The number of revolutions per minute of the throstles of the machines was in the year 1815 1846 . The number of spindles to each mules was in 1815 ...... lBO 1816 5OO These were facts demanding the most serious attention of the House.— (Cheers.) The rooms in which the operatives were, were of the most unhealthy nature, no current of fresh air was allowed, and it seemed to be necessary that the unfortunate creatures of factory labour should be kept in a state of continued perspiration, in order the better to perform their work.—(Cheers.) Since he had had a seat in that House he had never given a vote against his conscience, but lie never gave a vote in that House with more honesty of feeling than that which he should give upon this occasion in support of the pre co it men it e. Mr. BRIGHT hoped, after the pointed allusions which had been made to him by the Hon. Members for Dorsetshire and Birmingham, and by several other Hon. Members, that the House would allow him to state the grounds on which he was compelled to differ from many Hon. Gentlemen on this important question. In addition to the means of udging, which many Honourable Members possessed from political economy and from other sources, he possessed this additional knowledge. He had lived all his lifetime amongst the population for whom they were 'legislating; he was very largely connected with this particular trade, and had not a farthing in the world beyond what was invested in it; but in his op position to the Bill he was actuated by no belief that it w ould injure hi s p roperty or prospects, because it was , clear to him that if the measure was really calculated to advance the interests of the 1,200,000 persons more or less dependent for their support upon cotton spinning and other textile employments, that his interests would be consulted. The agitation in factories in favour of a Ten Hours' Bill had been conducted on the political economy of the Hon. Members for Birmingham and Oldham, and of the late Michael Thomas Sadler, on those principles of poli tical economy which that House last session declared un sound and rotten, and which, if persevered in, would injure the great interests of the country and de stroy the manufacturing and commercial supremacy of the kingdotn.—(Hear, hear.) When it was first commenced, it professed to have only the labour of children in view, and Lord Spencer brought in a Bill with that view but last session. The late Secretary of State for the Home Department carried a Bill through the House, which limited the labour of children under thirteen years of age to six hours a day; but, not satisfied, those who pro fessed themselves the friends of the w a o n rk d er o s f , n w o h w ate a N s . k er edthe Ii sex, Mouse to interfere to prevent young persons f rom 13 to 18 , and women of all ages, from working more th an ten h ours a day; but their object really was t o i nterfere with the engaged e o d f s i v n o l r a k b o o f ur P i e n rs t o h n i s s o co f u a n i t i ry ag , " in ' the belief that the pre sent rate of wages would be maintained—a higher rate than their labour could command in the free markets of the country. 1 Many- of the exaggerated statements which had been put forward by Lord Ashley had not been urged upon the House on that occasion, but the Noble Lord the Member for Newark ( Lord J. Manners) had read a letter from Mr. Fletcher, physician, in Bury, which however he did not consider more worthy . of belief than official documents furnished by persons appointed to make such investigations. From them it appeared that, in 1831, the mortality in Leeds was less, than in 1801. and less than the mortality in Bristol for the 1 same year. The mortality in Manchester was less than in Liverpcel, and, in short, themortality in large manufacturing towns was not larger than in other towns is w hi c h there were no manufactories. Dr. Phillipps, who had published a book on ‘, scrofula," had stated that the health of those engaged in factories was not worsen large m thanthsnfs the health atlthrof the rest of the p o p u lation employed..gtowns. It was stated that the labour orm y omen in factories was long and conusive eviaence that the work was not If t h HeyonswoGuentleme thatn d o u h b e t ed was th c o ' did t e factoryni it. t womenTwho They yk severe, but he considered the fact . of women correct. so employed was this let them Id find be,ea turned wuhs ey m la a b i o , r e io bl u g s. u — ir ( je T a l n ) dit it was so severe as forsake it, and work as s_b_one n m ot as , on b s and with spades was stated to ?- -(Oh, oh!) They id was superior ; employments where they were must tarn to those from the weather, and which were light. sheltered ts in France had been equally con- The experiments nothing injurious in factory elusive, that there was (The Honourable Member then labour to females. t from a report of the they dnatt.wally extract read a long ' Bill appointed by the Committee on the Ten HoursfM hwhicharc , 1845 , Con gress of Massac huse tts 12th on theo went to show that imanufactories did not injure the health of inanuf And the report further stated, that those employed n them.) hours appointed for manufacturing in the town of Lowell the in these countries for labour far exceeded those appointed : he textile manufacture. Let him not be misunderstood Jill, he was was not advocating a twelve hours ' labour only defending himself, a nd arguing against the state ments in behalf put forward that children of the present Bill ; and let the Hon. Member recollect t up to thirteen years of age were exempt from the system now complained of. He himself never went to school after he was fift een held himself to be a proof years of age, and 1.0 - to thir be obtainedup that some kind of information might Under the old system their forefathers teen years of age. used to put out every person to earn at fourteen. And to show that those empleyed in manufa c tories were not • not so wholly uneducated and immoral, diem that