The Sun. — London, England, 1847-03-03 00:00:00

sses s eeses-e- esessenesessesesee.---e e ssesesseessee-seseesesos esstese alseidy resseedy fee the t i a t e o f ilifees. oarnetaincit of might WM be steerded. On a second occasion when the Member for Perth (Mr. F. Manic) brought the same subject before tie Howe, the Ri g ht Honourable Baronet repeated the ame thing. He must sq, that th. continued refusal of sites by pr o p r i etors was most impolitic, and opproed to the interests and welfare of the count rio—s Hear, hear.) He be• lieved that time and reconsideration had had its effect, and that !aeli cases were not now of so frequent occurrence as form , rly, th ough he regretted to find that a few still existed. He saw that the re were cases still in the Free Church—though ad tore e re-union was now given up—where the inhabitants of ust t;ticosirvdeindy o districts were totally debarred front worshipping God their c onsc i ences. U n d er th ese c ircumstances, Ins Hon. Friend had come forward to ask, not for a legislative rere,edy.for the gr i evances complained of, b ut f ur a C omm ittee in quire into th em I t was a ll ege d t h at s t ron g reasons exist e d it t'in many cases f or re f us i ng t h e s i tes. If th a t were so, Was a legitim a t e cause of inquiry, and wou ld ver y p r operly tne under its consideretion. There wre acre proprietors, brroever, as soon as they becerne aware that union had me Impossible, had granted the sites, which till then hal been refused. To ascertain who those proprietors we re w ould,, be th e result attained b the labours of the Commi tte e. Those also wile labo ure d tinde r the imputation of refusing sites would hav e an opportunity of showing the motives which in taced them in such a course. He, therefore, for o e , was ready to assent to the inquiry. Ile did not,. to after, wish to lie understood as pledging te st' 11 e h y legislative course in consequence of that asserit. Zere were parties wh o were unwildng to believe that t he i rc i tion would be eermanent, and therefore they were In g t O grant s it es ; b ut that expectat i on mus t have I ng ' ll ' e ce passed away ad for the f uutre better things were to be °Pell li e did } not wish, on this occasion, to enter into the tVsestion as t o w h ether the cessation was right or no t. b u t h e I,l(llieeeht everyb o d y would admit that it was a remar k a bl e even t , . e the b carri e d w i th it the sympathies, if not the couv i ct iono . ot ur o m o la Y• He wished f u r one moment to glance at the err el ntes under which this ineuiry was proposed. It had r eseed God to visit a part of Scotland with severe destitution, k e r . l d in this state of things the members of the Free Church, di d all sectarian fee ling, had joined with all parties in It W a s a common fund for removing the prevailing distress h . Pieties e now, fur the fi rst time since the cessation, that bot titr. _ had come together in harmony and union. They had uwn aside all illefeelirg, and, united, they had taken upon at‘lasselves the good will of feeding the hungry, clothing til t ed, and arresting the progress of the destitution. Let I s 'r e o:i n te ld ho P e, then, that before the year closed, all di ff erences -be forgotten, and both parties would again unite them et' pood fellowship and religion. r re. H. INGLIS was unwilling to enter into a general post of the subject, but, before h 3 proceeded further, he att t be allowed to express his sense of the feeling had Moderate manner in which his lion. Friend 11 brought forward this motion. (Hear, , must say that no object which he had ever felt himself manner try st dijf s n: P r e en lie t d fr t o lo t it h p e ose was ever brought forward and advocated manner more calculated to gain it friends. This was very p - °position made last year by his friend the ar. (Mr. Fox Maule). He spoke not of the direct ;he referree to the object. There they proceeded to le ee i .rf a : eli,neg e s t ; here they only proposed a Committee of tO t he Y. nut he did think that some regard ought to be paid and principles of those who supposed that it was of j: e t? ` ',al part of their duty to forward the pri iciples agree i t ,', re ,e Church of Scotland. He could not Cl3tlPta" W.. " "is lionourab:e Friend who seemed to hold nt . e ' whole names he had mentioned as bigots and perse tkonew i' n ' tiro ° n , e especially of them, he ( Sir R. H. Inglish) y lo n e a ' e lY, and knew his Hon. Friend was quite unequal rapnr.;ett_ or vo a unwortlav of he would not say a man, but of a Christian country. He felt himself bound to l e a e s 2P and defend his Hon. Friend Sir James Riddle, who he f o "" was incapable of it, and would be the first to assist in lje W4rdin g any great benevolent object. In reply to the state that of the proposer, he might, in the first place, remind him a nd lll:Population was overstated ; there were but 3,000 eople, th at ,'" 0 of them belong ing to the Free Church. He l ps ssed Gentler' however, and he saw by the smile of the Hon. Wo man that he ' did not consider that any answer. But he , e. ll ld ask the Hon. Member, as he had asked him the former li te °, whether he was prepared to give the same privileges to Cee°„ther Disienter s e recollected that last year the Hon. ilj or c ef l o e : e an Mr. F Maule), when he put the question to him, „ e not at all seem prepared to accede to the proposition. He thought that his lion. Friend ought not to move the mike to do that, the principle of which he was not prepared to I / ',common to all—Roman Catholic as well as Protestant. t th ought that the remaining landowners who had refused I:, P a nt sites h a d d une so by th e con d uc t of the been of the f ree c h urc h o f Scotl a nd. He had pla t' Cr edibly informed th a t at Kimoss, and some other rn e - ` e n e t s a ' the Free Ch urc h h a d b u ilt th e ir establish the t not only near to, but in actual juxtaposition with, a od e hurehes o f the establishment, insomuch that the same bells ties the !line clock answere d f or b o th b u ildi ngs . The real qur s- Pin dispute was , whether he, as a member of the establish otent, should be compelled ' to erect buildings upon his estates h e ti le Purpose of propagating a system of worship to which Mwal conscientiousl opposed. He hoped the House would ate b efore they gav e y their assent to the proposition of the th " ' Member for the appointment of a Select Committee on w e subject. He did not think that the Duke of Buecleugh tlaa actuated by any unworthy motives in refusing sites for kiees or public wors - hip lie thought the Hon. Member for 11rnarnock had introdu cede the question in the manner that Wa n five m ost - unobjectionable, still he did not think that a legi s la- Measure would mend the matter. Sir JAMES GRAHAM wished to say a few words in the P r esent st e of the discussion. It having been his painful e ti StY to : a ddress the House more than once before. Ile "ad but little to add, and nothing to retract. He much regretted that sites had been refused to the Memb ers of the Free Church, and that some individual Proprietors, from a sense of duty, had made such a refusal. It Was, after all, as the Member of the University of Oxford hod Stated, with many of these proprietors, a case of conscience ; but he differed with the Hon. Member in thinking that the Present motion was better than the one proposed last year by the Hon. Member for Perth. He did not consider that the question was one for a Committee. It was admitted that cer. P~pof the great proprietors of Scotland had refused site ; t o th e . es eshurch. No one attempted acs,y. The Hon. Member ."r K ilnaarnock's statement of which had been presented ,t e . ' l , tt Calm and dispassionate manner, presented nothing new. o la r t re had been only two additional cases stated ; the one was th at ' ll Lord Macd ona ld, o f Sk ye , an d h e was even t o ld t h at weer use had been mentioned last year. These refusals tear -l" diminish as the weeght of public opinion would a l ready to upo n the subject. He understood that they were i t in number. What was the object of the measure? Why h ad been frankly stated by the seconder of the motion that hey such so lemn feeling in th a eir nature should be called forth ; they Were in the midst cf a great national calamity, of such an extent I t'd of such an awetil character, that it humbled the pride of 4 0 ". He did agree in the sentiments of Mr. Jones Loyd, so eloquently expressed, and which they had all read in the 'morning paper, that the present was an occasion when the ?gre Oppositio ' n of party ou . ght to be silenced, and all the euterness of religious animosity ought to be assuaged in the l 'ntitnent of Christian charity. Now, he would ask, was ex. P? do t e ttle_a legitimate object? •r was it desirable that the eon *" of certain individuals should be inquired into? If there r e ':,! . no other grounds, he would be prepared to resist the inquire Was it just, or was it advisable, that they should 1 1)V re into what were the religions opinions of the w e ' „e t e , of Buccleuch or of the Earl of Aberdeen ? He tso 4 ,aak, was it even tolerable that such an inquiry should - glare ? He lamented these refusals. He did not think ei at they would continue. The Secretary of State had de -4 re d that they had diminished, and be therefore saw no room tZosa that wrimittee of Inquiry. He considered that the measure end i h tn‘•hy the Member for Perthwas m - st objectionable, to nsur e course of legi s l a ti on on tha t subject would be most did trot Us. The q uest i on was , h owever , one of degree, and he *eret doubt th e competency o f t h e L eg i s l ature , butif they tolerat? l egislat e t h ey should do i t on t h e pr i nc i p l e o f genera l all so t em ; it mu s t not b e con fi ne d to S cot l an d, but extend to trot t oi tet Y• The principle of toleration was universal. lie h et not trespass open this attention of the House furthrrt uP Pre en Lose grounds he would object to the motion, andt f toa division, he would vote against it. Lord the _• B ENTINCK concurred-in all that had fallen from is i h t s l it Hon. Baronet who had just sat down, more especial ! l ieu Hold not agree w i.h the sentiment expressed t heby "r ? S eotl Member opposite, that if the proprietors of land fro m the and rs fused to grant sites, he was prepared to take them who h a m by legislati ve enactments. Every Hon. Member th e Ho d addr essed the House had praised the moderation of his member who moved the appointment of this Corn ell{ r na :._ admitted that there was the sunviter in mob in especaniiner, but there was also something of the . fortiter in re, when speaking of the Duke of Buccleuch ; he (Mr. iilll:rhetttri,eY) acknowledged the virtues of the Noble Duke, but All to ote d that he was willing to indulge in a little persecution. Ptru, c „,, who were acquainted with his Grace, were aware that t to( s t _ l ° l l was altogether foreign to his character, and that esed ee ee generous person did not exist. It was led to that a great degree of provocation had m ore Many of these refusals. He believed nothing could be le iolent and inde c orous than the denunciations flung by toePreacherses of the Free Church upon those who had refused peeeraet alter. He was not prepared togo into an inquiry with Is lit lj eo l f : i t t o ° the conduct of his Grace and other noble individuals p 5 1 16, 7ad been alluded to. If the landowners were to be corn grant sites fur the Free Church, on what ground were e to be refused to the Roman Catholics? Whereve r the be caus e of the Free Church had been refused sites, it was eet'ae they wished to build them ino ff ensive stations. 