The Sun. — London, England, 1847-01-15 00:00:00

3 LE.C.B. ) I,IF e straint -sfl ' o r raterol , o ntelicatoo xnagetr a ExPerf° :'S ~ vll 4. ° l ' prio nve lopel og o outgo; al 70/ a nd AD of o' r goo t banddoeAte sod 500 a josa tier d is OVA ficoo t r: 0 0446 s 01° o ne 6liners e t Ing tj'tit . ctO g oal° . 0 11 e 0 Efocti c do° the 111° 0 ° O ° yaiti' of a Weir - 0. , and nio Goo nsii• iegasg e , exp.-- of ~„ tale s ivalua l4 o . , IVbi e3 2, ky US rOO/ Y . g r nit oc' oldeuce; 0:s r and C"li‘r Gordon t, Wen -70 ' a nd > 4° if Wo r m, BED`" s r ay' Of t of a l e f n co _ o tbs . of soy, ana et give worri t o i seri° r ed t.cobt m e t h y vs S IS J ll5 0 lem oa ad $ 0 Ibtle I teri oA bie ll a w err.. roo Ago . ow tp tePil l an d p$ tod 0 d tin Do r soled Jog r r i p O ° ye ;it well S° ~A „ Lexce'f ist 4,, that i orae ot; an 04 t° ran P rCr oat . a c o thew'. ton, 43f treet 012 public' ;Wendt of Oil su l for coow !fig f i to r ;a - o c o si o 1 r ' us 014°. Int l " 13" / o r' goose► Le gel lig , Ina PURSUANT to a DECREE of the HIGII , OX a ,'OURT of CHANCERY, made in a cause ATKlN tior.,aaslast PARKER, all persons claiming to be the Heir, or b eha r i ton aw of JOHN TAVEIISON, late of Victoria-place, New ot ,, in in the county of Kent, Gentleman, deceased, and his living at the time of his death, or the personal Repre- M,,„... 7 Representatives, of such Next of Kin, who have since 14 7 .7 Y their solicitors, on or before the 19th day of February, kid come In and make out their claims, and prove their heirship of the 'red, before Sir GIFFIN WILSON, Knight, one of the Masters Chi said Court, at his Chambers, in Southampton-buildings. 4, Y•lan e, London, or in default thereof, they will peremptorily v tle ed the benefit of the said Decree. ittIL: 4 , II2I, IOIIN TAVERSON was (as it Is believed) born at Shad follN„ the county of Middlesex, and in the early part of his life 'a ge Mme seafaring occupation, which he gave up on his mar top.'l?Q it is not known that he afterwards followed any occupa • Item.e'lo_eresided in Charlton-terrace, New Charlton, and on Plum: Th r l ,Tnon, in the county of Kent, and afterwards in the Marche month Brussels and latterly at Antwerp, where he died In the ePtember, 1844. FREDERICK SMITH, 3, Basinghall-street, went for Robert Suter, Greenwich, Kent, Plaintiff's Solicitor. NATIONAL SECURITY BANK. *in b e -70TICE.—No applications for SHARES in this undertaking liuk,,, receiv ed _ after To-Moutow, Saturday, the 16th day of Ja 'lll4 " the Directors will, after that date, proceed to make an ilk. Pent r _ c ations for shares may i , DII be addressed to the Secretary, at 163, 14, the sku ' rees al - s o t f reet, by whom prospectuses and a detailed statement of „ .1e,,,,.. profit , & c., will be forwarded, post fr ee, if written for; ttp ro „ ' l . Sutton and Co., solicitors, 6, Basinghall-street ; Messrs. to I:and Co solicitors, Saville-place, New Burlington-street ; and _ "........:____ o 3. Sutton and Co., stockbrokers, Royal Exchange_ .1 111 ,R SELF-SUPPORT INSTITUTION, 4 n' ai tled bY Voluntary Contributions,) for the Cure of Stricture -re ha, and all other Diseases of Urinary Organs, Nervous, eave seic G eneral Debility. ad2 snd .T P. r B. COURTENAY, 31.R.C.5.L., 2, Chandos-street, T o Beri erai l'su trad esmen, clerks, mechanics, and the wor ki ng c l asses la ststa e , ? 2, t his Institution offers, in all cases, gratuitous surgical p w ..". and in others medicine also freeof expense. Surgery adjoinng the Surgeon's residence. ttR2°TRERTON'S COMMERCIAL HOUSE, 111 4 ' DOD-STREET, HANOVER-STREET, LIVERPOOL. 41,•,,,..rotherthn begs lave most respectfully to acquaint ..her d the public that she is carrying on the above Establish- Z u ktre t eng conducted by her late parents, .and in returning her iio ks 'Janke to those gentlemen who so liberally patronised them t liel 3 ' unr emitting care and attention to merit a continuance of 24 r i e l u b lVo u rt. Roes " 43 the satisfaction to state that the house has recently Aoe tt arged to the extent of Six Show Rooros and Twelve Bed trZnich, with the acquisition of Hot and Cold Baths, &c., will, 7 . add i nateria'ly to its convenience and comfort. 14 LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY, e, F leet-street, January 14, 1847. ' r °l) . ll. •-• nerebY given, that a GENERAL MEETING of the vier),l B s of the Law Life' Assurance Society will be held at the So e2t"'e, Fleet -street London, on TUESDAY, the 2d day of February :it 'Lot 4-Past Elev ' en o'clo ' ck in the forenoon precisely, pur ctiv,.o the Society's Deed of Settlement, for the purposes of re tq the Auditors annual report of the accounts of the Society up ,alst December last, and for general purposes. By order of the Directors, GEORGE ei tTRICR, Actuary. commence at win TwKel IRKF ve e' Cl ock precisely. PELICAN IA 70 LIFE INSURANCE OFFICE , ,01 113ARD-STREET, and 57, CHARING-CROSS Established 1797. kr:p" BONUS. ,:i u nhs of the net Profits realised by the Company from In -41044 effected upon the Participating Scale of premiums allotted, "rot Dv,/ to the conditions of the policies, every seven years. The Ve r ii o d th commence from the 3d of July, 1840. . 4 tlet h aw ate offered to those who prefer insuring upon the Non- Th e run g scale. t9yo classes of Assurance are kept distinct from each other. R. TUCKER, Secretary. N AT IONAL LOAN FUND LIFE ASSUR ANCE SOCIETY, 26 COENIIILL, LONDON. Capital X 500,000. Empowered by Act of Parliament. hitt re B „.. batten embraces important and substantial advantages all to Life Assuraneei and Deferred Annuities. The assured k 'kre °ooasions the power to borrow, without expense or for etLlDOr th e p ~.kge of ,on ° CY. two-thirds of the *premiums paid . (see Table) :ufst ot i , on of selecting benefits, and the conversion of his hi eet other conveniences or necessity. 4 4 ces for terms of years are granted on the lowest possible 74 re DIVISION OF PROFITS. e rtabi lll 'T'able success and increasing prosperity of the Society Atth e : the Directors, at the last annual investigation, to declare e eeltp n ".vraYing from 35 te 85 per cent. on the premiums paid e 7 effected on the Profit scale. EXAMPLES. EXAMPLES. ~,., g ot Edmonds, 154, Strand. ..,-.. a. Pr eilllute, iis Bonus Bonus In 2 . ..P, g Assured Just published, the Second Edition, price ss. coloured, !!, added. Cash. g- .6.- z.. TfIE BOOK of the FEET; a History of Boots may 5: 3 Borrow. and Shoes, with upwards of One Hundred Illustrations of '................._ the fashions of the Egyptians, llebrews. Persians, Greeks, and • 2' ( 0 t 3 d• ---- 183 ----- ----- 100 0 ' • , 7 4217 15 1 £lOO 011 416 0 414445 0 0 f 395346 1 1 2 31 I m lo i m dd r e s, Ag a e n s d d t o h w e n pr to eva th il e ing pres sty ei l i e t Ih e r r o iod ugh . ou A t ls Ezr i o i p in e ts du to ring La t s h t e . 4 4 i 8 8 33 30 1 1 :5 2 1 3 1 100, 7 8 4 7 1 94 1113 130 21' pmakers,atent Elastic e Remedies uoot_m r Boot-maker t C o orn he s r ,'"lc iest ß y y thfe. Queen,S P ARKE t hSeIIQAuLe Queen 1841 1 . 16 7 6 54 010 718 10, 296 13 4 Dowager, and the Queen of the Belgians. 184: , Th. _.. • 111 6 8, 49 10 0 710 4; 247 4 5 London: Simpkin, Marshall, and Co. tZeztr - "moon or .2 r profits is annual, and the next will be made in . 