would tell . t that Dr. Peirce had divided the community into tn en lasses y c and the worst of these were and amongst the first grooms, such a class as most gentlemen in that House were in the habit of employing. Number and nineteen in that class were domestic servants, number twenty were females engaged in factory la bour. There was not a magistrate in any manufacturingand town, that could not bear witness to the sobriety angood conduct of these operatives. The Hon. Member said . that d he presented a petition from Manchester, signed by twenty-two thousand persons. Now, when he (Mr. Bright) presented a petition in favour of the repeal of the corn-laws, the gams Honourable Member would not pay the slightest regard to it. He was as much in f avour of paying attention to the wishes of the poor as any ma n , and he would go fa rther than the lion. flember, for he was prepared to give th em votes, by which th e y wou ld be enabled to send men to that House to represent their feelings and wishes. But if the short time was enbrced, they would be obliged to receiv e less wa g es. He could not conceive a guilt more dreadful than the prac thlingtf such a delusi on on the working classes, a delusion likely lo bring upon them the most 'serious disappointment, and greater evils than any other measure had ever inflicted upon them. He had in his band a publication called " The Ten Hours' Advocate," dated December 5, and that publication asserted that it had, from its first con nexion with the question, advocated the fact that the effect of the Ten Hours' Bill would be a diminution of wages in the same proportion as the reduction of time, as any eircurristance that lessened the supply of an article increased its value in the market, and that there were numerous instances where the hours had been reduced and the rates of wages were advanced. Mr. Oastler said, in speaking of Mr. Ackroyd, in Halifax, that if lie were one of the operatives, and he were asked to sign for the Ten Hours' Bill at the present rate of wages, he would not do so, as any re duction in the hours would be followed by an increase, in order to show how these persons endeavoured to persuade the working classes that they would have the same wages. The Ten Hours' Advocate said that when children were made to work only six hours, their wages had been increased. Such, was not the case, for, in every instance, the wages were reduced in exactly the same proportion as the time was reduced; and a child twelve years and eleven months old, and working only six hours, received only half of the wages that a child 13 years and one month old re ceived. With regard to the case of foreign competition, he believed that it was not properly understood by the lion. Member for Oldham. He had in his hand a statement of the raw material consumed in the manufacture of this country. In the cotton trade alone 600 millions of pounds of cotton were used, and in the wool and worsted trades there were not less than 260 millions of pounds used. In the flax trade there were 177 millions of pounds imported, and in the silk 600,000 pounds, making in all 1,000,175,000 pounds. If that were divided by six, it would give a diminution in the consumption of the raw material of 176,000,000 of pounds, and how was it possible to dispense with one-sixth of this description of munufacture ? The difference in the revenue Would alone amount to 7,000,0004 annually. That was a question worthy of the consideration of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as it would make a reduction of 7,000,000/. per annum in the expenditure. He had attended many meetings at Manchester, and was aware that not one single individual of the working classes would accept of this Bill if he did not believe that no redaction would take place in the rate of wages, Many of the work -people he employed had petitioned that House in favour of the Bill, and he was glad that they bad done so, as it showed that they were independent, and could act for themselves. That was the case in many of the largest and best establish meats in their trade; but he warned the House, that if they encouraged the working classes to come to that House for legislative enactments to limit their hours of labour, and to fix their scale of salary, that every manufactuter would be obliged to unite in self. defence—(Loud cries of "Divide, divide")—and that, he was sure, would do away with the good feeling which at present existed between the manufacturers and their workmen.—(Renewed cries of" Divide divide.") He would not detain the House, but he understood that it was intended to bring forward in Committee a clause to limit the hours of working to eleven and not ten hours. Now he thought that the House would at onceconcede that the workmen were or were not right in this demand—if right it was cowardly for Hon. Members to depart from their principles, if wrong, they had only to op pose the Bill altogether. He could not consent to the second reading of this measure. The Hon. Member for Durham then expressed his astonishment that the Government had left this an open question. He had expected that the Noble Lord at the head of the Government would have adopted a bolder and more straightforward course, and he thought that he was introducing a strange anomaly in legislation by sanctioning the principle that the workman should be pro tected against the capitalist. Sir ANDREW LEITH HAY moved the adjournment of the debate. Lord JOHN RUSSELL said that he rose only to say a few words to the House, in consequence of the attack which had been made upon him a few minutes before six o'clock. If the Hon. Member for Durham (Mr. Bright) had intended to have made this attack, he (Lord J. Russell) thought it should have been made at five o'clock—_(Continued cheer ing)—and he really thought that the Honourable Mem ber, in his anxiety to :make the best defence on behalf of the cotton manufacturers, had departed from that candour and courtesy to which Honourable Members who might differ in opinion from him were fully entitled. The llon. Member said that this was a question of principle, he (Lord John Russell) did not view it as such. He conceived that the difference between ten, eleven, and twelve hours was a question of degree, and not a question of principle. This was no new principle, as the Hon. Member had been pleased to allege. The limitation of the hours of labour had been introduced before into that House, and it would be found that it was carried out in the statutes of the realm.