'etrs ISIAULE No. no fo rd G. BENTl — lie—fle believed, however, that such R as the case, they wishing to build their churches beside, or erbra egedr to, toth e churches of the Estash. T conude, he say that he would support bli the ment Right o llon. cl Baronet ' 4 his objection to the motion. Mr. F. MAULE, after the speech of the Noble Lord an d t hat o f th e Right lion. Gentleman who preceded him, he thought that without going into any argument, he could ti,all!blish a fair claim to an inquiry into the subject. The * 't l e Lord had brought forward assertion after assertion, Committee he (Mr. Fox Mauls) would be able to prove before the ; ` - • :irvi e lee rica l Ian::: w ere wholly without foundation, and the facts of had been misrepresented to the Noble Lord. If the a question for a Committee of Inquiry into the mo tif:3of individuals, he would be one of the last to ask the se eeh e , !: grant the Committee moved for. The Committee erte e_ , , r was only one to inqure into a national griev; nee, and r nere w ,neeh affected an integral part of the nation, and affected k in 'flan one half of the populto ion of that part of the United oe Im. The matters in issue had been before the House Mad e ° Pner occasions , and each time the statements e rstd E t )) , the Honourable .Member who brought them for gets, e"ad been disputed, and he must say that he h aee e it nt the time was now come when the House was bound to full explanation of the matters complained of. If it bee n u se true that unjustifiable language had upon some occasions rnadeu_aed, unworthy of Christian ministers, let the facts be had 4 0 11 lie as the refusal of sites had been made. .He Poe,. 0 wish to protect or to expose either of the . parties. h pr evi )nrie r tit fi_t e eases hal b een brought forward of individuals ward g y ,! e h t used to grant sites, but they wsre only brought for reference to districts in which there were no other Of the ors, and thus enhancing the di ffi culties of the members been Free Church. He woeld tell the Noble Lord what had it t e the co n d uct of the ministers of the Free Church fuse:, island of Skse, to whom sites had been re doe, and what hail been its results famine had Perso ns starvation had done its worst, and many poor at one had been driven to desperation. Threats were aest ens erne held out that the poor would apply to their own rneeoteß{tiehare.the flocks of sheep which were grazing o . n the tt e et dess 'From the pulpits, and in the gravel pits in doctrine were forced to assemble for Divine worship, the Mi n d s s e ,"f obedience was successfully inculcated upon the th e ' 1 the people, and not a single instance had occurred of aPpr e e eta .. Po or re _ e non of property. Was it. to be borne that these th eto l, "lee shuulil be denied the erivile e of a roof to protect floe 'orfomseheinelemency of the weather 4 during their celebra that reivinc worship e— Hear, hear.) He believed these i f the II P • ( ouse refused the latter, they would drive to despair, and also run the risk 'if e (l ie rivirt he rn m en frum the habit of attending public worship. CootZtee_ar,r2t.stly trusted that the House would grant the truth rnir .,7_ , ,T , lnquir y . This was all they wanted, so that the on no t t i s o m o laid bare, and that they might ascertain whether truth and _ complaints of the Free Church were founded in A ir rs (pored redress.—( Hear, hear.) tl • STUART w. ertia n ORTLEY thought the Right Hon. Gen eerem -0 fi rst addressed the House on the side of the Go ent (sir George • veorge Grey) should have remained silent on face. _, ques tion al uot 0 re s. 10 , ri par isoa country iv' ,s. ilso. _ t Al" must i a geologic t hi I Countrl: !re freque '9 r le Irelan d nits' of get °I ige d by m ozi be retie ~:.. Tag ge N., _ii . r . )spt?..Y4E . ,_lB 7- ii:LoNF;BII,A.Y ' ""- • 17.7.4.-• quatio, rill tefilt to the advocacy of -•• the Hon. asfembe, behind bins. It was geing upon a most dangerous principle. He would not yield to that Resist Hon. Baronet in the slightest degree in his support of the principles of toleration, and in his admiration of the-great body of the Free Church, set. he could not support. the present motion, because he honestly believed it would tend to retard inst. ad of advance the cause they were so anxious to prernete. The question was in course of settle ment ; it would, in due course of things, be arranged by the people of Scotland themselves, anti for the House to step in and interfere would be to revive the evil. it was ad mitted that since last year die cases of refusal of sites had greatly reduced, and that this year there were but thirty. This showed that the cause of the comfilaint was being gradually done away with, in obedience to the expressed feeling of the House, and the sense of the Scotch people. To appoint a Committee, therefore, would be of no use, but to ensue again the hail feeling that was dying away. With regard to the Duke of Buccleuch it was well known that he had only refused • because parties, ministers and their frienes from a distance, came on his estates and excited hi: own tenantry against him. He (Mr. S. Wortley) did nst say that the Noble Duke acted right in refusing sites, still he mentioned tlis in his vindication. As a proof that the state of things was steadily improving, he would refer to the fact that while thousands of petitiens were poured in last year into Parliament on the subject not One was present: d during the pre cut.— ( Hear, hear. ) On these ;pounds, therefsre, he did not think any good would come front the Committee. lie would therefore oppose its ap , oint Lent. Lord J. RUSSELL. in rising to support the motion. must not be understood as speakihg on the behalf of the parties to whom it hal ieference. No one hail more strongly resis ed the claims of the Free Church party before the unfort tinateseces si n t ban himself, as he could see no good that would arise fermi it. But the secession had taken place. A great numbsr of the people of Scotland hail left the Estaldished Church, and their ministers lied given up their houses and their means of liveli hood, so that they might be at liberty to txpress the string religious feelings which they en - ertained, freely and unmolested. That secession having taken place. he was now no less persua ded that everythieg should lie done to enable them to preach and to practice the doctrine which they believed that it was their right to do.—( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Dorchester (Sir James Graham), put the case in a smooth and round firm, from which they might conclude that all further inquiry into the. subject. was unnecessary. He said that the facts were un disputed—that a Committee was not required, but no sooner had the Right Hon. Baronet concluded than up got the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, and said that regarding the facts, they were not to be taken for granted. He disputed their correctness, aed stated that the reason why sites had in many instances been refused was, because the Free Church parties had acted iu such an unbearable and oppressive manner that to grant them was impossible.—( Hear, hear.) Now, this was to be ascertained by inquiry. As the facts were disputed, and as these reasons for a refusal of sites were given, a Committee of Inquiry to ascertain the truth was re quired. They would then learn the true reason why the grant of sites was refused. Here it was confessed there was a considerable grievance. In one place pat ties were driven to the moor and the moss, under the pelting of the storm, and drenched by rain, in order to listen to religious worshi in such a way as they desired. Like the Covenanters of old, when persecution was the established law, they were deprived of all shelter in their endeavours to worship according to the dic tates of the consciences. In other places they had to go out in boats to meet the ministers whose religious doctrines they adhered to. All this had been justified, on the ground of the rights of property. Now a legislative rtmesly was talked of; and while on the one hand he was unwilling to consent to a legislative remedy on a subject of such difficulty, on the other hand, it it were proved that the facts alleged were true—that the inquiry showed that the refusal of sites die of arise from the improper proceedings of the parties themselves, but were simply refusals on the ground of being a dillerent religious sect, and if the pastors still were obliged to worship with. out the shelter of a roof or dwelling, he would not be indis posed to a legislative remedy.—( Hear, hear.) It was, there fore, a case for inquiry, as it would not be for the House at once to interfere. He admitted that if the Free Church was entitled to sites, that so was the Roman Catholic, the Society of Friends, or any other religious body.—(Bear, hear.) The principle he admitted was universal. But though that was the case, it did not convince him that a legislative re medy was not advisable.—( Hear, hear. ) There was no thing more sacred than the right of every man to wor ship according to the dictates of his conscience; and though some gentlemen of the highest character and most benevolent disposition had refused sites, it only showed to what extremes men of the best feelings would go on the question of religion. —( Hear. hear. ) They had an imeance in the Hon. Member for the University of Oxford himself, than whom none could possess a more kind or benevolent disposition, but on this question he has shown how little he can teel for the sufferings of others.—(Heat, hear.) He thinks the people of Scotland should support the churches that were open for their accom modation, and has no regard for their feelings or opinions when they differ from him. But how would that le on. Member like, if he, were in a town where there was no place of worship but a Roman Catholic chapel, and was told to attend there for there was no other place for him, and that there was plenty of room. —(Cheers and laughter.) This showed, how little persons of the kindest notions could act justly in religious disputes.—( Hear, hear. ) Though it might be considered a dangerous principle in legislation to admit such a remedy as he referred to, and that it would be a violation of the rights o f property, still he wou ld be p re p ared to support it if he saw it required. With respect to the rights of property. was not the rights of property equally violated in questions of health. in constructing railroads, and in forming streets or squares? There was no hesitation in opening a way or removing a house if they thought such a step was necessary. On the same principle he did think, in the granting of sites, that inter ference m i g ht be required —( Hear, hear.) In the course of the present debate he had been glad to hear but one opinion prevail as to the impolicy of refusing sites, and he hoped, whatever decision the House might come to, those who had hitherto made stilirefuoils would t a k e no ti ce o f thi s g e neral expression of opinion, and c angc their course of proceed ing in relation to the worshippers of the Free Church. Mr. SCOTT was prepared to give his vote against this o C r o 2e m o n f i Committee e N o o f b l l e n q v u a i r r t y i i es tlyfhohew s e v r e e r e s to o f t e c o n n s a u l l l u t d it.hde to, o w: s h h e e sof be lieved that he would court inquiry, and prove beyond doubt that he had good and sufficient reasons for withholding these sites. Similar, lie believed, would be the sentiments of Lord Macdonald. When he remembered the late commotions in the Church of Scotland, and die fact that the vast number of sites which had been in the first instance refused had dwindled down to about thirty, he could not but see with pain this re opening of the question, and he hoped that within a few years, if they were to allow the publi c opinions to unfold itself, the country would be at peace—(Loud cries of "Divide.") Colonel MORE thought they were bound to make inquir} i and he would support the motion o f th e H on . Member, at tln , same tints not pledging himself to support any after motion which might be founded upon it.—(Centinued cries of " Divide.") The gallery was then cleared for the division, when there appeared— For the motion for inquiry Against it •• Majority —2B POOR REMOVAL BILL. Mr. BANKES then proceeded to call the attention of the Howe to the report of the Select Committee on the Settlement and Poor Removal, and also to the copy of the case submitted by the Poor Law Commissioners to the Law Officers of the Crown, for their opinion with reference to the construction of a clause in the Poor Removal Act. It had been his (Mr. Bankes . ) endeavour to induce the committee to examine into the working of the measure as it affected the comforts of the poor, but after some discussion, a majority of the Committee determined to postpone that consideration. If the Committee did not, before Easter, make greater progress than they had yet done, he should feel it his duty to bring in a measure modifying in a very great degree, or perhaps, repealing alto gether, the Act of last session. It had been promised by the Nr ble Lord and some others of the Members of the Govern ment, that this subject would be laid before the House this session; but looking to the great diversity of opinion in that Com mittee, he did not see any hope that they would have a measure introduced in sufficient time to warrant them in expecting it to pass into a law that session. There was a feeling very popular now-a-days to do away with settlements altogether, and to provide for the poor by a national rate. '1 hat feeling had greatly progressed in consequence of the defi ciencies of the Bill passed last Parliament.