01 Preseat year. P. FERGUSON CAMROUX. Secretary. BRITISH WHALE FISHERY. This day, with a Map, price is. 6d., PROPOSAL for RE-ESTABLISHING the BRITISH SOUTHERN WHALE FISHERY, through the medium of a Chartered Company, and in combination with the COLONIZATION of the AUCKLAND ISLANDS as the Company's Whaling Station. By CHARLES ENDERBY, Esq., F.R.S. Effingham Wilson, Publisher, 11, Royal Exchange. CURE OF COUGH AND itopyam Lo coc 110ARSENESS BY ent. str , et K S PULMONIC WAFERS. ,4er,'lWlth a co „„' 4 verpool, Jan. 1, 1846. Sir,—l had been '44 'Men "," and hoarseness for nearly two years, without ke Wer wa s ind ues t o try Lcock's Wafes, the effects of th e i r sin soo neevi!lble d for one large box (2s. 9d.) r has quite cured have also eri them to several of my friendshem . and ex Penced weoMrnended the greatest relief from t, t t i r' e akte J. WILLIAMS. del l reli ef 13 R. LOCOCK'S WAFERS ti le bre `q,3, kr 1,0 SINGERS and lungs. and a rapid cure of asthma, coughs, and all dis 4erA brvah,:eGEßS AND PUBLIC SPEAKERS e-e4l°€t e for clearing and strengthening the voice ; they 44 la, Didpleasant taste. kid bp--D1 1 ls. per box. tnedi e „T a and Co., 1, Bride-lane, Fleet-street, London ; a vendors. CLAY'S'uvIIA. FOGS AND DA MP AIR. ASTHMATIC CANDY hag, for ttt, bets h eYeaors; been a proved an effectual preservative from the thol 4' e li th ‘lie nt in th i s d Damp Air, which, in the Winter Season, s to , ,, is Climate. Its effects are to expel Wind, to ktel 0 Bthejrayarduff S tomach from the admission of Damps, and to relieve soer from Difficulty of Breathing. Prepared only by ~1 1. 11„_11 o int n s , 9 5, Farringdon.sreet, London; and sold retail, by t n t , by Sanger, 150, t Oxford-street ; Gifford, 104, and 0, Strand ; Johnston, 68, Cornhill ; Hallows, Drug 0, `‘,. }h e t. street, a ll respectableVenders in Town and -r elay b n serve none can be genuine, unless the names of c'ns" are on the Stamp affixed to each Box. This Day, In foolscap Bvo, price 6s. THE BATTLE OF NIBLEY GREEN : from the MSS. of A TEMPLAR ; with a PREFACE, NOTES, and OTHER POEMS; by J. B. KINGTON. Henry Colburn, Publisher, 13, Great Marlborough-street. h b k. ROWS, MOUSTACHIOS, and WHIS kOII •Y the useliiteer Puc in a few weeks, and Baldness r and WHIS- T of GRIMSTONE'S AROMATIC emoved REGENE kAt.* 4044 essential spirit, drawn from aromatic herbs and flowers, b o rt 44' which cure headache in few minutes i t t is also a 7. litful, fragrant toilet perfume. a Sold only intriangular tkii 4411:,otected by the Goverment stamp, at es. ; double the size. Oin v .onble this size, e l l la. e ach ; enclosed in a Pamphlet, COB: i:qll4 ,t'ltlinonials of undoubted authority, entitled " Three Minutes 'l)l,4:lithe Growth and Preservation of the Human Hair, 26c." 1, 8 014 Gd., 7s. 841„ and 125., for money orders only. f A do w holesale only at Grimstone's llerbary, Highgate, near To il " ; and by Messrs. Barclay and Son. Farrin g don-street ; Sanger, om 'street; Messrs. Butler and Co., Cheapsid e ; Fi s her and Toiler, y li t.street ; Mr. Johnston, medicine warehouse, 68. Cernhill k, 0: all Chem ists, Perfumers, and others For Edinburgh, J. and 11 .ie,7 1 kes, Leith-walk ; for Manchester, eresehe and Son, Adver To THE LADIES. lady had the following letter interted in the ‘. Times" news , 1 4 t ( )ti Aug. 7, 1846. Reader, remember, this letter was put into „ aler by the lady herself, as a testimony to me. h, Weekley, of No. 3. Swan-street, Borough, takes this oppor- Iktt cc't Publicly thanking Mr. W. Grirnstone, of the Herbary, High iiitOr the efficacy of his Aromatic Regetierator, in having corn ka-t•iy restored the hair on her head, after using itabout four months, to 4t ,. c Whole of her hair is much stronger and mere luxuriant than p; w all before the baldness appeared. Weekley inserts this testimony to the virtues of Mr. G.'s 11 1..t0r, feeling sured that many ladies woeld gladly purchase De.rien'Lbottle if they a w s were as certain of Its virtues as she is, from ex. L `gte C , not only in the restoration and produotion of hair in abund ilYo'hatit as cure of nervous headache ; as a toilet perfume ri it , is far dyof ~""Y to her taste. She will feel a pleasure in answe n, a ' eA Pectabilit to the above facts.-3, Swan-street, Borough." 4 kb " of the • .t „ hair becoming thin, weak, or turning grey, a few ."" Crown of the head occasionally, every w t ee s k, o w n i o fi parne,u noti7 h air from coming away with the comb, make 1 tr Zie 1,1; turning grey rendering the hair luxuriant and curly. A "it b Th rit! an Your hairbrush before brushing the hair, will give the ,_Fausing it to curl. d elicate ladies may use this delightful product of the Cllrre: na tic herbs and fl owers with confidence ; its refreshing %the trves headache and makes it a most necessary companion h„ nit c '• In cases of nevous headache, our ten or twelve dros i n wo of the heal ; if very bad, repeat p it every quarter of an ~...!nost cases relief is certain in ten minutes. It produces , ..4144eteulsions, as well as promoting 1 / 4 14 condren's heads in a few appplications. If used on infants ' l lt ' t has totr... such a peculiar cooling influence on the brain as to pre the growth of hair.—See All et+ of tastlinordal s . .'•••„.s.lers a ddressed to William Grimstone Herbary, Highgate. TWO FEET.—AN ANECDOTE. FOR R. MOSES AND SON'S BOOTS AND SHOES. Alvp readerrs as they happen'd to meet, the shall hear what was said by the feet. Or , a Y What do you honestly think (said the one), P or " l e boots and the shoes made by MOSES and SON? lei„ 1 Y l n own part a full satisfaction I feel, .1,, M ysole and my instep, my toes and my heel. bootsw e have on are so stylish and neat, t, in truth, we're a couple of beautithl feet." done! (said the left with a stamp of the foot), l tre right, Mr. Right,' with regard to your boot ; F ri M entimes thought I'd begrudge sot a ransom 4, 14 4 boot or a shoe that would make me look handsome; Ra eh aow I have got it, and so have you, too, Aa oth a Pair of neat feet very seldom we view. s bel o ng ng to MOSES and SON'S boots and shoes, IN e, e ~ !ct that they are faultless in fit and in style,. ! J uly answer their purpose a very long while. liyotl_eot would do well to attend our advice t or such goods at a very low price, Art B,` - ',SES end SON, in their boots and their shoes "errnined that a 1 folks shall gain and not lose. LIST OF PRICES. 1 / 41 1 1 1 N I , READY MAIM l Olen %loni a f. s. 1 44,1 1, 13 .. •• • . ..... • • ..... .......9 8 6 T rot s : voth;ngtons ...... ••..•••• • • •• • 010 hnte r •„, 4 Ys. and Chesterneldo, and every description 11 * , 4 4 ,1a1 e '' r ats. ' **•• • • - 1 5 0 e. A rs, 0 4114 uedn 1, every style• • and make ....... ,0 8 6 .. 0 4 6 ..... • • • • 010 6 k••• •....... ...............................1 0 1: 31 ' ti br ltste,i;;" ....... •.. • • Dl ,ittgar Yenta 0 2 0 le t wiat e a nd Tuni c •;.; ' • •• .. 018 6 .0 1 6 11 '14. Y extent at five minutes' notice. 1 .1141 Co m ' 4 l " t ore ; Warrant MADE TO MEAWERE. N ' . 4 Cio t cl Y trim, ed waterproof, made to any style, 1 5 0 hll ed ................... Witt ( ' :,;ver, toa : l :; triaa n , d, 1 144 r V r c atte r r •• • • ........ 'velvet collar and cuffs, lined 2 6 0 1)t "411 I • " ..... ••••• • • . • • ...... o 8 6 .. . . 0 18 0 Ott -n all the most approved French patterns 1 2 6 C . -1t 14 .44 4 ` 4l r .... 1 6 0 41")..." .• .• • • . • 112 0 )i Nt •• .• •••"• •• " " • • •• •• 2 15 0 t .'14 41 110 '• •• " • .... •1 15 0 A L 14; 41 4,4 1 4d t .. ...... ••"''•••••••• • ' •• • ' • • • • • 3 3 0 ''1 4 . : 4 1 „ 411 1 o r ' "•• • • •.: ••::••••••• • • • • • • • • • .. •. .. : 0 8 6 • mpaeyfitl,7t 4 ar •• • • :•... ........... :••••• • • • .. . 0 12 0 Tunic Suits : .......... 