—(Hear, hear, and cheers.) Neither was it a change in the old law, fey the old law protected apprentices against their mas ters: it was, therefore, no question of principle; it was merely a question whether the Legislature should throw the shield of protection round the younger workers. That was a mere question of the day, on which the mem bers of the Government might differ without at all differing on any principle. If the Honourable Member differed from that principle ; if he thought the Legislature were wrong in the course they had adopted, he should have proposed the repeal of the laws on the subject. He knew not that it was necessary now for him to enter into this question. He had stated what he thought was the general principle, and if this debate came to be adjourned he would not detain the House by any length ened observations. But if the House were pleased to listen he would not address himself more than a few minutes to the question. He considered then, as he had already stated, that it was not a question of principle, but of degree ; and that young persons of 13 years of age, working twelve, thirteen, or fourteen hours a day, were taxed too much, because their bodily frame was not sufficiently matured. Ile considered it was too much to give time for theirmoral or mental improverneat, and he conceived that it was so far a question of degree, inasmuch as a shorter period of labour would be more fitted for them. The Honourable J' amber for Durham had expressed a fear of foreign competition. That was another estion, and with regard to it he would only say that the same objection had been urged in every previous arrangement that had been made from 1831 to the present time, and he was happy to say that the manufactures of the country were still flourishing, while the factory ;operatives had been greatly benefitei+. The limitation of labour had given them three or fur months in the year for the purposes of improvement. He would not have troubled the House so long but fur the attack of the Hon. Member for Durham.—( Cheers.) The debate was then adjourned, as we understood, to to• morrow (' his day). The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the House Adjourned at Six o'clock. LAW INTELLIGENCE. PRIVY COUNCIL, Fill. 10. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council sat: again to day to hear appeals. The Loads present were Lord Brougham, Lord Campbell, the Master of the Roils (Lord Langdale), and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall (the Right Hon. Thomas Pemberton Leigh). THE HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY OF GRENADA V. CHIEF JUSTICE :xANDERSON. The arguments in this part heard case were resumed this morning. The case came before their Lord.ihips upon appeal from the decision of his Excellency the Governi.r of the isi , nu, refusing to dismiss the respondent. the Chief Justice the colony, from his situ tion. The case appears likely to 0..!- cupy several days, the first counsel for the appellx , ( Mr. J. P. Wilde) not having yet concluded his addre,s to their Lordships. COURT OF CHANcEi:Y. Fcb 10 The Lord Chancellor sat to-day in his Court, in the Old Hall, Lincoln's Inn and heard appeal motions. THE ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH COMPANY D. NOTT AND GAMBLE. This case came before his Lordship a; (Li a motion in the nature of an appeal from the decision of his Honour the Vice-Chancellor of England, ordering a motion for an injunction made on behalf of the plaintiffs, the Electric Telegraph Company, to stand over, and giving liberty to the plaintiffs to try such action as they might be advised to try the validity of the patents, to prevent the infringement of which was the object for which that injunction was sought. One of the objects of the present moti•m was to discharge that order, also to obtain an injunction from his Lordship to restrain the defendants from directly or indirectly making, using, exercising, or putting in practice the invention or improvement contained in the patents belonging to the plaintiff of the :years 1837, 1840, and 1842, or from, or in any way, resembling or counterfeiting them. We have already given a statement of the facts of the case, and it is, therefore, unnecessary to repea' them. Mr. Bethel!, Mr. Teid, and Mr. Heathfield, appeared in support of the appeal motion ; and Mr. :quart and Mr. Webster were counsel for Messrs. Gamble and Nott. The case appears likely to occupy a dayortw;: VICE- CHANCERY COURT, Ft& 10. (Before the VICE-Cturromuß of ENGLAND). THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY V SWAINSON. Mr. BETIIELL, with whom was Mr. Follett, applied in this case upon motion to discharge an crder made by Sir W. Horne, one of the Masters of the Court, by which he gave to the defendant six weeks longer to put in an answer, plea, or demurrer to the bill of the plaintiffs. The London and North-Western Railway Company was now incor porated with many other railway companies, by several Acts of Parliament, and it was usual in any bill filed by the company to mention those Acts. The London and gorth- Western Railway Company had entered into a con tract with the defendant, Mr. Swainso'n, fur the purchase of a p►ece of land, and the present Bill was filed on the 22d of December, 184 G, for the specific performance of that contract, and praying thacit might be decreed that the plaintiff was bound specifically to perform the contract. The defendant did not put in his answer