—( Hear.) He believed that the abolition of settlements would be most prejudicial to the poor, an that it would not (as had been absurdly argued) give a stimulus to industrial exertion. To support his statement he must allude to the evidence of Mr. Guls in, an Assistant Pour-law Csmmissioner, but he must first state that the reason he had not referred to it before was, because the Committee which sat upon this subject decided upon reporting before they heard, and published the evidence. Now, Mr. Gulson? in his evidence, said the Act was unjust and defective, had totally failed in its operation, and must sooner or later be altered. This he thought was enough to prove his case. He could conceive no better testimony in his favour than this. It was perfectly true that it counterbalanced the evidence of the Po •r-law Commissioners themselves, but he thought the preference ought to he given to Mr. Gul sou's evidence, because he had ample opportunities of witnev ing its injurious effects upon the poor, whereas the Poor-law Commissioners had no such opportunities. Mr. Gulson spoke practically, but the Poor-law Commissioners gave their evidence theoretically. No doubt the intention of the Act unjustwa sgood, and but inope r ativ e , in o i)era c t a iv rr e y . ing i) ( e i r u h t a i l ts ): i(tledtaidils notit was n.eigh fo s u o nd op t p o ro b s e . bthivaetlypruoppoonsittia,p:h)ner a a w s o t n h o n h r t at t e o - p h a o y a e l r t , e r obdu in e t v h e a n t r admitting that proposition, the law oueht to be altered in that respect or discontinued al toget h er. l i e session so regretted m uc h th a t Govern mentfi far to advance without stating what they intended to do wit mp eu its ntei,,,d a t to thatils the e did not expect that they would have disclosed H this time, but certa i nly 112 haea, its general principles would have been communicated House. Had there been any parties in th e House responsiblet for the operation of the po o r - law , he was quite c er t a i n so many deficts could not have crept into it, and he was, therefore, the more anxious to learn what improvements were to be intro: duced into it. The law had been decided by the law officers of the Crown, as well as other eminent legal authorities, to be defective, and he thought the House was entitled to have the opinion of these legal gentlemen. But he did not ask fir much, all that he asked for was the care upon which the opinion w as given. Mr. Lewis, in the Committee, stated that six questions were submitted to the law officers of the Crown upon which to found their opinion upon the legality of this law, and it was for the production of these six questions that he now made this motion. They were called for in the Committee, hut it was stated that only the House of Commons had the power to eels for their production, and it was under these circumstances that he brought forward the present motion. At present there was a strong feeling abroad, that the law ought to be abrogated altogether, but he warned the Govern ment that their best course was to amend its defective provisions, and the strong feeling would ssbsile. In an amended form, and, with the aid of a new Poor-law Commission, the Act might prove successful, but, without that amendment, it must still remain unjust and inoperative. Mr. C. BULLER said it was a rule in the legal profession, which had always been respected and observed, both by the House and the Government, that neither the case nor the opi nions of counsel should he prsiduced. The questien which bad been referred to the Committee alluded to, by the lion Gen tleman opposite, was a most difficult one. Opinions upon the consideringe om t o any ts decision upon the .uhjgeneral law of settlement were so very dive rs ifi e d, t h a • i t was qu i te imposiiblt for s the t,nt Committee to have withoutfirst t bearings, and without considering what were the particular circumstances of each mode of settlement. The question which he t'• ought to he decided by the : urn mittee was, whether there was anything connected with the framing of the law, which rendered the working of then measure in a manner contrary to the opinions of th ose w h o brought in that measure. The opinion of th e ma j or i ty o f the Committee was, that the interpretation of the Committee should be different to the interpretation put upon it by the framers of the measure. A particular interpretation bad been put upon the Act, in consequence of which, one half of the paupers of the comitry had obtained an irremovable settlement ; and he, fur one, would not consent to alter the measure, so as to meet the supposed in tentions of the framers of that measure. It would be a great hardship to the poor of the country if such a course were adopted. The excuse of the Committee for refusing the evi dence of Mr. quiston upon the working of tlse present law was, that the Hon. Member for Dersetshire had proposed that evidence too late; the evidence had been closed when he offered it, and the Committee were then engaged in reporting upon the evidence they had heard, The House muss, ;GOY up3u the question as a whole ; it was ore which affected, to an immense extent, the condition of the people of this c,:iuntry. . . Mr. MILES said that there was a very strong opinion in the minds of the Committee that the operation of the Poor Removal Bill ought to have ii en most carefully looked into The real question, he thought, for the House to consider was whether the country was to be taken in by a gross fraud. The courrry thought it was a fraud, and it was reprobated throughout all portions of the country as such. The Hot,. Member then alluded, at considerable length, to the statements of a gentlenr:n residing in the Frume union—a union con taining twenty-nine parishes—showing the injurious operation of the existirg law in that union. Sir G. GREY thought that the motion of the lion. Member was a most unusual one, and he hoped that the Hon. Member would not pr e ss it. He did not see what advantage could possibly be derived from publishing to the world tie six doubts referred to by the Hon. Member, and which had been submitted to the opinion of the law officers of the Crown. The Hon. Gentleman should submit a defioite motion on the subject, and until he did so be should consider himtclf to ot l es to abstain from entering into the general ques!inn. Mr. FINCH thou,c,dit that the Hon. Member for Di,rset shire should not 10-ess his motion at preset t. Ile was of opi nion, hoe ever, that the Removal Act of last s 'on was one which produced considerable evil, and was pas favour the lauded at the exi ense of the manufacturing in est ; bat as the law of settlement was at present under the consideration of a Committee, he thought the Hon. Member should trait for their report. If they did riot recommend its repeal, then he would support the Hon. Member if he made a motion to that effect. _ _ . --- Mr. RICE thought the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire should persevere in his motion fur a repeal of the Act of last session. He knew that in his own district it would operate most iejuriously, for on the h March next, notices would be served on many ere +age; s iu his ricighteer: hetet, who wousl obliged to leeve their holdings on Michaelmas next. The Hon. Memoir state,/ several instances NS here the operation of the Act was meat harsh. He hoped, therefiee, the Hon. ' Member wculd persevere Vi ith his motion after Easter, and lie might rest assured he would be well supported by petitions. Mr. E. WODEIIO USE hoped the Hon. Member for Dor setshire would persevere in his efforts, and expressed his obli gations to him for having taken the qtiestion up. The late Act had operated most injuriously in his part of the country. Mr. VERNON SMITH was glad that this discussion had taken place, otherwise the report of the Committee might have had the effect of inducing a feeling throughout the country that the Act of last session was to be permanent. He hoped, however the Hon. Member would not postpone his measure till after Easter; for he contended, that the repeal of the Poor Removal Act of last session was preliminary to coming to any arrangement with regard to the law of settlement. The sooner, therefore, he brought forward the measure the better would it be fcr the country. Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that his respect for the time of the House prevented him from referring to the evidence that had been adduced, bet which was not before the House, and for the same reason he did not intend to go into the question of the Removal Act of last session, which was not under their consideration. The Hon. Member for Dorset shire gave notice of his intention for an alteration, er the repeal of the Act of last session, after or before Easter. He by no means denied that the interpretation of the law officers of the Crown had given a more extensive operation to the Act, than those who bad brought it forward, or the House which passed it, intended. But he could not concur in the censures which had been passed on that extension, for the balance of advantages was greatly and decidedly in favour of the poor of the country. That was not the question now, but he considered that he should be wanting in his duty if he did not detail some of the advantages to which he referred. '1 here was one class, however, against whom it operated unfavourably. He believed the Act of last session bad conferred inestimable advantages on large classes of the poor of this country. First of ail, he would call attention to that great provision in the Act, which stated that a pauper should not be removed after a residence of a certain number of years. The next had reference to those oho re sided in a place for some time, but who had not establishe4 a right of settlement by a residence of five years. He was satis fied that if this Act was rightly u derstood with respect to the recipients of relief, it would be found that it was decidedly favourable to the poor, and that it was therefore a humane and just enactment. With regard to the effect of the Act upon the ratepayers, he had never altered the opinion he had already standing express theed' an offence should ce h hadcontinue therebyto i t ‘ i , t e e n r t ation many it , n of h o th i • friends, that the law of settlement did not impose too heavy burdens on the ratepayers. As he was a member of the Com mittee floe sitting on the subject, he could not well use the evidence which had been adduced before it. If this were not so he might have availed himself of the evidence of Mr. Gulson, a gentleman of considerable experience, who was called by the Member for Dorsetshire before the Com mittee, to show that they ought not to alter the present law of settlement. As the whole of the evidence would be in the hands of Hon. Members in the course of a few days, he en treated them not to give their attention to garbled extracts but to peruse the whole of it. He was a man of the bighes. authority and well conversant with the operation of the law, not only in the manufacturing districts of this city, but in mans parts of Ireland, in fact, h e p ossesse d more pi ac ti ca l k now - . ledge on the subject than any other man. They had that day of E Union ng l a a n n ( d i , t h a e I chairman e o n f t in c o a u n r o f f g g r e u a a t te i x a p n r i i e n n e t c h : w n h o , o rt s t , i , examined one of the g uar di ans o f th e S u ff o lk an d Cambridge e o e e evidence would be found moot material. In fact, he was jus titied in saying that the whole of the evidence aideced before the Committee would tend to show, that the Act of last session ought to be maintained in all its integrity, but that some por tion of the existing poor-law, and even of the law of settle ment, admitted of correction. Mr. 0. STANLEY considered