5 r !i . at article purchased, ready made, or made to mea -114 kiAtiriiq`uved of, will be exchanged, or if preferred, the FRS and SO N . orti, rs. , Tailors, Woollendrapers, Clothiers, Hatters. `i C arl e t , „..I:na_General Outfitters, for Ladies and Gentlemen, 144440"i:1%e. 15 and 157 Minories, and 83, 84, 85, and 86 Aldgate, ' r Q4 Std .--- • Arose c._, nst a and Son regret being obliged to guard the 00.1'1-7natd LmPosors, but have learned that the untradesman tesor'tl bei ng connected with them, or it's the same concern, e , : 411 1 '4 2°110 ed tt ' 111 many instances, and for obvious reasons. 44,04 t t t0i.a.,401 eagsnseitn transacted n t ;l , c c h i e t *I, connexion with odes o any other house in or out of London; L el o o n th do in n g . , &c., should call at, s atu ra rd n a s y ac t .w el e a n t b t u h s i i s nes es s ta is bl r i ; i s hmt till ' , inset likk from sun- W rs tia ' l ee to t till twelve he 1441 fouprpdoesrtaet th e en gh t ur ls e a i t i, B3, Aldgate, corne r o f th e agate AN INFALLIBLE HAIR DYE. IIOWLANDS' MELACONIIA, the most suc cessihl liquid preparation ever known in this or anyother country for dyeing the hair of the head, whiskers, mustachios, and eyebrows a natural and permanent brown or black, so exactly re sembling the natural colour of the hair as to defy detection. It is perfectly innocent in its nature, is free from unpleasant smell, and can be used by any lady or gentleman with the greatest ease and secrecy. Its effects are so permancnt,"that neither water nor perspi ration will influence them ; and it is entirely free from those properties (usual in hair dyes) which give an unnatural red or purple tint to the hair. Price ss. ROWLANDS ODONTO ; or, pearl Dentifrice, a white powder for the teeth, compounded of the choicest and most recherche ingre dients of the Oriental herbal. It eradicates tartar from the teeth, removes spots of incipient deeay, polishes and preserves tke enamel, imparts the most pure and pearl-like whiteness, and gives sweetness and perfume to the breath. Price 2s. 9d. per box. Sold by the Proprietors, A. Rowland and Son, 20, Hatton-garden, London, and by Chemists and Peifumers. OZ/ 41 11 4 . 14 , • ' .? (Tr.:4,N I , 4 1 41) ry/ 'V a:" -1114 e -1)., - •?f, " 11 , 6\• 1 P-41 0,e ) v „Ac i a °.( ' • ‘4. • A r-Ar. nit+ s I I- ts ITT OW & fe • ; • - ( . 14 . jo ji , - . 0 „, • J AN 1 1- 7: k% „„ u \ DROIT. • No. 10,950. LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING SU N, JANUARY 15, 1847. TAEEDS AND THIRSK RAILWAY. LEEDS AND HARTLEPOOL EXTENSION. CONTRACTS FOR RAILS, CHAIRS, SLEEPERS, AND SPIKES. The Directors of this Company will meet at the Company's Offices, No. 5, South Parade, Leeds, on Thursday the Eleventh of February next, to receive and open TENDERS for the supply of the following Articles, viz. :- 5,000 TONS of MALLEABLE IRON RAILS. 1,800 TONS CAST IRON RAILWAY CHAIRS. 120 TONS RAILWAY SPIKES. 77,000 MEMEL FIR and LARCH SLEEPERS. Persons desirous of Tendering for the supply of the above, may ob tain further particulars on application at the Company's Offices on and after the Twenty-first of January next. Sealed Tenders, addressed to the Secretary, will be received until Noon of the Day of Letting. The Directors do not bind themselves to accept of the lowest Tender. _ . By order, No. 5, South Parade, Leeds. S. SMILES, Secretary. ROYAL POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTION. PROFESSOR SCHCENBEIN'S GUN COTTON, and other Explosive Compounds, with brilliant Experiments, LECTURED on y Dr. RYAN, daily at Half, past Three o'clock; and on the Evenings of Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. The principle of the various ELECTRO-MAGNETIC TELE GRAPHS explained daily by Professor BACHHOFFNER, including the Patent of Messrs. Cook and Wheatstone, in use on the railways, and the more recent Patent of Messrs. Nott and Gamble ' • the various Models explained. Magnified Specimens of DISEASED POTATOES, exhibited by the OXYHYDROGEN MICROSCOPE, with the DE- S TRUCTIVE INSECT, supposed by A. Smee, Esq., F.R.S., to be the cause of the disease. A beautifbl Series of NEW DISSOLVING VIEWS. The DIVING-BELL and DIVER, with Experiments. The PHYSIOSCOPE, new CHROMATROPE, &c.. &c. Admission ls. Schools, half-price. 1 RAVESEND STAR and BLACKWALL PACKETS. Boat and Rail Included ha One Payment, avoiding the danger and delay of the Pool. Prom the Brunswick Wharf, Blackwall, at 9%, 1016, 1,3, 4, and 5. Sundays, at 9%, 11, 1%, 4, and 5. The Trains starting one quar ter of an hour before eaoh of these times. 'New Terrace Pier, Gravesend, at 7%, 8%, 9%, 11%, 1,3, and 5. Sundays, at 8%, 11%, 1,3, and 5. N.B.—No other packets call at the Grays or Greenhithe Piers. Star Office, Gravesend, Dec. 28, 1846. NEW VOLUME OF MR. JAMES'S WORKS. Just published, in medium live., price Ss. cloth, with finely engraved Frontispiece, THE KING'S HIGHWAY; BEING TILE ELEVENTH VOLUME of the Works of G. P. R. JAMES, Esq. *** The previous volumes (each complete in itself) may be had separately ; contents— ' Vol. VI. Henry of Guise. VII. Morley Ernstein. VIII. The Robber. IX. Darnley ; and X. The Brigand. and Co., G 5, Corhhill. Vol. I. The Gipsy. 11. Mary of Burgundy. 111. The Huguenots. IV. One in a Thousand. V. Philip Augustus. London : Smith, Eldi Just published, post dye., cloth, 75., ON NEAR SIGHT, AGED SIGHT, AND IMPAIRED VISION : with Observations on the Use of Glasses. By W, WHITE COOPER, F.R.C.S., Senior Surgeon to the North London Ophthalmic Institution. " Truly practical, and consequently truly valuable, we recom mend this volume to all eyes. There is nothing connected with the sight upon which its advice is not most significant and valuable. Founded on the most thorough scientific knowledge of his subject, Mr. Cooper goes intd - details of 'forms to Improve the vision, to choose glasses, and adopt every course which can strengthen or pre serve the most precious of our senses."—Literary Gazette. London: John Churchill, Princes•street, Soho. ELEGANT AND USEFUL GIFT BOOK—A PICTURE OF GERMAN HOME LIFE—WITH A VALUABLE COLLEC TION OF ENTIRELY ORIGINAL KNITTING PATTERNS. Dedicated, by permission to her , Royal Highness the Duchess of GLOUCESTER. Now ready, in 1 vol. Bvo., full gilt cloth, illustrated with Engravings, price 10s. 6d., THE GERMAN CHRISTMAS EVE. Edited by Mrs. ALFRED MONTGOMERY. Being a Pic ture of Home Life in Germany. With Instructions for, and Illustra tions of One Hundred beautiful and Original PATTERNS for KNIT, TING. Translated from the German of Madame A. FLOUR. London George C. Comes, 5, Halkin-street West, Belgrave-squaro. OUGL AS JERROLD'S WEEKLY NE WS PAPER ENLARGED, with Various New Features, ou the 23d January, to 32 Pages or 9G Columns. Price, as heretofore, Six pence. Order of all Newsmen, Town or Country, of whom fuller prospectuses may be obtained. DOUGLAS JERROLD'S WEEKLY NEWS PAPER, ENLARGED, with Various New Features, to the utmost Limit allowed by the Stamp Law, on the 23d January. Price, as heretofore, Sixpence. Orders of all Newsmen, Town or Country, of whom detailed prospectuses may be had. D OUGLAS JERROLD'S WEEKLY NEWS PARER. ENLARGEMENT OF ONE-THIRD, ON THE MEETING OF PARLIAMENT.