in time, and not being able, as he alleged, to do so, in consequence of not having had au opportunity of reading the several Acts referred to in the Bill, he applied, under the new order, to Sir W. Horne for further time, which application was granted, and six weeks further given, and that order it was now sought to discharge. Mr. Walker and Mr. Wright opposed the application. His HONOUR directed the order of Sir W. Horne to be dis charged, and gave the defendant ten days to put in his answer to the bill. COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, Feb. 10. BARKER V. LYNDEN. On the assembling of the Court this morning, this case, which was part-heard yesterday, was resumed. Mr. Stevens, the secretary of the company, was recalled, and cross-examined at some length, with the object of showing that the advertisements were ordered on behalf of the managing committee, and not at the instance of the pro visional directors. The evidence, hoe; ever, did not show that any particular distinction was kept up between the two bodies. The only material point elicited was, that the five original projectors, in consideration of having a certain num ber of shares allotted, or a certain amount of money paid them out of the deposits, would bear the directors harmless in the expenses. The shares had never been allotted, and the arrangement was not carried out. No dispute being raised respecting the fact of the adver tisements having been inserted in the newspapers by Mr. Barker, Mr. Sergeant RYLES submitted that no evidence had been adduced to fix the liability on the defendant. No proof was given that any credit had been given to the provisional di rectors. If any credit was given it was either to the secre tary or the committee of management. It did not ,pp ekti • that the secretary, who gave ttel orders, had ever been ap pointed by the provisional directors; for the meeting at which that gentleman and the solicitor were appointed was only a meeting of certain gentlemen favout able to a parti • cular line of railway. Any appointment ot officers or orders emanating from such a meeting, therefore, could not bind the provisional directors who might be afterwards published in ta mnection with the company. Mr. KEA N followed on the same side. Mr. COCKBURN contended for the liabilit y of the defendant on the grounds set forth in the evidence. This case was dif ferent from the ordinary cases of provisional directors, inas much as no distinction had been shown in practice here be tween provisional directors and the committee of manage ment. In fact they acted as one concern. Again it had been clearly shown, that the defendant had given his consent to be a provisional committee-man; that his name had been inserted in the prospectus by his instructions; that a cor rection of his name was made in his own presence; and that as provisional director, he had desired to have 150 shares allotted. Besides he had given, on several- other instances proofs that he took a lively interest - in the company's proceedings. He sub mitted, also, that the meeting on the Bth of October was clearly a meeting of provisional directors, for though they might meet in the first instance as gentlemen in favour of a particular scheme, they resolved themselves before breaking up into a provisional committee, and made the appointments as such. The acts of the officers, therefore, were to be taken as proceeding from the instructions of the provisional com mittee; and as advertising was absolutely necessary for for warding the scheme, that was clearly a liability incurred at their instance. Mr. James and Mr. Parry followed on the same side. Mr. Sergeant BYLES replied, recapitulating the objections he had Previously advanced. The LORD CHM' JUSTICE said, a great deal of what had been advanced on this occasion was inapplicable to the pre sent case. There were certain points on such questions as these, settled as law, till reversed by the House of Lords—, an event which he apprehended would never take place. If he differed ever so widely from what had bean already de cided, in his individual capacity, he would in law and pro priety be bound to give effect to it; but he saw no ground, whatever for difference. Much had been said about the hard ship of the plaintiff having no responsible party to proceed against, if these provisional directors were not liable. But in a great number of those cases, he must remark, the actions were not in reality brought on behalf of the plaintiffs, but only to enable the projectors of companies to save themselves from liabilities incurred, and to saddle them on other parties. He did not, however, say that this was the case with the present plaintiff, who was a trades man, and had, no doubt performed the services for which he sought to recover. It was settled as law that an individual consenting to be put on the list of provisional directors did not, therefore, pledge his credit for any debts that might be contracted in forwarding the objects of the company. It had also been settled that the taking of shares as a provisional director did not establish a liability. Now the present action was brought by an advertising agent, and it would be necessary to refer to the evidence which had been adduced in support of the liability, in order to discover if there was no exception to the rule. The evidence had shown that the defendant assented to be placed on the pro visional directory, and that he had also consented to take 150 shares, though it appeared shares had never been issued. It had next been shown that he had expressed himself as willing to have his name advertised as a provisional director. Now, these in his (the Lord Chief Justice's) opinion, didnot take the case out of the decision which the superior Court had come to, therefore did not establish the legal liability cf the defendant. In reviewing the other parts of the case, he did not think there were any circumstances to alter this view of the matter. The meeting of the Bth ot October