that in making the altera tions referred to, they would not overlookthe rate-payers, many of whom were in a condition little removed from pauperism. He trusted that the Committee now sitting for the purpose of ir:quiry into the law of settlement, would endeavour to devise remedies for all the anomalies which existed in the present law, and whish had led the Attorney and Solicitor-Generals tr. form a different opinion to the one entertained by many el the hoards of guardians. Mr. E. DENISON considered notwithstanding the sitting of the Committee, that the House was in a tit condition to proceed then to the discussion of the question of the law of se ttl emen t. No pledge had been given to tl , e Committee that the question would not be entertained by the :louse mild the Committee had furnished their report. Ile considered ilia , o.e law had worked well ; but when the ratepayers were dis satisfied the recipients could not fail to suffer as the ratepayer, eou'.d believe the poor forced upon them, and it was not un• likely that they might be u,ed unkindly. Therefore some alterations were necessary. The evidence taken before the Committee had not had that effect upon hi: mind which the Hon. Gentleman the Member for INrsetshire had sated it hail had upon his. Sir W. JAMES wished to know if the Government intended to take steps to remove some inconsistencies with respect to the powers placed in the hands of auditors relating to the pay ment of accounts? He commended the conduct of the Com mittee in not wishing to interfere with the law of last ses sion until they had proposed the adoption of a better measure. Mr. NEWDEGATE bore testimony to the fitness of Mr. Gulson to give a Factical opinion on the working of the law. Sir G. GREY stated, in reply to the question of the Hon. Member for Hull (Sir W. James), that the Pour-law Com missioners had taken the matter into their special consi derat ion. Mr. WAKLEY said, the parties who were so anxious to get this law repealed were tyrannical boards of guardians, and gentry who had no wish to pay for the maintenance of the poor. Now he believed the Bill an excellent one, and he was sure if they compared the gored end the evil of the measure that the former would be found to predominated to a great ex tent.—( Hear. ) It would be useless for him to repeat what had been so well said by the Right Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham), but he could confirm from his own experience all that he had stated on the subject. The ratepaye. s in the me tropolis did not complain, so far as he could judge, of the opera tion of the poor-law. The expense of the rates pressed heavily upon them, but they bore the expense because they he lieved that it was absolutely necessary. In his parish since the Bill had been in operation the guardians had not sent any Irish paupers back to Ireland. because they knew that by doing so, they would drive them to starvation. The Irish pauper obtained relict in this country when he sought it. Was it not mons!rous, that in England. an Irish paup, r was entitled to relief, but that, if he were sent to his own country, under the same Crown and under the same laws, he would be doomed to starvation. The Right Hon. Baronet in passing the Bill, got in the small end of the wedge, and he hoped the people would see that it would be driven home, and that all future laws on the subject would be framed on the same principle. So anxious was he to put the matter to the test, that he gave the Irish paupers a general invitation to come over here. Ile, wished they would all come over. He wished 2,11;0,000 of the destitute people of Ireland would come over here during the next month--( Hear and laughter)—because would bring the Parliament to its senses with respect to those laws, lie was informed that in St. Ann's parish, out of every shilling paid to the poor, that l Id. was paid to Irish paupers, and that nut of 27,0001. expended for the relic of the poor in his parish, during the last year. 20,000/. was expended in the support of Irish paupers. He admitted their right to relief, and would not deprive them of it, but what he said was, that the poor-laws of the three coun tries should be assimilated, and that each county should sup. port it 3 ewn poor. Mr. HARRIS said that the whole of the question had arises, from the vague manner in which the Act had been constructed, leaving it discretionary with the guardians to adopt the law or not. Mr. BROTHERTON said that he believed that the measure would be a humane one if properly carried out; and looking at it as a whole, he believed that the good more than counterba lanced the evil, and he would be sorry to see it repealed. Mr. B. ESCOTT said, that with respect to these numbers of little debates, they only indicated that the whole question, like one of finance, was to be hung up for another session of Parliament. The indignation of the townspeople in England had been very generally excited against the provisions the law, and he could tell them that the country people also mere of opinion that some substantive alteration should take place in the relief of the poor. They could not enter into th, not bn into satisfied the question o f re li e f w i t h out entering i nto t h at o f sett l ement, and they could n o t en t er i nto t h e l aw o f sett l ement w i t h out enter iugquestion unless o the of rating. great The people of propertyofEnglsa brought t o contribute with the land. Thero gietors of funded prop erty should be made Poduldble would e to contribute their common share wall those wh o contribute their hard earnings. It was the owners of funded property who made the poor.—( Hear hear, and laughter.) It was they who caused the gres. amount of taxation which was levied upon the people in order to pay and keeo them up. Mr. S. WORTLEY said that nothing would satisfy th e people t e people unless there was an a b o li t i on of thel law of settlement. Mr. BANKES said, that after what had I.llen from the pre , ceding speaker, he wou.d agree not toh . ., • press a motion EXPENSE OF *ENGLISH. R ULWAYS: . snake th e mo ti ons of k et that th e Ri g h t as wanting rtgr to t ir i i i. courtesy 10 Lord G. BENTINCK, in rising to thin question. which he had given mitice expressed hiss Hon. Member should thin that he w him in calling the a tt e ntion o f the House But when, on a f o rm er occasion, the subject of rail_ ways was under consideration, the late Chan cellor of t Exchequer had made the extraordinary statement he did as the expense of English railways, he (Lord G. Bentinck th o u g ht it necessary h e should set himself right on tn. queso.on. The extraordinary statement which the ex-Chan cellar of the Exchequer had made was, that seven of the principal lines of railway in this country before the year 1840 had cost no less a sum than 37,72941M'. This had induced him (Lord G. Bentinck) to make an inquiry into the subject. and the follow'ng was the result to which he had arrived. The Right Honourable Gentleman stated that the London and Birmingham Railway before 1840 had cost no less a sum than 8,!50,0001. ; but what would they think of this surprising statement, when he told them that if they looked in page 475 of the returns furnished te that House they would find the sum expended was onl) 5,994,536'. ; and of the ten Bills enacted for this company, but six were passed before 184).—(Hear, hear.) The Grand Junction was stated to have cost 4,638,0001. before 1841, whereas he found there had been expended but 1 921,496' The Great W es t ern was s tated to have spen t before 1840, 8,282,0ia01.; the ex p en diture, however, lie found was only 4th,540t,8,w1a36 54,01. The B r i g ht on Railway was represent ed to have cost 20367,000!. ; the real expense was 1, 166,5401. The Sou, h W es t ern was represen ted to have cost before 1840, 2, 600 000/ ; 3 • 6 01. B the sum, thheowgerveearietshtoulehpasrotmureewhfraotinundtheer $ real facts of the ease hail been shown by the Right lion. Gen tleman in his representation of the expense of the South- Eastern Rail way. He was not content with increasing it one-third. or one-half, or even double, for while the real expenditure had only been 364,4051. it had been represented to be 3 857,0001. He stated that the expenditure on the Midland railways was 7,235,000/., when, in truth, the whole exeendituse at that time had only been 1,257,600/. But he (Lord G. Bentinck) was quite willing to give the Right Hon. Gentleman credit fsr a tots! ignorance on this subject. It would seem that when he took the Midland Counties Railway as an illustration, he ima gined that he was dealing with the Amalgamated Midland railways of a liter period ; and therefore he included the ex penditure of the North Midland and Birmingham lines. If that were so, then the entire expenditure from the first commence ment amounted to 4,724,753/., so that the truth woe, that on these seven railways from the first commencement, from th year 1836, when their Acts were first obtained, the expendi ture of the whole of them had been but 20,437,115 1 . When the Right Hon. Gentleman had sent forth a statement to the country that the expense in the two years of the deficiency was 37,729,000/. ; so that they had a Chancellor of the Exchequer who, on the seven railway lines, was wrong to an amount of 17,291,090/..--( Hear, hear.) Now, if that was not a marvel lous statement for a gentleman to make, who once held the post of Chancellor of the Exchequer, he (Lord G. Ben tinek ) did not know what constituted a marvelous statement. But that was not the whole ease. The argument of the Right Honourable Gentleman wss an answer to a speech which was made three weeks before. Though Honourable Gentlemen had came down to the House calmly and deliberately, armed with the authority of the rail way Cs'ommittee report, of which he was himself a Member ; he made this statement of the expenditure in the yeas of deficiency. Now, as the only years in which a gloat de ficieney was found in the revenue were the years 18.?.9 and 1840, the impression which was intended to go forth to the country was that this sum of 37,759,000/. was the expenditure of the years 1839 and 1811. Whereas he (Lord G. Bentitick) found that on these railways in th;,se two years the entire sum expended was bat 9,718,f - '9;/., showing an aysrage expenditure in each of the two years of 4,859,0001. ; so that taking this view o' the question the Right Honourable Gentleman Wes net wrong merely in the matter of seventeen bat of twenty eight millions—( Hear)—and when they reflected that this statement was come to after much deliberation ; with all the pomp and circumstance which attended an Ex Chsncellor of the Exchequer, with the report of the Committee, of which he had been a member, in his hand; and when they saw that that statement was exhibited in the face of that party, with the figures quoted in perpendicular columns; when they saw 111 this, he trusted the House would not think that he had occupied its time unnecessarily, in showing how little reliance was to be placed on the statistics and statements of the Right Hon. Gentleman. But when it went to the country and to Ireland, that it was on account of the pressure from the Right Honourable Gentleman that her Majesty's Government, which appeared to be wavering whether or not they would accept the measure which he had introduced to the House, when it was solely from the pressure of the Risslit Hon. Gene leman that the First Lord of the Treasury was fixed to the de claration that he wou'd resist the second reading of the Bill when it came to that House ; it would be stamped on the public mind of the country that her Majesty's iklinisters had allowed themselves to be led by such blinded guides as the Right Hon. the late Chancellor of the Exchequer. He (Lord G. Bentinck) had stated that the years 1839 and 1840 were the two past years in which there was any great deficiency in the revenue, l'rue there was a deficiency of 658,0001. in 1837, and of 345,0001. in 18',8 ; but these deficiencies had arisen from the re duction of 930,000.: of taxes, and did not ar i se f rom an y erostration of the resources of the country ; but in the year 1841 there was a deficiency of 2,100,000/., and in the year 1842 of 3,979,000/. Was there, in these two years, a great expenditure of money on railways ? Far from it. He found, that in the course of these two years, there had been ex pended— On the London and Birmingham On the Great Western .. On the London and Brighton On the Grand Junction On the South- Western On the South-Eastern ... ....... ..... 