- In order to give ampler space for all the News of the Week, including The Debates in Parliament—The Miscellane ous Occurrences—Law and Police Reports—Public Meetings—Foreign I ntelligence—Literature —Correspondence —as well as for Original and various New Serial Articles, the Proprietor has determined to enlarge the Paper to the utmost limit allowed by the Stamp Law, and to ADD ONE-THIRD, or TWENTY-FOUR COLUMNS, making in the whole THIRTY-TWO PAGES, or NINETY-SIX COLUMNS, thus rendering it equal to the Fullest and Largest News paper in the extent and variety of its News of the Week, and still retaining the large space heretofore devoted to Original Articles by the Editor, and his Eminent Literary Colleagues. Price (as here tofore) SIXPENCE. Order of all Newsmen, Town or Country, from whom detailed • Prospectuses can be had. THE CIGAR WAREHOUSES, LONDON. Fine Foreign Cigars of all Makers, 17s. Gd., 18s. Gd., 209., and 21s. per lb. ; Government Manillas Cheroots, 17s. per lb.. British made, from the finest tobaccos imported, Cheroots, Gs; Mexicans, 7s. Gd. per lb. ; Cuba and llavannah Cigars. 7s. and 7s. Gd. per lb. ; Silvas and Cabanas, Bs. Gd. per lb. ; Principes, Lopez Recompendzas, Esparteros, Dos Amigos, and Estrellos, 9s. Gd. per lb., warranted first quality. The Union Cigar, equal to any foreign, 12s. Gd. per lb. Single pounds may be had. Messrs. Tosswill and Co., Commission Merchants, Importers, and Manufacturers, have a large stock of the above, well worth the attention of large buyers. Warehouses, and 7, Pudding-lane, Eastcheap, three doors from Gracechurch street and King William-street, City. DAVIES'S CANDLES, Qd. per lb. ; Genuine Sperm, la. 9th ; Yellow Soap, 485., 545., and 60s. per I l2lbs. ; Mottled, 60s. and G4s. ; Wax Candles, Is. per lb. ; German Wax, Is. 2d. ; Fine Wax, Is. sd. ; Transparent Wax, Is. lid. ; Genuine Wax, 2s. Id.; Waxed-wick Moulds, 7 cl.; Sperm Oil, Bs. per gallon; Solar, 3s. 3d. , Pale Seal, 4s. ; Argand, or Vegetable, 4s. Bd. ; Wind sor and Palm Soap, la. 4d. per packet; Brown Windsor, is. 9d ; Rose, 2s. ; Almond, 2s. 6d. ; Sealing Wax, 45. 6d. ; Bale's Paragon Composite, requiring no snuffing, 934 d. ier lb. For Cash—At DAVIES'S Old Established Warehouse, 68, St. Martin's-lane, opposite Slaughter's Coffee-house. THE PERFECT SUBSTITUTE for SILVER. The high estimate formed by the public during the twelve years WILLIAM S. BURTON'S (late nirroN and BURTON'S) chemically purified material has been before it (made into every useful and ornamental article usually made in sliver, possessing, as it dces, the characteristic purity and durability of silver), has called into existence the deleterious compounds of " Albata Plate," " Berlin Stver," and other so called substitutes ; they are at best but bad Imitations of the genuine articles manufactured, and sold only by him. Fiddle Threaded King's Table Spoons and Forks, hall size per Pattern. Pattern. Pattern, dozen. Dessert ditto and ditto ditto•..... lOs. Od. 21s. Od. 255. Od Tea ditto and ditto, ditto . . 3s. Od. 11s. Od. 12s. Od. Gravy ditto •••• • • 3s. Od. 6s. Od. 7s. 0,1 NICKEL ELECTRO-PLATED. —The REAL NICKEL SILVER, Introduced and made only by WILLIAM S. BURTON (late RIPPON and BURTON'S), when plated by the patent process of Messrs. Elkington and C0.,1 beyond all comparison the very best article, next to sterling silver, that can be employed as such either usefully or ornamentally. in the lengthened and increasing popu larity of the material itself, and the high character of the method of plating, the public have a guarantee that the articles sold by W. S. Burton (and by him only) are, as it regards wear, immeasurably superior to what can be supplied at any other house, while by no possible test can they be distinguished from real silver. Fiddle. Thread. King's. Tea Spoons, per dozen • •• .. 18s. • • 325. .. 38s. Dessert Forks „ .••• • . . 30s. .. 465. .. 58s. Dessert Spoons „ Table Forks . 40s• .. 68s. . • 755. Table Spoons „ ••..•• • • .. 40s. .. 725. 80s. Tea and coffee zets, waiters, candlesticks, &c., at proportionate prices. All kinds of re-plating done by tile patent process, Detailed catalogues, with engravings, as well as of every ironmongery article, ent (per post) free. WILLIAM S. BURTON (late RIPPON and BURTON'S) Stock cf general Furnishing Ironmongery Is literally the largest in the world, and as no language can be employed to give a correct idea of its variety and extent, purchasers are invited to call and inspect it —39, Oxford-strut (corner of Newman-street). Established In Wells-street 1%90. THE SPANISH MARRIAGES. (Continued from The Sun of yesterday.) We have received from Paris copies of the docu ments respecting the marriages of the Queen of Spain with Don Francisco d'Assis and the Infanta with the Duke de Montpensier, presented to the Chamber of De puties by M. Guizot on Tuesday last. The following are translations of the most important dispatches: — LORD PALMERSTON TO LORD NORMANBY. Foreign-office, Oct. 31, 1846. My Lord,—Her Majesty's Government would willingly have allowed the communications betweent the two Governments on the Spanish marriages to close with M. Guizot's dispatch of the sth inst., a copy of which was transmitted to me by Count Jarnac on the Bth, if it were not that there are some statements and some arguments in that dispatch which it is impossible for her Majesty's Government to leave entirely without a,reply. M. Guizot's dispatch, like that from me to your Ex cellency, to which it was an...anawer, treats of two sub jects,—the marriage of the Queen of Spain, and the marriage of the Infanta. With regard to the first I have little to say, except • so far as I may have to touch upon it in treating of the second ; and except to express the sincere and earnest wish of her Majesty's Govern ment that it may conduce to the happiness of the Queen and to the welfare of the Spanish nation. Her Ma jesty's Government, indeed, in answer to repeated appli cations from the Government of Spain on the subject of the Queen's marriage, had instructed her Majesty's Mi nister at Madrid to recommend a different arrangement, and had invited the French Government to join in that recommendation ; but the recommendation of her Ma jesty's Government was not givea to the Government of Spain in the spirit of dictation, as M. Guizot's dispatch would seem to imply ; nor did her Majesty's Government either ask or expect that the Government of France should exclusively recommend the candidate whom her Majesty's Government thought the best. We knew perfectly well, that if that candidate were not ac cepted by the Spanish Court, the French Government watild recommend another; and I distinctly stated to Collet Jarnae, in answer to a question - v - 0110h he put to me, that her Majesty's Government, having given its opinion, would, in the event of that opinion not pre vailing, take no part either for or against the other can didate whom the French Government would afterwards propose. But what I adverted to in regard to this matter, in my former dispatch, is this, that while at the latter end of August Count Jarnac was holding out to me, and M. Guizot to your Excellency, the expectation that M. Bresson would be instructed to co operate with Mr. Bulwer in recommending the candidate whom the British Government wished to pint out, provided that, in the event of that candidate being rejected, Mr. Bulwer would be instructed not to oppose M. Bresson in recom mending the other. M. Bresson was at that very time al ready deciding the matter at Madrid, against that first candidate, in pursuance of instructions previously sent to him from Paris; and her Majesty's Government think that the French Government might as well have made those instructions known to them, instead of continuing to discuss the conditions of a joint action which those in structions had put entirely out of the question. And in regard to these matters, with respect to which the French Government professed at the time a desire for a full mutual understanding, and now seems to imply that a similar disposition was not equally felt by her Ma jesty's