seemed to him but a meeting of certain gentlemen, desirous of forwarding a particular railway scheme, and they appointed the provisional directors, but at this time the' were not directors. Neither did he think the circumstance of the defendant promising subsequently to settle the matter. of such a character as to give any other complexion to the case. The evidence of that was not very clear, and was given by Mr. Garbett, who, it should be obse r v e d, h a d been inn mately connected with getting up the scheme. The Learned Judge having gone over the evidence in de tail, gave it as his decision that there was not sufficient evi dence to go to the jury, and that the plaintiffs should be non suited, or else a verdict to go for the defendant, in order to admit of a bill of exceptions. Under the direction of his Lordship, a verdict was returned for the defendant, Mr. COCKBURN, on behalf of the plaintiffs, then tendered a bill of exceptions to the ruling of his Lordship. GILES AND ANOTHER V. COMFORT.-THE TUNBRIDGE WELLS AND RYE HARBOUR RAILWAY. This was an action brought by Messrs. Francis Giles and Alfred Giles, engineers, to recover 1,5601. for work and labour done in surveying the line, and preparing the plans and sections of the Tunbridgo Wells and Rye Harbour Railway Company. This was the first of 13 actions by the same plaintiffs in this Court. The defendants pleaded the general issue. Mr. Sergeant Channel! and Mr. Pigot appeared for the plaintiffs; and Mr. Cockburn for the defendant, who is a merchant in the city of London. Mr. Sergeant CIIANNELL having opened the case, pro ceeded to call his witnesses. From the evidence adduced it appeared that the scheme i w n as pu p r r s o i j l e a c n t e e e d o i f n the a res l o a lu tt t e i r on end of a of e B e 4 t s, ing a n o d f t that he provisional directors, held on the 26th of October, the plain tiffs were appointed th T e h e e ig e n f e e e n r d s a , n a t n h d m i i ns p tr r u e c v t i e o d us t t o o pro ceed with the work. consented to be a provisional director of a scheme out of which the present one emanated, and shares had been al lotted to him. It was further alleged that he had been present at the meeting of the 26th of October, and moved a resolution. The fact of consenting to become a provisional director and to taking shares was clearly proved, but the secretary of the company could not say that the defendant was the Mr. Comfort whose name was attached to the resolution in the minutes. On the resolution being proposed to be read, the question g w as raised whether the evidence was s uc h as could oto the jury, to fix the defendant as the p arty a ll eged to have been present at the meeting. On counsel being heard on the point in queti The LOED CHIEF JUSTI CE , a f ter reviewing the evidence at some length, decided that the evidence was not sufficient for purpose. the . Sergeant CIIANNELL, on beh a lf o f t h e plaintiff, then r con T s i e le nt p e l d ai t r o iti b ir e s t , t v o e n- re su n i o te u c . l 2 . uited accordingly. This action was b G ro l u L g E tt t'. b3' l3 ' L i t h x e rt) s N aMe plaintiffs against another provisional di rector of the same company. The circumstances of the case similar to the pre ceding one the r ecor d was withd b raV i i n- g CO URT OF QUEEN'S BENCH, Feb. 10. (Before Mr. Justice WIGIITMAN and a Special Jury.) KNILL v. LOVEG ROVE. Mr. Serge an t Shee and Mr. Lush A ppaced for the plaintiff ; and Mr. Knowles, Q. U., and Mr. Miller for the de:en,taril. This is an action brought by the plaintiff, a bankrupt in Gloucester, against his attorney. The declaration in the cause alleged against 'the defendant was, first, a breach of good Path, in unnecessarily giving evidence before the Bankrupt Court of an act of bankruptcy executed by Knill ; second, the use of fraudulent pretensions that all the credit ors were rea d y an d w il l i ng to accept a composition of 4s. in the pound, in consequence of which Knill executed a deed of mortgage, whereby 200/. was recovered, a sum represented as sufficient for that purpose; but it afterwards turned out that only five of the creditors agreed to accept the composition. and only two of these received payment to the amount of 171., the rest of the 204. being swallowed up in costs, the defendant's own bill of costs amounting to 108/., and the plaintiff, now bereft of his money, was in no better condition than when the fiat was issued ; third, the want of due vigilance on the part of the defendant in endeavouring to bring the rest of the credi tors to an agreement to accept the composition of 4s. in the pound. The evidence, which occupied the Court tie whole of the day, was multifarious and very unititercsting. It failed to prove ill, alieg.,fion of a Oreach oi good faith, and there fore that part 01 the c.se was abandoned by the plaintiff's counsel. Witneises were called on both sides, who showed that the plaintiff, aware that some of his creditors would not accenc to the composition of 45., agreed to pay a com position of 10s, to two of them, and pressed the defen- Uaot to get the fiat superseded, and said, with regard to his creditors, he would take his chance. It the plaintiff was deceived by the representations of his attorney into the hope that the sum re covered under the mortgage-deed would be sufficient to obtain a settlement trust his creditors, this was not an issue in the trial. The fiat was ultimately super seded, and ab•.ut 151. were paid to the creditors, the rest of the money being swallowed up in costs, but the plaintiff found himself nu better situated with regard to his creditors than when the fist issued. Thejury, after consulting about ten minutes, found a verdict for the defendant. The Court rose at six o'clock. COURT OF EXCHEQUER.—Feb. 10. (Sittings at Nisi l'rius, before the Loin CHIEF BARON and a Common Jury.) CARMAN . v. JOHNSON. Mr. Martin appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Wines for the defendant. This was an action for the recovery of the balance of a loan made by the Metropolitan Loan Society, for which defendant became security. A verdict was taken for the plaintiff for 511. 