2,171,593 On the No: th Midland, the Midland Counties, and Birmingham and Derby, together Making a total of £3,009 637 Or about an average of 4,000,0001. on each of these ' y e . He must say that when the exaggerations of the Rightll a o r n s Gentleman went to the extraordinary length of 17,000,000/. in the best face that could be put on the matter, or of 23,030,0001., if the argument of the Right Hon. Gentleman were taken in its fullest extent, he was justified in saying that it could be nothing but a trick of the trade, or if not so it was what he (Lord G. Bentinck) had already designated as mar vellous a statement as was perhaps ever heard within the walls of that House, and most ma-vellous, as coming from a Chan cellor of the Exchequer. The Noble Lord concluded by moving for a return showing the amount of money expended in the actual cost of construction and of working stock (including locomotive engines, carriages, tools, &c.,) of all railways in Great Britain and Ireland in each triennial period previous to ;he first day of January respectively in the years 1841, 1844, and 1847 ; as also a return, showing the sums of money actually expended by the following railway companies previous to 1841 : —London and Birmingham, Grand Junction, Great Western, Brighton, South Western, South Eastern and Mid 11nd, likewise the aggregate sum expended by the above-men tioned railway companies in each year previous to 1841. Mr. GOULBURN regretted that he had been the innocent cause of inflicting on the House a somewhat lengthy speech in support of certain returns to which there could have been no possible objection. But he thought lie could satisfy the House that it was not to him, nor to any statement of his, that they were to impute this inconvenience. If on the occasion when he had delivered the speech or expressed the sentiments which the Noble Lord had seen fit to attribute to him, the Noble Lcrd had availed himself of the privilege which he then enjoyed (the House being then in Committee), of observing upon the statement which he (Mr. Goulburn) was alleged to have made, or if he had asked any explanation of that state ment he (Mr. Goulburn) would have been most ready then to live that explanation which he would now be compelled to give and thus would be precluded every necessity for further discus sion or this subject.—( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had stated, that they had had a Chancellor of the Exchequer who had advanced erroneous sta'ements, and false ca.'culations, and shat he was therefore bouni to suffer the penalties attached to these. He ( Mr. Goulburn) might say in return, that. a use wao expected to be Chancellor of the Exchequer, and who misrepresented what fell from ogler Honourable Gentlemen, ind founded false arguments on those misrepresentations ; he Mr. Goulburn) said that that person was not fit for the ace to which be might be thought to aspire.—( Hear, hear. ) With these observations he would proceed to sta te to the House slat it was he did say on the occasion to which the Noble Lord had made reference : he would vindicate the words le had made use of on that occasion, and the argument which he had deduced from them. The Noble Lord said that n making those statements lie was doing that which was im proper, because he was referring to a speech delivered three weeks before in Parliament. He was afraid the Noble Lord imputed to him a practice to which he himself was but too prone, namely, that of taking nine days to consi der his reply. Honourable Memb ers would recollect that he then spoke to the strict question before the House, anti referred particularly to a speech of the previous evening. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had, on bringing for ward his Budget, adverted to the revenues of the years 1842, 1343, 1844, 1845, and 1816, and had shown by reference to a number of articles that a reduction of duty on those h a d l e d t o a progressive increase in the consumption of such arti c l es , and the Chancellor of the Exchequer argued from thence that the reduction of the duties on commercial articles was the wiser policy to be pursued. Th said that the Ch ance ll or was wrong in his reasoning, this increase wa s no t t o b e attributed to any t:), le a the;d vial policy of th e country, b ut was to b e att a u n t g e e d i a n it t o h g enrantO 'he extension of railways. He said, "What has free trade to do with it ? It is railway enterprise alone that has done this. The Noble L or d sa id h e (Mr. Goulburn) had confined his ob servations to the years 1839.40, and followed that statement up with the declaration that these were the only two years of great deficiency. Now, the Noble Lord subsequently, in his n soeech, admitted th a t t h ere was a d e fi c i e ncy in 1841 of own millions, and in 1842 o f t h ree m illi ons ; but let that pass. The Noble Lord said he (Mr. Goulburn ) attri b ute d the defi ciencies of the year s 1839-40 to the expenditure which took place in those years on railways. Now he ( r. Goulburn) said no such thing. What he did was not .at say would he found correctly recorded in what he liberty to refer to in that House—in those memoranda which conveyed the debates i n some d egree to the public. It would ' be found from them th a t h e state d, t h a t during the years of deficiency there was r a i se d f or ra il wa y s , in the course do leave pletion. no less than 47,700,000/., an d i n order not h t he l de the House in doubt, he st a ted the quarter from rived his information. He colle c ted it from a reportwhic made to that House in the year 1846, from the Select Committee on railways.—(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord, how ev er, ey t ec, bad atet that t is was fixed a charge upon him, that he states th t3 a 4o, hi but he the sum expended in the years 1839 and 1 really said no such thing. What he did sa u was the amount he had mentioned was the sum raised to , teat date for the purpose of completing the railways in P question. The Noble Lord had told him that if he (gr. 6 a :uure lb s u b r e n) wo h u a ld d looked over the paper whence he obtained his Well, have seen that the amount included sum s to be raised. did lie not state that of the total amount the .;o e rn s panies had g an as raised 8,250,000!. No doubt, had he been add semhly who were not in the habit of attending to s s n ub'ects of this nature, he should, perhaps, have been more cu j iar and precise in his observations . He should have a rts care to guard his hearms against the impression that the T whole sum had been expended fn one or two years. two ways of addressing that House, which was supposed to consist of an educated and well-informed assembly. One was merely to deduce results in arguing particular topics, while the other was to go into details and p a rticalarswhich would naturally suggest themselves to every man of intelligence. He adopted the former course, for the obvious reason . that he did not wish to make himself more dull a i n m d pli t e e a d t r i o o u n s tthheanN tiles s t em a ent which er h . e never e absolutely necessary. In the way Lord had put into his mouth h t made. The Noble Lord statedastat burn) stated that this sum had been expended in the of two years in which there was Hear.) He stated no such a large coarse deficiency in the revenue. thing. His argument applied. revenue. —( a series of years of deficiency, beginning with 1837 and ending with 1843. So far the state ment he made was literally true, and was not capable of mo e con tradiction. But it w as said that he raised this d of argu ment to impress up on the House what was not founded on f act , n amely, that there had been a considerable expenditure i n r ailway speculatio ns during the time of the deficiency i n t h e rev enne. Of cours e he could not decide so accurately as an the 47,000,000/. Honourable Member in the position of the Honourable deficiency, but Member for Sunderland how . much of was expended within the period . of the it could not have been an inconsiderable proportion because the because during the period many of gnat lines connecting he metropolis with the north were in thecourse of construc tion. Therefore he concluded that a considerable portion - S the outlay must have been occasioned when there was a ° a at m e ou su n m te s d the to defi ciency in the revenue. There was a return sent to Parliament in 1839, in which it was stated that the t a r g a e ta r e e , g different railways were ern 57,700,000; that was two years after the commencement of the deficiency, and it was very natural to suppose that a referut thereto for was n other evidence to consi derable portion of the exp enditure of that sum fell within the perioci to which he had adverted . B w hich he could support, and in which pe rha p s the Noble Lord wou ld b e dis posed to place some degree of confidence. Its the year 1844, Committee upon an examination took place before the Select upon railways, Mr. Laing was asked what had been the whole amount laid out in tie construction of tail ways wa up to that time, and the reply was 64,000.000 /. Now they deducted from that sum the cost of railways that were completed previous to 1837, of which they had no distinct account, they would arrive at the exact amount expended between 1837 and 1844, which he was sure would made, fully to justify the statement that he had that co-existent with the deficiency in the namely, revenue, there was a large expenditure in railway speed ations. He l trusted he had now satisfied the Noble Lord and the House statements; the attention and that he had committed no error in his or in conclusion, he had only to thank the House with which they had listened to him, and to refer them for the real statement he did make to the ordinary chan ne l s b y wh i c h information of the debates which took place in that House were conveyed to the public. Mr. DISRAELI rose to make a few_ obser va ti ons to t h e House for the purpose of substantiating the statements of his EV.RNING, MARCH_ 8,, 1A47.. Nol.le :I,end the Member for Lynn. It was quite a mistake to suppose that his Noble Friend was et all irritated in bring ing forward his motion. That, hoeever, was not the point before the House. It might be very well for the Hon. Member to talk to the House, and tell them that he knew the difference between addressing a vulgar and uneducated assembly and one like that which he was then addressing, and skip over all the details of his arguments. The question vies were opinions to go forth to the world upon a subject which at present interested the public mind to a very great extent, and was public enter prise to be affected by mere declamation in that House ? The Hon. Gentleman had said that a large expenditure in railways did cot necessarily benefit the revenue. Mr. GOULBURN—No, no. Mr. DISRAELI—What, then, was the course of argument pursued by the Hon. Gentleman ? His Noble Friend (Lord G. Bentinck ) and those who acted with him, had certainly been endeavouring to impress upon the country the idea that an ex• penditure of money in the construction of railways was a benefit to the country; if the Hon. Gentleman was not at tempting to make out the converse of that proposition, a great portion of the time occupied in the debate could have been spared, and he might, at least, have been induced to occupy neutral ground. Ile certainly understood the Honourable Member to say, that it was a mistake to suppose that a great expenditure in railway enterprise had a necessary tendency to increase the revenue of the country, because they had had a great expenditure of money upon railways, and that, too, in a year of great deficiency. If that was not his argument, what was it? II;s argument cer tainly was, that they had a great deficiency in the revenue, as similating with a great expenditure in railways, and therefore a great expenditure in railways did not at all tend to increase the revenue of the country. The Hon. Gentleman had, how ever, just stated, that when he refereed on a former occasion to the expenditure upon seven of the lines of railways which he then named, he did not refer to it in order to show the amount expended abut the amount about to be expender'. What, then, became