Government, it is to be observed that her Ma jesty's Government twice communicated to the French Government the instructions which had been sent to Mr. Bulwer ; the first time in extenso, and the second time in substance ; whereas no similar communication was ever made to her Majesty's Government of the ix. structions sent to M. Bresson. But not only was the confidence thus shown by her Majesty's Government towards the Government of France not reciprocated, but it was turned to purposes at variance with the spirit in which it was made ; and though M. Guizot declared that my instruction, of the 19th of July, to Mr. Bulwer, of which a copy was communicated in confidence to M. Guizot, and was sent immediately by him to M. Bresson, was not used by M. Bresson in any public or official manner, yet he does not deny ; that it was used by M. Bresson in a manner unauthorised by her Majesty's Government, to whom, and to whom alone, it belonged to determine what use should be made at Madrid of its own instruction to her Majesty's Minister at that Court. M. Guizot reverts to the earlier periods of these trans actions, and admits that, from the outset, the King of the French spontaneously made known that he did not pretend to obtain the hand of the Queen of Spain for any of his sons, and that he wished the Queen of Spain to choose her consort from among the descendants of Philip V., a category which, as the French Government pointed out at the time, specifically excluded all the members of the Royal Family of France. But surely there declarations had reference to a principle, and not simply, to a person. The objection of which his Ma jesty the King of the French by such declarations ad mitted the validity, was not that one of his sons should be the husband of Isabella of Bourbon, but that one of his sons should be the husband of the Queen of Spain ; and the principle of that objection is therefore not confined in its application to a marriage of one of his sons with the reigning sovereign, but evidently applies also to a mar riage with the immediate heiress to the Crown. And is this the doctrine of her Majesty's Government de t n h t e period alone ? And i s it on ly now , for the first time, advanced? by his at an Majestyan tenn Far otherwi se . It i s a doctrine admitted virtually p Ki i n n g d ;of for M. French Guizot himself, and Alludes in his dispatch to certain engagements, from which the French Government intimated, on the 27th of February, 1846, that they should, in a specified contin gency, consider themselves freed and released. And what were those engagements ? They were, first, the engagement, originally and spontaneously made by, his Majesty the King of the F renc h, that no son of hs should marry the Queen of Spain ; and, secondly, the engagement, also spontaneously t a k en b y his Majesty, and by his Minister, in September, 1845, at E u , that in no case should the Duke of Montpensier marry the In fanta until the Queen of Spain should have been mar ried ; and until, by her having had children, the prospect of a direct succession to the Spanish Crown should have been assured. Does not the second of these engagements prove that the first was understood by those who made it exactly in the sense which I have given to it ? and that the objection of which the King of the French acknowledged the force and justice, was, not that one of his sons should marry a particular Princess of the House of Bourbon, but that any of his sons should be the consort of the Queen of Spain ? And his Majesty, feeling and admitting the force of that ob jection, proposed, of his own accord, that the marriage which he wished to take place between his son and the Infanta should be postponed until the birth of children to the Queen should in some degree have divested that marriage of the appearance of an attempt to take the chance of attaining by indirect' means in one way that which had been relinquished directly in another. This last-mentioned engagement at Eu was obviously not sufficient to remove the objections of the British Government to the proposed marriage of the Duke of Montpensier to the Infanta. But that engagement, such as it was, ought to have been kept; and if it had been kept, time would have been allowed to the two Govern ments to discuss with deliberation the various questions connected with the matter, and they might have endea voured to have arrived at some; amicable arrangement of their mutual views and interests with regard to it. But the object of the French Government on this occa sion seems to have been so to precipitate the matter, as to render all arrangement and mutual understanding im possible. This engagement, spontaneously made by the French Government, has been broken; and upon what plea? M. Guizot, in his dispatch, assigns two grounds of excuse for its violation. The one, a circumstance , which happened during the administration of her Ma jesty's late Government; the other, some circumstances which are said to have happened after her Majesty's present Government came into office. M. Guizot alludes to a communication which was made to her Majesty's late Government on the 27th of February of the present year, the purport of which was that the King of the French would hold himself free from the engagement he had taken as to the marriage of the Queen and of the Infanta, and would deem himself at liberty to ask the hand either of the one or of the other for the Duke of Montpensier, in a certain con tingency. That contingency M. Guizot stated, in his dispatch, to have been defined to be, " if any combina tion should acquire consistency, which should make the French Government fear that the Consort of the Queen of Spain would be takennot from among the descendants of Philip V." This communication of the 27th of February, 1846, upon which so much stress is laid as affording a justifi cation for the course which the French Government has pursued, was verbal and unofficial. There is no record of it in the Foreign-office. There is nothing to show that it was ever acquiesced in by her Majesty's late Govern ment ; and the pretensions put forward, and the inten tions announced in it, are at variance with the principles laid down, and with the opinions declared; by her Ma jesty's late, as well as her Majesty's present, Adminis tration. I never heard of this memorandum till lately. It was never even mentioned to me by Count Jarnac until after the event had happened for which it is now quoted as a justification. It is said to have been a timely warning, the neglect of whic h j ustifies the double mar riage, and its existence was made known to me, for the first time, by Count Jarnac, after the news of the double marriage had been received. About the middle of Sep. tember, Count Jarnac showed me an unsigned memo randum, which he said was the record of the communi cation in question ; but, although I remember that the passage quoted by M. Gutzot was in that memorandum, yet, the specific contingency stated therein as the one which would release the French Government from its en gagements, was the case of "there being at any time an imminent danger of a marriage either of the Queen of Spain, or of the Infanta, with Prime Leopold of Saxe Coburg, or with any other foreign Prince, not being a Bourbon, and not being a descendant of Phillip V. of Spain ;" and it was in such a ease that the memorandum declared, that his Majesty the King of the French would consider himself free to ask for the Duke of Montpen sier the hand either of the Queen or of the Infanta. It is to