3s. 4d., with leave to the defendant to move to enter a nonsuit. JAMES v. MANN. Mr. Martin and Mr. Howorth appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Humphrey and Mr. Prentice for the defendant. This was an action to recover compensation in damages for an injury sustained by plaintiff's, cab from a collision with defendant's cart on the 7th July last, in Piccadilly, in conse-, quence of alleged negligence on the part of defendant's servant. A number of witnesses baying been examined on both sides, a verdict was given for the plaintiff for 121. 103.-- costs, 40s. BAIL COURT, Feb. 10. (Before the Judges in Banco.) SIIAIH V. SWEETLAND. Mr. BUTT, Q.C., who appeared for the plaintiff, said that this was a motion for a rtew trial instituted by Admiral Shanks, for the recovery of a right of way over a piece o land adjoining a tenement and some mills, occupied by a person of the name of Reed, who was himself a tenant of Mr. Sweetland. It appeared that the piece of land had been for a considerable time in a state of waste, and un occupied for any useful purpose. On the farther side of it there was a small stream of water which was used by Reed as a convenience, and it was necessary to pass across this land of Admiral Shanks' to get to it. The con stant exercise of this custom for a length of time had induced Sweetland and Reed to believe that the easement was vested in the proprietor pro tempore of the tenement, and that with the easement the real:property came also. Mr. Sergeant KINGLAYE, on behalf of the defendant, said that if there had been no grant of the right of easement, there had been an open use of the right of way for time that was legally immemorial. During the trial in the court below both the tenant Reed, and also an old man long resident in the neighbourhood, named Wollen, had declared that, so long as they had known the premises, this right of way had been enjoyed without interruption. The cause had been put to the jury, under the direction of the Learned Judge who tried the cause, for them to return a verdict, on the ground that if Reed went over the land be lieving that he had the right, if not to the possession of the land, at least to the easement of passing over it. That, he, ( Mr. Sergeant Kinglake) submitted, was an erroneous di rection, for the principle on which the jury ought to have been directed to return their verdict was upon the point as to whe ther there was an open possession or not. He contended that there !Gild been this o?e,. possession, and that the plaintiff ought, there.oe, to be nonsuited. Mr. MONTAGUE SMITH followed on the same side, and contended, that the mere belief of any man ct uld not be taken, ter unless there were facts to confirm the existence et that belief; and that an uncommunicated belief was an improper ground on which to found a decision, and that cause, which rested on s uc h ev id ence , oug h t to be stopped , in limine. Both Reed and Wollen had shown that there had been an o, cupation for above forty years. There was the actual occupation of the right of way, and the whole difficu ty of the case arose out of the testimony of Reed, who had tes ified that the tenant was in occupation of the land. That was clearly going too far, and as is the case with the testimonyof willing witnesses in numerous instances, was both wrong and mischievous. But this in no way shook the real merits of the case, for it had been decided by the Court hi the case of Bright v. Walker, that the right of easement should, in the words of the Act be claimed as such, and not as a right to the land. They also stated in their judgment , that this right must be used openly, not by stealth, but in the face of the whole world. B u t t h e jury in this case bad given their verdict even upon the weakest ground; and he, therefore, submitted that it ought not to be reversed, simply, because one witness had made an injudicious statement, and he did not hesitate to assert 9 1 2 if it were reversed the Court would be destroying c mense number of rights in this country, for wite always be found to come up and make an overstatement. rould d been Mr. Burr, for the plaintiff, contended that there h no sufficient evidence given to prove th e right, for there was other land beside that which had be en adduced. DGE Mr. Justice COLERI said that if there had been no evi dence to go to the jury, he wondered that the counsel on the trial did not turn round and tell the jury so at the time. Mr. Burr resumed, and went through the evidence, en• deavouring to show that it was either insufficient or con flicting, and thus either way constituted a sufficient cause for making the rule absolute for setting aside the verdict. An argument was raised as to what was the land over which this right of land was claimed; when it was estab lished that the piece of ground over which this right bad been exercised, although unquestionably the property of Admiral Shanks, was separated from his other property by a wall, and lay on the side of the ground which was occupied by Reed. The Learned Judges consulted together, and then Lord Chief Justice DENMAN said that they conceived that this trial had not been quite satisfactory, on the ground of insufficient evidence of Reed's occupation, and they therefore decreed that the rule for a new trial should be made absolute, the costs to abide the issue. MARKET NEWS.-(YESTERDAY.) CORAT-EXCILA.NO E. The arrivals of English Wheat for our market this week, eeistwise as well as by land-carriage and sample, have been on a very moderate scale ; hence the show of samples of that grain here to-day was small. Although the attendance of buyers was by no means large, the demand was very steady, and Monday's advanced quotations were readily sup ported. In Foreign Wheat, the supply of which on offer was small, very little business was transacted, yet the holders were very firm, and would not sell, except at extreme cur rencies. Barley was in short supply and ready inquiry, .at fully late rates. The Malt trade was firm, but we can notice no improvement in the value of that article. Oats, Beans, Peas, and Flour moved off slowly, at unaltered currencies. ARRIVALS. Barley. I Oats I Flour. 