of the other portion of the Hon. Mem ber's argument? If he meant anything at all, he meant to show that lion. Gentle.nen on his side of the House were all for railways; but he (Mr. Goulburn) could show that the ex penditure upon railways would not advance the revenue of the country, for in the year 1840 there was a deficiency of 2,5e0,000/., and they had, at the same time, a proposition to spend 47,000,000/. ; therefore the House might see that a de ficiency of 2 500,000/. was of more power than the proposed expenditure of 47,000,0001. Suppose, for instance, that the proposed expenditure had been an amount equal to that of the national debt, the Honourable Member might then have got up and said there was a great deficiency but he would undertake to show them what they expencleJ in public works would not produce any benefit to the revenue, because there was a proposed expenditure of 800,000,0 tOl., and they still had an increased deficiency. And when, there lore, the Honourable Member said that the amount of capital he referred to was not raised, but proposed to be raised, what became of his arguments? He thought that was the real state of the case. He certainly thought that it would be better to have had the speech of the Honourable Gentleman answered at once in the Committee. The opinion expressed by he Hon. Gentleman was an opinion of great weight, and coming from so great an authority had had great weight with persons out of doors. The state ment made by Mr. Laing, and alluded to by the Hon. Member, was a statement of an expenditure of 60,000,000/., which commenced in 1822, and actually included in it the Manchester and Liverpool Railways. He thought he had then made the case perfectly clear to the House. Mr. CARDWELL wished to address a few remarks upon parts relating to the question. The first point was, were the statements made by the Hon. Member for the University of Cambridge perfectly and literally true in point of fact. The second point was, were the arguments which his Hon. Friend intended to base upon those statements perfectly true and fair? The Hon. Member then went on to recapitulate the statements made in the speech of his Hon. Friend on the occasion referred to by the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn, and contended that they were strictly and literally borne out by the facts of the case. It was quite unfair to suppose that his Hon. Friend should undervalue the benefits of railway communication. He should, indeed, think that his lion. Friend would be unworthy to occupy the high position he held in that House if h e entertained such opinions. Mr. HUDSON wished to say a few words with respect to the statements of the Right Hon. Gentleman the ex-Chancellor of the Exchequer. He was not in the House at the time, but the impression made upon the Noble Lord and others, by the statements of that Right Hon. Gentleman, was the one he had mentioned. He stated the amount of money raised in 1841. He stated also that the London and Birmingham was empowered to raise 8226,000/. up to 1841, but they had only power to raise 500,004. ( Hear, hear.) The same obser vation would apply to other railways. Some Hon. Gentlemen seemed to think that the introduction of free trade measures had created all the property of the country. He did not believe any thing of the kind but that it arose from the energy of the capi talists of the country. The London and Birmingham was com menced in 1833, and was opened to the public in 1839 ; bet the capital which the proprietors were empowered to raise, was raised and expended before 1838. The same observation ap plied with equal truth to the Midland and Northern Companies, which expended large sums of money before the deficiency re ferred to took place. The lion. Gentleman the Member for Cambridge ( Mr. Goulburn) had not always acted consistently with respect to railways. The motion was then agreed to. " TIIE BLACK CAT." Mr. INIUNTZ gave notice that he w ould postpone his motion relative to the detention of the schooner "Black Cat" until Friday next, when he would bring it on in Committee of Supply. The reports of the Committees on Ways and Means and of Supply were then brought up and received. CONSOLIDATED FUND BILL. The Consolidated Fund 8,000,0001. Bill then went through Committee. The House adjourned at Half-past Twelve o'clock. PARLIAMENTARY U SIN ESS. From the Votes an'i Proceeding; of the House of Coulmoul.) TCEiSDAY, MARCH 2. The following Railway Bills were presented, read a first ime, and ordered to be read a second time:— Edi!iburgh and Bathgate (Deviation and Amendment) " to enable the Edinburgh and Bathgate Railway Company to extend their Barracks Branch, to deviate a portion ct their main line, and for other purposes." Edinburgh and Glasgow—" to authorise the Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway Company to hold Stock in or to pur chase or lease the Edinburgh and Bathgate, the Stirling and Dunfermline, and the Glasgow, Airdrie, and Monklands Junction Railways, and fur other purposes." Edinburgh and Perth—" for making a Railway from North Qucen,ferry, by Inverkeithing and Kinross to the Scottish Central Railway at Moncrieti Hill, with Branches; to be called • The Edinburgh and Perth Railway.' " Wexiiird and Valencia (Killarney to Valencia) —" for making a Railway from the town of Killarney, in the county of Kerry, to the Harbour of Valencia, in the same county, to be called •I'he Wexford and Valencia " Great Northern ( Deviations between Peterborough, Boston, and Gainsborough)—" to enable the Great Northern Rail way Company to make certain alterations in the Line of their Railway, as already authorised between Peterborough, Boston, and Gainsborough." Great Northern (Deviations near Doncaster)—" to enable the Great Northern Railway Company to divert the Line of their Railway, as already authorised between Gainsborough and Doncaster." Great Southern and Western Extension (Portarlington to Tullamore)—" to enable the Great Southern and Western Railway Company to make a Railway from Portarlington to Tuilamore." The following Railway Bills were read a second time, corn nutted, and referred to the Committee of Selection:— Dublin and Drogheda (Purchase of Navan Branch, &c.) Great Western (Amendments and Extensions). Newmarket and Chesterford. Cork and Bandon. Cork, Blackrock, and Passage. The undernamed Bills were presented, read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time : Inverness Municipal and Police, &c.—" for extending the Municipal Boundaries of the burgh of Inverness; establish ing a general system of Police therein; lighting and cleans ing the Streets; improving and maintaining, and, if neces sary, rebuilding the Bridges over the river Ness, and making Accesses thereto; providing Public Markets and Bleaching Greens; regulating the Bridge Tolls, Petty and Market Customs, and for other purposes relating to the said Burgh.' Inverness Harbour and Navigation Improvement—" for deepening, enlarging, improving, and maintaining the Port and Harbour of Inverness, and the Navigation of the river Ness, and the Quays and Piers and other Works connected therewith ; for regulating the Anchorage and Shore Dues of the said Port an d H ar b our, and for other purposes relating thereto." NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PitIVATE BILL-OFFICE. The following Railway Bill is appointed to be read a second time:— MONDAY, MARCH 8. Colchester, Stour Valley, Sudbury, and llalstead (Lease to the Ipswich and Bury St. Edmund's Railway Company). PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS. (From the Votes and Proceedinfhe House of Cozronont.) TUESDAY, MARCH 2. CHURCHES (SCOTLAND). Motion made, and Question put, " That a Select Com mittee be appointed to inquire whether, and in what part of Scotland, and under what circumstances, large numbers of her Majesty's subjects have been deprived of the means of religious worship by the refusal of certain proprietors to grant them sites fur the erection of Churches." The House divided:— MAJORITY-AYES, 89. Aldam, William Evans, William O'Brien, C. Arundel, Earl of Fielden, John O'Connell, D., jun. Balite, Walter Forster, Mathew O'Connell, M. J. Bannerman, A. Fox, C. R. O'Connell, Joba Barclay, David Gibson, Thomas M. Oswald, Alexander Baring, F. T. Gore, Robert Palmerston, Viscount Barnard, E. G. Grey, Sir G. Parker, John Bernal, Ralph Hall, Sir Benjamin Plumptre, J. P. Blake, M. J. Basile, Archibald I'lumridgc, Captain Brotherton, Joseph Hawes, lien). Rice, E. R. Brown, W. llay, Sir A. L. Russell, Lord J. Browne, W. 'Lindley, C. Rutherturd,lA. Brownrigg, J. S. Hobhouse, Sir J. Smith, J. A. Buller, Charles Howard, C.W.O. Somerville, Sir IV. Buller, Edward Howard, P. 11. Stansfleld, W. It. C. Chaplin, W. J. Ilumphery, Ald. Stanton, W. 11. Christie, IV. D. Hutt, William Stuart, Lcrd J. Clay, Sir W. James, William Stuart, V. Colebrooke, Sir T. Labouehere, Henry Strutt, Edward Collett, John Lainbton, H. Tancred, H. W. Craig, W. G. Macaulay, T. B. Thornely, T. Dennistoun, J. M'Clintock, W. B. Trelawny, J. S. D'Eyncourt, C. T. M`Taggart, Sir J. 'Dirndl, 11. Dickinson, F. F. Mangles, It. D. Villiers, Charles Duff, James Manic, Fox Ward, H. G. Duncan, George Mitchell, T. A. Wawn, J. T. Dundas, F. Monahan, J. IL Yorke, llenry R. I nuidas, David Morpeth, Viscount Ellice, Edward Morison, General TELLERS. Ellice, E., jun. Mure, Colonel Rouverie, E. P. Escott, Bickhain Napier, Sir Charles Ewart, William MINORITY-NOES, 61. Acland, T. D. Pu Pre, C. G. Mundy, E. M. Ainsworth, Peter Fellowes, E. 3luntz, G. F. Antrobus, Edmund Finch, G. Newdegate, N. Arkwright.;9. Fuller, A. E. O'Brien, A. Stafford Austen, Colonel Godson, R. Polhill, Frederick BatMe, W. Goulburn, Henry Rashleigh, W. Banke.s, George Graham, Sir James Sandon, Viscount Barrington, Viscount Halsey, T. P. Scott, Robert Beckett, W. Hamilton, W. J. Scott, Francis Bentinck, Lord G. Herbert, Sydney Spooner, Richard Bereslord, Major Ilildyard, T. B. Sheppard, T. Bowles. Admiral Mimic, J. 11. Stanley, E. Broadloy, Henry Hodgson, R. Taylor, E. Campbell, Sir 11. Hope, Sir J. Thompson, Alderman Cardwell, Edward Hudson, G. Tollemache, J. Clerk Sir G. Jermyn, Earl Vyse, R. H. R. H. Clive, Vise. Lawson, Andrew Walsh, Sir J. B. Cripps, William M`Ncill, Duncan Wodehouse, E. Disraeli, B. March, Earl of TELLERS. Douglas, Sir C. E. Marslan l . Henry Wortley, J. S. Duckworth, Sir J. Martin, C. W. Inglis, Sir It. F LOODS IN PARIS.--Notwithstanding the fine weather and the nbsene? of Taut in Paris, the waters of the Seine still maintain their height at 5 metres 60 centnatres. SALE'‘FEE:SIMPLE ESTATES IN THE COUNTY OF KERRY. f On Thuray last Mr. W. W. Simpson, of London, offered or ssle f'y auction, in several lots, at the Commercial Buildings here, valuable freehold estates, situate in the county of Kerry. At one o'clock the sale was opened by the particulars and conditions being read, when Mr. Simpson said—Gentlemen, there are observations which I request to m a k e , an d probably ofmay se) , more than you may d e em e xp e di ent, b ecause so I anythe gentl em n present are intimately acquainted with the locality of the property which I have the honour to offer to vou for competi tion this da3 . You are also conversant with the condition of Ireland in general, as well as the prospective indications touching the well-being o f thi s country; if, theref ore , I trespass on your endurance, my apology must rest on that of duty towards my employer, which may engender a zeal beyond knowledge. My sincere desire is to avoid misrepresentation, not alone fur my own sake, but also for that of the gentleman for Whom I have this time the honour to act. On these occasions the auctioneer is vit.- tually bound by certain limits, at the seine time he has a certain license for bringing the subject treated of before the mind's eye," through the intervention of that varnish which will throw its best points into relief without. altering the pic ture. For the last thirteen years I have had the honour, at short intervals, of addressing myself to Irish proprietors and capitalists; and I trust that those gentlemen who have known and heard me during that period will do me the jus tice to say, that if I have been guilt) of sins they have been venial, and partaking more of those of omission than of commission. 