be remarked, that the memorandum thus places both the marriage of the Queen, and that of the heiress presumptive to the throne, in the same political:category; but if there was between those two marriages, in the opinion of the French Government, this identity of poli tical character, why did that Government, while it felt the propriety of endeavouring to come to an understand ing with her Majesty's Government about the one mar riage, consider itself free to ma k e a se cret and surrepti tious settlement of the other ? The memorandum further contained assurances that each of the two Princesses ought to marry a desendant of Philip V., and that consequently neither of them should marry the Duke of Moatpensier, except in the case of imminent danger of one or other of them being married out of the House of Bourbon. What, then, were the circumstances which are men tioned as having made such an event imminent ? The first circumstance happened, as I have observed, during the time of the late Government. M. Guiaot says " that in. May of the present year the French Govern ment had addressed to the reining Duke of Saxe Coburg, then on a visit to the Court of Lisbon, a message for the purpose of negotiating the marriage of Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg with the Queen Isabella ; and that the French Government had learned at the same time, and with the same certainty, that this message had been previously communicat e d t o M r . Bulwer, the Bri tish Minister at Madrid, and had received his approval ; that the French Government immediately expressed, both at London and at Madrid, its surprise and uneasiness, and that it received from Lord Ab er d een ass urances which demonstrated his entire good faith." Now what is the impression which this statement is calculated to produce as to th e course o f the transaction to which it relates? Why, evidently, that the French Government having, from its own sources of information, obtained a knowledge that a letter had been written by the Spanish Court to the Duke of Saxe Cobourg, and that it had been seen by Mr. Bulwer before it was sent off, expressed to Lord Aberdeen its surprise and uneasi ness, and received from Lord Aberdeen, factory assurances. But the real transaction was ex actly the reverse of this, as regards the communication between the two Governments. in reply, satis-. The first knowledge which the French Government received of the letter having been written by Queen Christina was from Lord Aberdeen himself. The first knowledge which they had that this letter had been seen by Mr. Bulwer was equally given to the.srd Aber deen." Theutrptlnersarmilvtleei escisturprise at what they learned from Lord Aberdeen; and the first expression of that surprise is said to have been accom panied not so much by uneasiness as by alleged incre. dulity. The French Government seemed unwilling to believe that such a letter could have been written, and that they should have received the first intimation of it from any other person than their own Minister at Ma drid. M. Guizot says that Lord Aberdeen, in reply to the communication of the French Government, gave as surances which demonstrated his good faith. M. Guizot ought rather to have said that Lord Aberdeen demon strated his good faith by spontaneously communicating to Count St. Aulaire a fact of which the French Govern ment represented themselves as uninformed. Lord Aber deen thought himself bound to make known to the French Government that such a letter had been written, because he found that the letter had been shown to the British Minister at Madrid before it was sent off ; and as Lord Aberdeen had said to the French Government that her Majesty's Government meant to take no active part in favour of the Prince of Coburg, he thought it right to inform them of what had passed, lest the bare knowledge which her Majesty's Minister at Madrid had acquired of this step might expose her Majesty's Government to the suspicion of having changed their policy in this respect, secretly, and without previously informing the French Government that they intended to do so. It must be confessed that, as regards Lord Aberdeen, it may be said of the statement made of this transaction in M. Guizot's dispatch, that " there is in it, perhaps, some want of memory, or of justice." At all events, this example of scrupulous good faith on the part of Lord Aberdeen cannot be quoted as con stituting a reason why the French Government should be released from the engagements which it had spon taneously taken towards the Government of Great Britain. The second circumstance upon which M. Guizot's dis patch founds the defence of the French Government in this matter, took place, as I have said, since her Ma jesty's present Administration came into office. M. Guizot says, that soon after the above-mentioned communication between Lord Aberdeen and the French Government had taken place, Lord Aberdeen retired from office ; and the information received by the French Government no longer permitted them to doubt that the efforts which had been undertaken for the marriage of the Queen of Spain with the Prince Leopold of Saxo Coburg were actively pursued. No doubt that informa tion was correct; and it was not difficult for the French Government to acquire it. Those efforts were actively pursued; but where? and to overcome what obstacles? Why, if her Majesty's Government have not been much misinformed, those efforts were making specially at Paris by the Marquis of Miraflores, who had been sent by the Spanish Court on a particular mission to the King of the French, to endeavour to prevail upon his Majesty to withdraw the opposition which he had made to a match which was stated by the Marquis to be anxiously desired by the Court of Madrid. 'But that mission, at least, the very foundation of which was the assumption that the Coburg marriage could not take place without the assent of the King of the French, afforded no excuse for a de parture from the above-mentioned engagement. " But then," M. Guizot says, " in the midst of this state of things, and in the anxiety with which it inspired the French Government," he received from Count Jar nac my dispatch of the 19th of July to Mr. Bulwer. This dispatch, he says, enumerated, for the first time, Prince Leopold as one of the three remaining rfsotr mentionedthe Q ue i en 's n h t a h n e d ,e enumeration. .ri n ic e Prince' s p 's n ae re f indeed, as M. Guizot admits, was expres sed in that the candi dates first dis patch in favour of Prince Leopold ; but, on t he other hpd , r m e ew nc a e s it is said that no objection was urged against _hins; and the passage in that dispatch which stated th at " her Majesty's Government have only to express their sincere wish that the choice may fall upon the cand i d ate who may be the most likely to secure the happiness o the Queen and to ensure the welfare of the Spanish na tion," was, in the opinion of the French Government, such a plain though indirect recommendation of the Prince of Coburg, that this "dispatch was calculated, by a mere act of laisser alley, to bring about that marriage without any direct support or active co-operation of the British Government. And it is argued that this dispatch justified the French Government in taking its own mea sures in regard to the two marriages. Now, in the first place, it is to be observed that if the knowledge of this dispatch of the 19th of July by the Spanish Court was calculated to render the Coburg marriage probable, that knowledge was afforded to them by M. Bresson, who