1,510 qrs. 650 qrs . 1,870 skis 1,330 and I 900 7,B3obrla Snlish ...... Wheat. 1,120 qrs. Irish. Foreign 1,410 Malt, 1,530 on. WRITECHAPEZ. Although the supply of meat on sale was good, the general demand ruled steady, at full prices. Beef, from 2s 8d to 3s 8d ; Mutton, 35 6d to 4s 6d ; Veal. 4s to 5s 2d; and Pork, 3s 6d to 4s 10d per Slbs by the carcase. [ADVERTISEMENT.] —TEAS AT WHOLESALE PRICES, N.). 2, IiucKLERSBURY, CHEAPSIDE.—FamiIies whose con,uthpti ,, n is large, and study economy, will derive considerable. advantage at this establishment. One uni r,.vin price is affixed, by which the purchaser of a single pound can obtain it on the same terms as the trade. Black Tea 2s Bd., Ss., 3s. 4d, 3s. Bd., 45., 4s. 4d., 59. Green 3s. 4d., 3s. Bd., 45., 4s. 4d., 55., Os. 7s. Coffee. 9,1., 10d., Is., is 2d., ls. 4d., ls. 6d., is. sd. One pound sent tree to any part of town. Orders from the country forwarded the same day; and when the quantity is for 61b. weight (tea only), the carriage is paid to any part of EngIand.—MANSELL and Co. wholesale tea dealers. 2, Bneklersbury, Cheapside . PANAMA, DEC. 22.—The Pacific Steam Naviga tion Company's st( am-ship Ecuador, from Callao, arrived here at 30 min. A.M., bringing, in addition to her usual pas sengers and cargo, the mails in continuation with the com pany's steamer Chili, which left Vi Iparaiso 28th November, from the undermentioned ports in Chili, Bolivia, Peru, Ecua dor, and New Grenada, of the respective dates as under noted :—Chili—Valparaiso, 28th November ; Coquimbo, 29th ; Guano, 30th ; Copiapo, 30th. Bol!via—Cebij., 2d 5 1) t e h c ; e j e s r e ; o Peru—.lquique, g a t i l l i a g o. u Grenada—Buenaventura, 19th. Ilt 3 h d ; d P itt a o yt ; a, A l r 4 i t ca h 4 7 1 :e ; uad Is L or a Guayaquil, 16th ; New STOKE NEWINGTON LITERARY AND SCIENTIFTC SOCIETY. —A meeting of the tin mbers of this society was held at the Manor House Rooms, Church-street, ou Monday evening last. The Rev. Mr. Clissold, M.A., who occupied the chair on the occasion, gave a very appropriate address ; aftor which Dr. W. B. Carpenter, F.R.S., and Professor of Physiology at the Royal Institution, delivet ed an a imirable lecture on the application of the microscope to the study of the vegetable kingdom. ADvERTIsEmENT.]—A DISEASED KNEE,--A WON DERFUL CURE BY HOLLOWAY'S OINTMENT AND PILLS.—John Weir. aged 19, of Kinnegs, parish of Longlial, near Armagh, was seized with a pain in his knee, which lasted lII' three months, and then commenced to swell; six months afterward , , it broke out into a dreadful wound, and discharged for twelvemonths, although every remedy was used that medical men could devise, both at the county infirm.,ry and local dispensary, yet no appearance of heallia presented itself, until his father purchased some of Holloway's Pills and Ointment, which soon effected a sound cure. No wounds, sores, or ulcers, however hdig• standing, can resist the proper use of these tine medicines. Sold by all druggists, and at Professor Holloway' establishment, 244, Strand, London. BIRTHS. On the 8111 inst., at Harleyford, near Marlow, the Viscountess Drumlanrig, of a son. _ _ On the 15th of December, 1846, at Cochin, Eaat India, the wife Of Alexander C. Brice, Esq., of a son. On the sth Inst., at Pakenham, Mrs. Stedman, of a daughter. On the 6th inst., at Vassal-road, Brixton, the wife of Mr. Henry It. Marriott, of a daughter. On the Bth inst., at Islington, Mrs. J. B. Price, of a daughter. PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons.) TUESDAY, FEB. 9. NAVIGATION LAWS. Motion made, and Question put, " That a Select Com mittee be appointed to inquire into the operation and policy of the Navigation Laws." The House divided:— MAJORITY—AYES, 155. cheson, Viscount Forster, Mathew O'Brien, W. S. Acland. T. D. Fox, C. R. O'Connell, D., jun. Aglionby, H. A. French, F. O'Connell :John Ainsworth, Peter Gibson, Thomas M. O'Conor, Don Baine, Walter Goulburn . Henry O'Ferrall, R. M. Bannerman, A. Grahant, Sir James Ogle, S. C. Barkly, Henry Granger, T. C. Oswald, Alexandrir Baring, F. T. Grattan, Henry Oswald, J. Barnard, Edward G. Grey, Sir G. Paget, Lord A. ''" Barron, Sir 11. W. Grosvenor, Lord R. Parker, John Bell, John Grosvenor, Earl Peel, Sir Robert Berkeley, Craven Guest, Sir J. Philips, Mark Berkeley, Captain Hall, Sir Benjamin Plumrldge, Captain Blake, M. J. Harcourt, G. Pusey, P. Bodkin, W. H. Hawes, Benj. Rice, E. R. Bouverle, E. P. Hay, Sir A. L. Rich, Henry Bowles, Admiral Hayes, Sir E. Romilly, John Bowring, Dr. Ileathcoat, John Russell, Lord J. Bright, John Herbert, Sydney Rutherford, A. Brotherton, Joseph Hill, Lord M. Sandon, Viscount Brown, W. Hoblimise, Sir J. Seymour, Lord Buller, Charles Hope, Sir I. Sheridan, R. B. Byng, G. S. Hope, A. Smith, Vernon Callaghan, D. Howard, Henry Somers, J. P. Cardwell, Edward Humphery, Ald. Somerset, Lord G. Carew, W. H. Pole Hutt, William Somerville, Sir W. Chaplin, W. J. James, Will!am Stuart, V. Cholmeley, Sir J. James, Sir:W. C. Strutt, Edward Clements, Viscount Jervis, Sir John Sutton, H. M. Clerk Sir G. Kelly, James Tancred, H. W. Colebrooke, Sir T. Labouchere Henry Thornely, T. Collett, John Langston, j. H Turnell, IL Copeland, Ald. Lascelles, W. S. Tuite, H. M. Corry, Henry Lincol n , E ar l of Turner, Edmund Cowper, W. F. Lindsay, Captain Vesey, Hon. T. Crawford, W. S. Loch, James Villiers, Charles Denison, E. B. Lockhart, A. E. Walker, Richard Dennistoun, J. Macaulay, T. B. Warburton, H. Dickinson, F. H. M'Carthy, Alex. Ward, H. G. Duckworth, Sir J. M'Taggart, Sir J. Watson, W. H. Duncan, Lord Maitland, T. Wawn, J. T. Duncan, George Masterman, John Wellesley, Lord C. Dundas, Admiral. Maule, Fox