1 will first, gentlemen, touch on the eircum curnstance of a Bill recently passed in Parliameot, relating to free trade in corn, and in doing so will take the liberty to read a small portion of a speech made by me to a very large assemblage of gentlemen and hignly influential per sons (the majority of whom were Protectionists), at Nor wich, in the month of April last. On that occasion I said, that," although I had been a thorough-going Protectionist, I was proud to say that sliding and all other scales had now fallen from my eyes," and that it was my honest convic tions that rents I%hich have been fixed on fair and liberal principles within the last seven years will be permanent; also, that the years' purchase on such rental, has risen within the last six months, and is all probability will continue to rise; the increase of population (viz. 1,000 per day) will, no doubt, form a counterpoise fur any importation, present or prospective, and thereby insure in ordinary seasons, not excessive, but steady and remunerating prices for the cultivator, as well as ample revenue to the lauded proprietor; and the assumed addition of sixty millions annually to the actual wealth of the country, will contribute to a higher years' purchase on the sale of land—the only property, indeed, which can be considered essentially permanent under adverse circumstances and political events. Instead, therefore, of the motto---" Agitate, agitate," it will be better policy to substitute that of—" Cultivate, cultivate." And let landlords assist improving tenants by making advances of that additional capital which may be required, in the nature of drainage and other improvements, charging for the same at the rate of 5 per cant. on such outlay and expenditure which may be judiciously applied. Hence the tenant farmer will reap a benefit in many instances of 25 per cent., and a permanent improvement in rental, quasi landlord, will super vene." I further observed that, "in adopting free-trade measures, Sir Robert Peel bad proved himself to be one of the most talented, fore-sighted, and fearlessly honest minis ters that ever lived in the tide of times." The present aspect of the United Kingdom fully justifies the opinion here ex pressed of the eminent talents and courage displayed by Sir Robert Peel; and it is stated by the most competent judges that if his wise measures of free- trade had not been carried out, the prices of corn and produce would have risen to a famine height. In conclusion, I said, I cannot refrain from alluding to the opinion of that eminent man, the late Sir Charles Wetherell, on this subject. A high Tory and firm Protectionist, the fears Le entertained as to the probable re sults of the repeal of the corn-laws induced him to determine on selling all his landed property; but his better judgment prevailed, and he not only retained possession of it, but was in the course of making further investments when he met his lamented fate. The Protectionists—where are they? Where are now your prophets which prophecied unto you? Gen tlemen, you must remember I made these observations in April last, and up to the present time I have been fully borne out in my predictions. The Government are now in good earnest, and we shall see the small farmer of this country rising in the grade' of society. It is not because that in this country we now see a peasantry poor, and clad in mean haoiliments—it is not, I say, because of this that we cannot perceive that foundation of intellect on which a noble superstructure may be raised. Rath not Shakspere said— "For 'tis the mind that makes the body rich ; And as the sun breaks through the darkest clouds, So honour peereth in the meanest habit. 18 hat ! is the jay more precious than the lark Because his feathers are more beautiful? Or is the adder better than the eel Because his painted skin contents the eye?" Yes, Gentlemen, the hands of Government are on the plough, and they must not look back, for whether it be a Govern • ment or an individual doing so, the penalty of unworthiness must attach. The Government is now moving on with a projectile force; and I tell you, Gentlemen, with such a pa ternal Government, this country, at no distant time, will rise to that high scale which is her natural position amongst the kingdoms of the earth. With respect to the ten millions proposed by Lord John Russell to be lent to this country at Si per cent.—it has been mooted that should Government make these advances they will take precedence of the en cumbrancers, and that the present mortgagees would be placed in a false position. This mode of reasoning appears to me the height of folly; for I opine the loans contem plated by Government, instead of weakening the se curity of present incumbrancers, will place them in a mucli , more secure position, for the value of the estates will be increased in an inverse ratio. God Al mighty, in his infinite and inscrutable wisdom, pours afflic tive dispensations on the earth; and I will venture to read some former observations 1 made on this subject. I said, " that the All-wise and Omnipotent Disposer of human events has visited that country (Ireland) with the potato scourge, for the purpose of stimulating the Government and landed proprietary to form plans and make such advances of money as will immediately tend to production and reproduction, and thus at once improve the condition of millions of the Dish poor peasantry and tenantry generally ; and by fur nishing that seed to the sower' . which will give ead to the eater'—,superseding the cultivation, and feeding so!e'y on a vegetable yielding twenty-five per cent. only of food nutri tious to the human frame—they will thus be enabled to grow kind consume corn crops in all their variety—produce a hid), under a fair course of husbandry, does not, like the potato, exhaust the natural power of the land ; and, sit the same time, the feeding and foddering, the straw of their crops will give an incalculable quantity of manure, whereas the potato plant will afford comparatively little." In con clus on, gentlemen, I will venture to rep..at a few more lines from Shakspeare, as applicable to the position of the govern ment and landed proprietary of Ireland : " Came—l have learn'il that fearful commenting Is leaden servitor to dull delay; Delay leads impotent and snail-paced beggary : Then, fiery expedition be my wing, Jove's Idercury, and herald for a king !" Mr. EDWALE. DAY STOKES observed that the present par ticular of sale WAS the fairest and best he had ever seen pub lished in Ireland. Mr. SIBLPSON —I am much obliged to you, Sir. I consider it a great compliment coming from a gentleman of so high a character, and one so intimately acquainted with the nature and circumstances of the estates. Some very spirited competition then ensued, when the fol lowing gentlemen were declared purchasers of the several lots which were sold : John Hickson, Esq., Deputy-Lieuteuant, The Grave, Dingle. Jiihn Leahy, Esq., South Hill, Killarney. The Rev. A. B. Rowan, Belmont, Tralee. E. B. Hartopp, Esq., Dalby House, Melton Mowbray, Lei cestershire. James Butler, Esq., Deputy-Lieutenant, Waterville, Cubit , ci veen. • The average rate of purchase was twenty- seven years; none of the lots (whereof several appeared to be let at their full value) fetching less than twenty-three years' purchase. The sales being concluded,• Mr. Edur39l-r returned thanks for the kindness and ur banity be had met with, and, in doing so, took occasion to state that he had been requested by several noblemen and gentlemen to issue a third edition of his pamphlet, " A. De fence of the Landlords of Ireland," which had run through two editions since 1844; and in the forthcoming one it was his intention to add a postscript, explanatory of his views as to that which the Government were called upon to do, in order to develope the resources of the country.—Dubin Evening Packet of Tuesday, Feb, 23. COURT CIRCULAR. Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent visited the Queen yesterday. Her Majesty, accompanied by the Prince of Wales, Prince Alfred, and the Princess Alice, walked yesterday in the Gar dens of Buckingham Palace. His Royal Highness Prince Albert presided, yesterday afternoon, at a meeting of the Commissioners for Promoting and Encouraging the Fine Arts, in the rebuilding the Palace of Westminster. His Royal Highness arrived at Gvrydyr House, Whitehall, shortly before three o'clock, attended by his Equerry in Waiting, Colonel Bouverie. The Commissioners present were the Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord John Russell, Viscount Mahon, Viscount Morpeth, Lord Ashburton, Lord Colborne, the Right Hon. the Speaker, Sir Robert Harry Inglis, Mr. Benjamin Hawes, Mr. Henry Hallam, Mr. G. Vivian, and Mr. T. Wyse. The Secretary, Mr. Eastlake, was in attendance. At four o'clock Prince Albert and the other Commissioners proceeded to the Palace at Westminster, and went over the New Houses of Parliament, attended by the architect, Mr. Barry. Her Majesty and Prince Albert inspected at.Buckingbam Palace, two medals of Lord Hardinge, the work of Mr. G. G. Adams. The Queen had a dinner party yesterday. The company included her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent, their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, his Serene Highness Prince Frederick of Hesse, their Excellen cies Baron and Baroness de Cetto. his Excellency Baron de Hugel, the Marquis and Marchioness of Lansdowne, Lady Augusta Cadogan, Lady Fanny Howard, Baroness de Speth, the Earl Auckland, and the Hon. Miss Eden, Lord and Lady Ashley, Lord Ernest Bruce, the Right lion. Sir Robert and Lady Peel, and Mr. Edmond Mildmay. The lasnd of the Coldstream Guards attended at Bucking ham Palace during dinner, and performed the following pieces : Overture, " Leonora," Beethoven. American Polka, Jullien. Selection from " The Crusaders," Benedict. Waltz, " Fleur de Marie," Barret. Pas Redouble, "Le Roi des Mers," Gurtner. Their Royal Highnesses the - Duchess of Cambridge and the Princess Mary, and his Serene Highness Prince Frede rick of Hesse, attended by Baroness Hammerstein and Mr. Edmond Mildmay, visited and inspected the British Mu seum yesterday. • A deputation of gentlemen from the centre of the county of Kent bad an interview with the Right lion. C. Strutt yesterday, at the office of the Commissioners of Railways, in Great George-street. The deputation consisted of the Earl Stanhope, the Right lion. F. C. Herries, Sir John W. Lub bock, Mr. John Rogers, and Mr. J. P. Atkins. The Bishop of Barbadoes had' an interview with Earl Grey yesterday, at the Colonial-office. Several members of the " Short Time" Committee from Manchester attended yesterday at the Treasury, to deliver a number of petitions to Lord John Russell. The Earl of Devon had an interview with Sir George Grey yesterday, at the Home-office. Sir Robert Ferguson had an interview )•esterday with the Right Hon. Edward Strutt, at the office of the Commissioners of Railways. Dispatches were sent off last evening from the Colonial office for the Governor of Ceylon. SIR W. COTTON.--That gallant and popular officer Lieut.• General Sir Willoughby Cotton, lett London yester day morning, with his Aide. de camp, Lord Adolphu; Vane, to embark for India for the fourth time, and to assume the office of Commander-in -Chief at Bombay. He carries with him the universal good wishes of the profession to which he belongs. 12U1:61),-A1' 'SV GA At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 27th day of Pao bruary, 1847, present the Queen's most excellent Majesty in Council, her Majesty baying been pleased to appoint the Right Hon. Henry Earl Grey to be Lord Lieutenant and Custos Rotulornin of the county of Northumberland, his Lordship this day took the oaths appointed to be taken thereupon, instead of the oaths of allegiance and supremacy. FOREIGN-OFFICE, ALtuen 1, 1847. _ The Queen has been pleased to approve of M. Eugene Bero, Sig Consul at Newcastle for his Majesty the King of the French. WAR-OFFICE, MAncx 2. Ist Dragoon Guards--Bankes Tomlin, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Brice, who retires, March 2. 7th Dragoon Guards—Cornet John Thomas Cramer to be Lieutenant, by purchase, rice Riddell, who retires; William Stuckey Wood, Gent., to be Cornet, by purchase, vice Cramer , March 2. iitii Light Dragoons—Cornet andAdtant Richard Prety man Apthorp to have the rank of Lieutenant, Feb. 18; _ Cornet R o be r t T own l ey W oo d man t o b e Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Barrett, deceased, Feb. 19; Augustus John Cureton, Gent, to be Cornet, without purchase, vice Wood rit,,n ; Sargewi Archibald Stewart, from the Gist Foot, to be Surgeon. vice Smyth; appointed to the 87th foot, March 2. 