showed them the" dispatch, and not by Mr. Bulwer, who was told in it that her Majesty's Government did not instruct him to take any step thereupon. In as far, therefore, as a knowledge by the Spanish Court of the sentiments expressed in that dis patch constituted, in the opinion of the French Govern• went, a danger, that danger was created by their own agent, and cannot be pleaded in their own defence. With respect to the assertion, that Prince L e o P °l ll., d never before been officilaly mentioned as one of the can didotes for the Queen's hand, and that his being g w hich ia tioned in this dispatch gave him some advantag he did not possess before, I would only observeeethhastd, considering that almost every newspaper in E er t e l l i ) a t the long ago already so mentioned him; considering s founded w to be a, memorandum of the 27th of February, 1846, on the assumption not only that he was known h Uourt in ing also, that the known wishes of the Span . is candidate, but was likely to be the chosen one; . ear, been regard to him had, later in the sprin g . of th t l i s m y stion from the subject of an o ffi cial and threatening n i 'n consequence M. Bresson to the Spanish Government, deemed it necessary of which the Spanish Government _onsider- Aberdeen made, England, to which communication Lo r d considering, on the 9 9th of June, an official reply; a nd hen my dispatch o f moreover, that at the very momen ta Sp Spanish envoy at Paris, to make an official communication to the Government of July was written there was a Leopold to the Queen of about the marriage of Prince Leopold mere mention of the Spain, it is not easy to see h ow the not intended to be name of that Prince, in a d ispa tch only for the personal information sent expressly to negotiate with the French Government ' made public, and meant Leopold with reference to the alter the position of Prince L eopold is said that the dispatch of adhered strictl • to th marriage question. But no d objection to Prince Leo the 19th of July expressed fler Majesty's present of her Majesty's Minister at Madrid, could in any way pold. Undoubtedly it did not. predecessors. Th ey have e ground d th fe e r r Government judicious Governmentcourse rhave pursued in this been of opinion, that no foreign had any a ca n didate f or the hand right to object to any Prince a s political reasons connected with the _ n i m en r t i tnce of the y ispatch of of the Queen of an independent coun t r y, ms. u e n t less for those balance of power, which were sta nd as those to reasons did objecting to Prince Leopold as a candidate for the hand sy matterthei! the et lateapp apply to GovernmentP ri Prince no r t Leopold he p r o e f s e S n a t x; .7 C o a b n y u r g g r , stated that her Majesty's present Government were not of the Queen of Spain. But that dispatch distinctly prepared to give any candi dates therein mentioned. Moreover, it refered Mr. Bul wer to the instructions which he had received en the marriage question from my predecessor in office, and among those instructions was the communication to him of a copy of the note addressed cm the 29th of June, 1846, by Lord Aberdeen to the Duke of Sotomay sr , in which Lord Aberdeen stated that " when an alliance of the Queen of Spain with Count Trappani had manifestly become odious to the Spanish natio n, the British Go vernment had:ventured, although without any English candidate or English preference, to point out the Infant Don Enrique as the Prince who appeared to them to be the most eligible, because the mast likely to prove ac ceptable to the people of Spain." And yet the French Government endeavour to represent that a disp atch which contained the passage first above quote d , and which referred Mr. Bulwer to this last-mentioned expo sition of the sentiments of the late British Governm en t , as having been adopted by the present Governme n t, was to be considered as an indirect encouragem ent of an alliance of the Queen of Spain with Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg. M. Guizot admits that good faith r e q uires, that what is not attempted directly s h ou ld n ue aimed at indirectly; and her Majesty's Governm en t ca nnot refrain from expressing some surpri se at the groundless insinuation contained in the passage on which I have been remarking, seeing that M. puizot, in the paragraph immediately following, di reeti _ y admits that her Majesty's Government had no intention to put forward or to recommend Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg. That admission is an acknowledgment of the exact truth. The British Government has at no time put for ward or recommended that Prince as a candidate for the hand of the Queen of Spain, and has at no time taken an, step to promote his alliance with that Sovereign. If that Prince, being the object of the c hoice of the Court of Madrid, had also been wished for by the great majo rity of the people of Spain, and if his union with the Queen would have created for Spain no embarrassment in her foreign relations, the British Government would cheerfully have taken any steps which it might have been competent to take in order to facilitate such an arrange. ment. But being led to doubt, by what had passed with regard to Count Trappani, whether any foreign Prince would be acceptable to the Spanish nation, and seeing that the objections expressed by the King of the French to Prince Leopold, however unreasonable, unjust, and in public law untenable they might be, might never theless, in the eventof that Prince becoming the consort of the Queen, injuriously affect the relations of Spain with France, the British Government, from the moment when the Trappani match was abandoned, stedfastly and constantly maintained the opinion, that it was desirable for the interests of Spain that the Queen's choice should fall upon a Spanish Prince. It is true that when her Majesty's present Ministers came into office great efforts were made by the Spanish Court to obtain from them some expression of opinion in favour of Prince Leopold; and not only were those efforts made at Madrid, but the Duke of Sotomayor came over from France, where he was residing on leave' of absence, to urge personally the same request. The British Government dealt with these applications, as considering them made in good earnest, and as under standing them to express the real wishes of the Spanish Court, and as made with no other object in view than that which was professed. My dispatch of the 22d of August to Mr. Bulwer conveyed an answer to the Spanish Court; and on the 15th of August I gave an answer to the Duke of Sotomayor, by stating to him that which I had before more than once said to Count Jarnao, namely, that the British Government had no candidate of its own; that considering all the di ffi culties connected with the selection of Prince Leopold, that selection did not seem to us to be the best; that it would be most advisable, on the whole, that a Spanish Prince should become the Consort of the Queen, and that amongst Spanish Princes Don Enrique seemed to us to be the fittest. These answers, no doubt, disappointed the expecta tions with which those overtures had been pressed upon her Majesty's Government; but what was there in all this which could justify the French Government in de parting from its voluntary engagements at Eu?