Williams, W. Dundas, David Mitcalfe, Henry Winnington, Sir T. Easthope, Sir J. Mitchell, T. A. Wood, sir Charles Egerton, Sir P. - Moffatt, George Wood, Colonel T. Ellice, Edward Morpeth, Viscount Wortley, J. S. Ellis, Wynn Morris, David Wyse, Thomas Escott, Bickham Mostyn, E. M. Yorke, Henry R. Esmonde, Sir T. Napier, Sir Charles Evans, Sir De Lacy Newry, Viscount Ewart, William O'Brien, C. Fitzwilliam, G. W. O'Brien, J. TELLERS. Hume, Joseph Ricardo, J. L. MINORITY—NOES, Cl. Allix, J. P. Finch, G. Newdegate, N. Arkwright, George Forbes, William O'Brien, A. Stafford Austen, Colonel Frewen, C. 11. Packe, C. W. Bailey, J. jun. G ore , M ontague Palmer, Robert Bankes, George Granby, Marquis of Pigot, Sir R. Baring, Thomas Grimsditch, Thomas Repton, G. W. J. Baskerrille, T. Grogan, E. Bolles ton, Colonel Bateson, T. Hall, Colonel Round, J Bennet, P. Hamilton, G. A. Rushout, Captain Bentinck, Lord G. Harris, Captain Shaw, F. Berestord, Major Henley, J. W. Sibthorp, Coionel Blackstone, W. S. Hodgson, R. Stuart, , J. Blakemore, R. Hotham, Lord Tyrrell, Sir J. T. Broadwood, H. Houldsworth, T. Verner, Sir W. Brooke, Lord Hudson, G. Waddington, H. S. Buck, L. W. Inglis, Sir It. Walpole, S. H. Clifton, J. T. Lygon, General Walsh, Sir J. Cole, H. A. Mackenzie, W. F. Connolly, Col. Manners, Lord J. TELLERS. Disraeli, B. Maxwell, Hon. J. P. Thompson, Alderman Douglas, Sir H. Miles, William Liddell, H. T. Ferrand, W. B. Morgan, 0. PETITIONS ON PRIVATE BILLS. (Room 22, before Mr. Examiner Stunt.) OPPOSED LIST. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (CLYDESDALE BRANCH). In this opposed case, it was found that the standing orders had not been complied with in one or two unimportant instances. Liverpool, Manchester, and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Junction Railway ( Alteration of Main Line and Hawe's Branch, with power to purchase, rent, or use the Northern Counties Union Railway, and amendment of Acts). In this case the opposition was withdrawn, and the cus tomary formal proofs having Leen put in, the standing orders were declared to be complied with. Caledonian Railway, Extension of the Motherwell Branch of the Clydesdale Junction Railway to Aberchenheath Mi neral Fields. In this case also the standing orders were found to have been complied with, except in one or two unimportant in- , stances. CALEDONIAN RAILWAY (BRANCHES TO , &c. This case wa s then gone CANOBIE into. One ) allegation was sus tained, impugning the accuracy of the levels, and the case was adjourned. (Room 23, before Mr. Examiner MAT.) °mann London and Nerth-Western,Wolverhampton and Porto bello Branch, and Birmingham and Wolverhampton, and Stour Valley Station, arrangement and purchase of branch from Showhill, and amendment of Acts. Mr. Examiner May was occupied with this opposed case. It was memorialised against by several parties. In the course of the day several allegations were sustained, but none of them appeared to be of a fatal character. The case was adjourned. WINDSOR, TUESDAY EVENING.—This morning being remarkably fine, and the snow which had fallen during the previous d ay and n i ght being in excellent condition for sledge-driving, the sledges were brought up to the entrance of the • private apartments of the Castle before nine o'clock, and in ten minutes afterwards the Queen took her seat, ac companied by the P r i ncess R oya l an d the Prince of Wales. At the same time his Royal Highness the Prince Consort mounted the drivi ng seat, and drove out of the great qua drangle, follow e d by lthe Russian drosky, driven by Count Alexander Alensdorti; and conveying the Countess of Charle mont, Lady in Waiting on the Queen, having under her care their Royal .Highnesses the Princess Alice and Prince Alfred. The third sledge contained the Maids of Honour in Waiting on the Queen, and the Equerry in Waiting on hie Ma jesty. The Hon. Captain Gordon attended the royal party on horseback. The Prince Consort led the way down the hill from the grand entrance in the London-road, and turning to the left, by Froginore, drove as far as Runny. mead, opposite Magna Charts Island, on the way to Egham, where his Royal Highness turned and drove back by the same route to the Castle, where they sifely arrived by half past ten o'clock, and appeared much pleased by the drive. FATAL ACCIDENT. —An inquest was held on Tuees day in the board-room of the Royal Free Hospital, Gray's Inu-road, on the body of Edward Glynn, aged 66, l a t e i n the employ of Mr. Ashfield, builder, Rest Lion.square. The deceased, with others, was engaged splicing poles on a scaf folding in front of a house in Burne's-court, Coldbath-fields, when lie missed his footing and fell to the ground on his head. A concussion of the brain and death ensued. Verdict ac eordiagly. MARRIED. On the 6th inst., at Marylebone Church, W. It. Hooper, M.D., of Cheltenham, to Emma, daughter of M. Taylor, Esq., of Upper Baker street, Pottinan-square. DIED On Monday, the Bth inst., at Brighton, George Robins, Esq., after a protracted illness. On the 7th of January last, at Gibraltar, Alexander Shea, Esq. On tha 29th ult., Louisa, the wife of John J. Bowles, Esq., Milton hill, Berks. Oa the 2d inst., at Brighton, Mary Ann Helen, the daughter of Mark PriNgle, Esq., of Oakenden, Sussex, aged 13. On the 6th inst., in Dorset-square, Robert Fellowes, LL.D., aged"' On the 611. , hist, at Deptford, Mr. Thomas Wallis, of the London bridge Tavern, aged 74. On the 6th inst., Joseph Bacon, of Great Russell4treet, Nur. thampton, aged 84. On the 7th inst., at Bristol, Mr. Lionel Drew Walter, aged 26. On the 7th inst., at Hatfield, Hefts, Mr. J. Simkins, aged 6L On the 7th Met., at Peckham, the infant daughter of Mr. J. If • Gall. On the Bth inst., Thomas Boyce, EBq., of New-place. 1713mineta" Lon , icn: Printed and Published by 11171tDO YOUNG. of No. 112. Strand, Printer, at The Sun r•Mee, N 0.112. Strand. in the Pracinai (*1 oc SavoY. 111 the Cow; .9( 3114dlectez, 'lll4odith 11! brupsy 11, 1847. -