4th Foot—Ere-ig,n Jahn Richard Lovett to he Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Chetwode, appointed to the All I ) ght Dra goons 31 ; Ensign Edward ..lso Purvis, from the ;4th Foot, to be Ensign, vi ce L ovett. M arch 2. 12th Foot—Ensign Ed ward Foster to be Adjutant, with the rank of Lieutenant, April 14, 1846; Robert NrasinvtN Irving, Gen - ., to be EnAgn, without. purchase, vice Foster, ap Adjutant, Match 2.'vointed 14th Foot—Frede r i c k L e M esurier, Gent., to be En:::Sny without purchase, vice Dumas, dect•rised, March 2. 16th Foot—Ensign George De la Poer Beresford to I'e Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Fergusson, who retires; Berkeley Craven Blackburn, Gent. to be Ensign, by pur chasa, vice &restore, March 2. 37th Foot—• Lieutenant Henry B. Phipps to be Captain, by purchase, vice P4rkinson, who retires; Ensign John Leversage George to be Lieutenatt, by purchase, vice Pbipps ; William Pollard, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice George, March 2. ..2d not—Ensign Samuel Douglas Abercrc'mby to , be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Bethune, who retires; JansP3 Baltour, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Abercrumby ; March 2. Henry Montgomery, Gent., to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Cameron, appointed to the Ist cr Grenadier Regiment of Foot Guards; March 3. _ _ _ 5, th Foot, - Captain Fitzm,Aurice William Colthurst, from half-pay 75th Foot, to be Captain, vice George Edwards, whe exchanges, receiving the difference. Lieutenant John Ahmuty to be Captain, by purchase, vice Colthurst, who re tires. Ensign George Arinstun/4 to be Lieutenant, by pur chase, vice Ahmuty. Henry Butler, Gent. to be Ensign, by purchase, vice Armstrong. March 2. 61st Foot—Assistant•Surgeon P. Gammie, from 80th Foot, to be Surgeon, vice Stewart, appointed to the 14th Light Dragoon', March 2. 74th Foot—P. S. Crawley, Gent., to be Ensign, by pur chase, vice Purvis, appointed to 4th Foot, March 2. 80th Foot—Henry Carr Lucas, Gent., to be Assistant- Surgeon. vice Gammie. promoted in the 61st Foot, March 2. 84th Foot—Ensign Charles Pringle Beague to be Lieute nant, by purchase, vice Bentmck, promoted in Cape Mounted Riflemen ; Ensign Frederick John Gothleipe Saunders, from 56th Foot, to be Ensign, vice Beague, March 2. 87th Foot.— Surgeon Robert Dunkin Smyth, from 14th J. fight Dragoons, to be Surgeon, vice Richard Arthur Pear sOrr,..N.D., who retires upon half pay, March 2. Ceylon Rifle Regiment.—Lieutenant Robert Watson to be Captain, without purchase, March 2. Cape Mounted Riflemen—Lieutenant Arthur Cavendish _ Bentinek, from 84th Foot, to be Captain, by purchase,' vice G. E. Cannon, who retires, March 2. BREVET. Captain Fitzmaurice William Colthurst, of 57th Foot, to be Major in the army, Nov. 9, 1846. HOSPITAL STAFF—James M`Nab, M.D., to be Assistant- Surgeon to the Forces, vice Simeon Heady Hardy, M.D., who retires upon half pay, March 2. MEMORANDUM—The commission of Captain Kenneth Murchison, of 29th Foot, has been antedated to Dec. 22, 1845. OFFICE OF ORDNANCE, FEP. 27. Royal Regiment of Artillery—Sergeant. Major William Elliott to be Quartermaster, Feb. 8. Corps of Royal Engineers—Second Captain Henry Drury Harness to be Captain; Second Captain Edmund Twiss kord to be Captain, vice Wortham, placed on the Seconded List; First Lieutenant Phipps John Hornby to be Second Captain, vice Ford ; Second Lieutenant James Thomas Burke to be First Lieutenant, vice Hornby; Second Lieutenant Francis Edward Cox to be First Lieutenant, vice Galton, placed on the Seconded List, Feb. 20, 1847. Commissions by the Lord Lieutenant of Staffordshire. Queen's Own Royal Regiment of Staffordshire Yeomanry Cavalry—William Francis Bridgeman, Gent., to be Cor net, vice Briscoe, promoted, Feb. 20. BANKRUPTS. Thomas Lawrance, draper, Reading, Berkshire, March 13, at half-past twelve, and April 24, at half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Green, official assignee, Alderman bury; Reed and Longford, Friday-street, Cheapside. John Brown, carver and gilder, Great Queen -street, Lin coln's Inn-fields, March 24, at half-past eleven,and April 24, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Follett, official assignee, Sambrook -court, Basinghall-street ; Shaw, Fami val's Inn. Thomas Bowles, victualler, Horsmonden, Kent, March 11, at half-past one, and April 16, at two, at the Court of Bank ruptcy. Whitmore, official assignee, Basinghall-street; Sten ning, Long-lane, Bermondsey; Stenning and Carnell, Tun bridge, Kent. Francis Champness, linendraper, Bishop's-road, Pad dington, March 11, at half-past twelve, and April 16, at half past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Cannan, official assignee, Birchin- lane, Cornhill ; Randall, Castle-street, Holborn. Edmund Strevens, victualler, Brighton, March 11, at one, and April 16, at halt-past one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. hitmore, official assignee, Basinghall-street ; Rosser, Tam plin, and Co., Fenchurch• street ; Dempster, Brighton. Michael John Starve, grocer, Abingdon, Berkshire, March 8, at one, and April 12, at eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy.. Graham, official assignee, Coleman-street, City ; Waller, Finsbury-circus. John Andrew, wood engraver, trove-terrace, Queen's road, Bayswater, March 9, at half-past twelve, and April 12, at half-past eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turquand, official assignee, Old :Jewry-chambers, City ; Webber, Caro line-street, Bedford-square. John Reddy and Thomas Reddy, bookseller, Bridlington, Yorkshire, March 10 and 31, at ten, at the Town-hall, 11u11, Kynaston, ; Hicks, Gray's Inn, London ; Nathaniel John Earle, grocer, Fahnouth, March 16, at eleven, and April 8, at one, at the Exeter District Court. Ilirtz official ass•gnee, Exeter; Builmore, Falmouth; Couc! and Co., Bedford-row, London. William James, builder, Stone, Gloucestershire, March 16 and April 13, at a quarter-past one, at the Bristol District Court. Hutton, official assignee, Bristol; Badham, Gray's Inn, London ; Chandler and Co., Tewkesbury. David Williams, cattle salesman, Ruthin, Denbighshire, March 16 and April 9, at twelve, at the Liverpool District Court. Turner, official assignee, Bristol; Pocock, Bar tholomew-close, London ; Smart, Rathin ; Evans and Son, Liverpool. William Herbert, tea dealer, Bristol, March 15, at twelve, and April 13, at eleven, at the Bristol District Court. Miller, offidal assignee, Bristol; Davison, Bloomsbury-square, London ; Briton, Bristol. Sulomon Marks, clock maker, Cardiff, Glamorganshire, March 16 and April 16, at one, at the Bristol District Court. Hutton, official assignee, Bristol ; Phillpotts, Cardiff. Jackson Prince, grocer, Coxhoe, Durham, March 11, at half-past ten, and April 15, at one, at the Newcastle-upon- Tyne District Court. Baker, official assignee, Newcastle upon- Tyne ; Marshall, Durham; Smith, Durham; Rogerson, Lincoln's lon-fields, London. William Beresford, lace manufacturer, New Lenton, Not tinghamshire, March 12 and April 16. at ten, at the Sheffield District Court. Freeman, official assignee, Leeds; Patchett, Nottingham, Binney, Sheffield. Joseph Hepworth, wine merchant, Huddersfield, March 19 and April 9, at eleven, at the Leeds District Court. Kynas ton, official assignee, Leeds;_ Wiglesworth, Ridsdale, and Craddock, Gray's Inn-square, London; Crenhelm, Leeds. DIVIDENDS DiI.CLARED. S. Wilcke, milliner, Fore-street, Cripplegate—first div. of 6s. in the pound, on Monday, March 8, and two following Mondays, at the office of Mr. Cannan, Birchin-lane, City. W. Hounsfield, commission merchant, Manchester—second div. of 7d in the pound, and a first and second div. of 2s. sd. in the pound on new proofs, on Tuesday, March 23, or any subsequent Tuesday, at the office of Nlr. Fraser, Manchester. J. Knight, mercer, Preston—a first div. of ls. 9d. in the pound, on Tuesday, March 16, or any subsequent Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Fraser, Manchester. W. W. Salford, builder, Stockport—first div. of Is. 7 3 / 4 d. in the pound, on Tuesday, March 16, or any subsequent Tuesday, at the office of Mr. Fraser, Manchester. J. Evans, ironmonger, Liverpool—second div. of I%d. in the pound, on any onday, at the office of Mr. Bird, Liverpool. D. MacDougall, merchant, Liverpool—second div. of 3 1 / E d in the pound, on any Monday, at the office of Mr. Bird, Liverpool. _ _ J. kichardson, merchant, Liverpool—fourth div. of a Id. and 3-16ths of a penny in the pound, on any Monday, at the office of Mr. Bird, Liverpool. J. Massey, engineer, Etruria, Staffordshire—first div. of 3s. in the pound, on any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Valpy, Birmingham. W. Griffiths, draper, Great Malvern, Worcestershir e— second div. of I%d. in the pound, on any Thursday, at the office of Mr. Valpy, Birmingham. D. Antrobus, apothecary, Audley, Staffordshire—first div of 11 t/ d. in the pound, on any Thursday, at the office of Jlr. Valpy, Birmingham. Dunsford, surgeon, Bristol—first div. of 9s. in the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Acrarnan, Bristol. J. Marshall, merchant, Birchin-lane, City—fourth div. of IF. in the pound, on Wednesday, March 3, and two following Wednesday s, at the office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry, City. W. H. Hounsfield, draper, Cardiff—first div. ot 2s 10d. in the pound on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Acraman, Bristol. W. Cameron, confectioner, Newcastle -upon-Tyne—first div. of 2s. 9d. in the pound, On any Saturday, at the office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon-Tyne . W. Pannell, grocer, High-street, Poplar—first dlv. of Is. 10 1 7 4 d. in the pound, on any Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Whitmore, Basinghall-street. (avidends, Scc., in our next.) The benefit for the distressed Irish and Scotch at l:er Majesty's Theatre on Thursday produced 1,3704 the whole of the expenses having been defrayed by Mr. Lumley. When it is considered how early it is in the season, that even now it is a week before the ordinary period at which the opera opens, and how deserted places of public amusement are as yet by the highest class of society, the result must be con sidered as far above all rational expect a ti on. Hoc nELAG A ; Oa, ENGLAND ,IN author T riE of" N _Edited by Ellot i ea N tt S iyn r wa h n u hca r ai c t : o he i r ), ila E s s ci a . lre. already reacheETdWhaeltCVhirOreecdßetire;Dniti and the Cross."—This work tion. We shall be surprised if it (1 1 3 ( not go through many editions. It possesses almot every qualification of a good vigour l3 of style— a concentrated book—grace, o a o o v c n k • power n o g r g f . 1 cidescription,en'foNrralllrhas all the effect of elaborate commuuicated—Found an d enla r g e c d o l v l e i e te s d 0 , f a i n m d p 0 r judiciously cornmuuicated_oufld an enlarged views of important 1 U C' tions—a hearty and generous love of country—and the whole pervaded bt a refined but sometimes caustic humour, which imparts a constant attraction to its pages. We can cordially recommend it to our readers, as well for the amusement of its lighter portions, the vivid brilliancy of its descriptions, and the solid information it contains respecting Canada, and the position, generally, of England in the New World."—Johog B ul!. . EADVERTISENENTI—HOLLOWAY'S PILLS AND OINT• MENT.—AN EXTRAORDINARY CURE. —Edward White, residing at 45, Clement's-lane, Strand, was an in-deor p a tient at King's College Respite], for an abscess in the thigh, and a w ound, nine inches long, on the same limb. tie could neither bend his knee nor put his foot to the ground. lie remained at the hospital five months in bed, when he was informed that " nothing more could ke done for hitn ;" , he was then carried to his home, andcommenced using the.above in valuable medicines. He is now, to the astonishment of every one, , soundly cured, and can walk as well as ever he could in his life.— , Sold by all retailers of medicine, and at rrOieSSOr .llcdowars Este. ' bliduneut, 244, Strand, Loudon. _~ iow in• ere tbd vas ono ig he 4, 1