—even admitting, for the sake of argument, that her Majesty's present Government were to be held bound by the me morandum of the 27th of February, which the French Government had never either mentioned or communi cated to them. But M. Guizot's dispatch goes on to say, that " The French Government was unable to deceive itself as to the state of things; and saw that there was on the part of the Spanish Court so strong a desire for the Coburg alliance, that if the British Government should make no active opposition to it, and should remain only passive in the matter, that marriage would certainly be con cluded; and that, consequently, the French Government resorted at Madrid to the most direct and most legiti mate means, and appealed to the free choice and inde pendent will of the Queen and of her Government, to bring about a different arrangement. "By the side of a combination which was being pursued evidently in opposition to the policy of the French Government, that Government," says M. Guizot, " offered a different combination; and this latter one was accepted by the Queen a nd her Go vernment." The contradiction between the opposite statements contained in these passages is too obvious to require to be pointed out. If the Spanish Court had so strong a desire for the Coburg marriage, that nothing but the active and decided opposition of the British Government could have prevented that marriage, how did it happen that in the absence, as M. Guizot alleges, of any such opposition, the mere and simple offer of a different ar rangement by the French Government sufficed to pro cure the immediate adoption of that different arrange went? And if, as M. Guizot states, the Spanish Court acted in this matter with the most entire freedom, what was the reason of so sudden a transition from what is represented to have been an almost uncontrollable de termination for one arrangement, to a spontaneous and equally decided adoption of another one? M. Guizot says that this result was brought about by the most urgent motives ; what those motives were he does not explain. May it bo inferred that one at least among those urgent motives was furnished by the urgency with which M. Bresson pressed the arrangement which he thus proposed to the Spanish Court? And might not another of these urgent motives have been afforded by the conviction, then already obtained by the Spanish Court, that the British Government did not recommend the Prince of Coburg, but thought that under all the cir cumstances of the case, a Spanish Prince would be fittest consort for the Queen. If that conviction was felt at Madrid—and her Ma jesty's Government have good ground for asserting that it was there felt—what becomes of the excuse put for ward for the precipitate and secret settlement of the marriage of the Duke of Montpensier to the Infanta, upon the plea that the engagements of Ea had been rendered void by the happening of the case of imminent danger specified in the uncommunicated, and, at least by her Majesty 's present Government, anacquiesced-in memorandum, of the 27th of February, 1846? The imminent danger specified is thaimemoranclum was the likelihood that either the Queen or the Infanta should be about immediately to marry a foreign Prince, not likteo exist lihood when M. Bresson demanded the hand of the Infanta for the Duke of Montpensier. Not only had it then ceased to exist, but with respect to the Queen , whose marriage hadbein g ever a descendant existed, of it PhhaidlipatV all eventsßut if ceased that dis cussion, it bad been succeeded by an impossibility ; M because, w hen M. Bresson demanded the hand of th e was at that time the immediate and only subject of Infanta for the Duke of Montpensier, the marriage of the Queen to the Infante Don Francisco had actually been resolved upon and settled. Therefore, the memo randum of the 27 th of February, 1846 , cannot afford the slightest ground on which to tbuild a justification for breaking the engagement of Eu. M. Guizot denies that the treaty and the renunciations of Utrecht afford to the British Government any ground of right for protesting against the marriage of the Duke of Montpensier, and against its possible consequences. Now, the British Government have protested against that marriage, as at variance with the spirit of the Treaty of Utrecht, and against certain contingent con sequences of that marriage, as a violation of the letter of that treaty ; and her Majesty's Government are of opinion that their protest rests upon good and sufficient grounds. • M. Guizot says that the Treaty of Utrecht had a double object: the first to secure the Crown of Spain to Philip V. and his descendants • the second to prevent the possibility of a union of the Crowns of France and Spain on one and the same head. Now the first of these results was undoubtedly the effect, but is nowhere put forth as one o f t h e o b jects of the treaty; and the seco n d was a means and not an end. and h realthe preced i ng n o g f w the r treaty, h ad b e besidesen undertaken;the r e - storation of peace b e t ween t h e contracting parties, was The main forw hic and it is truly set ; forth in the second article of the treaty between Great Britain and Spain, which recites that, " La guerre qu'on vient determiner heureusement par cette paix a ete entreprise au commencement, et continue: si longtemps avec taut d'animosite et des de ponies immenses, aussi Bien qu'avec une effusion de sang inexprimable, a cause du danger imminent dont la liberte et la sitrete de toute l'Europe, a 6!4 menace's par "union trop etroite des royaumes d'Espagne et de France." It was a too close and intimate union between the kingdoms of France and of Spain which constituted that danger to the balance of power in Europe which it was the real object of the War of Succession, and cf the tsrruaicenesse,actions of Utrecht, for over afterwards to avert ; and the mea ns by w hi c h t h a t t oo c l ose an d i nt i mate union was to be p reven t e d, were th e perpe tual separa tion of the tw o Crowns, and the p erpetua l exclusion of any t Peordriinncg of any Prince t o o ft t h ho e ef Royal Family of one of the two eoun tthhreondeesocf the descen d ants of such Prince, from Her Majesty's Government, therefore, contend that the marriage of the Duke of Montpensier to the Infanta is at variance with the main object of the treaty ' • and tvinhaialaitdhtithtybeeoltfehttetheemr renun ci ation s a , and positive stipulations, of the treaty, would prevent any o f th e d esc endants of that Prince n n line."er fvroolTmvheeuspurocrcneenethdcheinir Gove rn mentg to the throne of Spain, "whate v er n which do of the un o t rteop success i on rhett. eT h might the validity p retend to deny e renun ciations were clear, positive, explicit, and compr ehensive. They were incorporated in the treaty, and were made part of the law both of France and of Spain ; and the King of France engaged by the stipulations of the treaty " Solennellement et par parole de Roi" that neither he nor his heirs and successors " ne feront jamais rien, ni ne permettront qne jamais it fat rien fait, capable d'em pcicher les renonciations, d'avoir leur plein en entier effet." But that, on the contrary, they would take sin cere care, and exert themselves, afin que rien ne donne atteinte a ce fondement du salut public, nine puisse reibranler." Her Majesty's Government are surprised that in the face of such renunciations and of such stipulations and engagements, the French Government should endeavour to represent, as implied, though not directly asserted, in M. Guizot's dispatch, that the descendants of the Duke of Montpensier could relieve themselves from the positive and perpetual exclusion whbete l ataches toat them I from the transactions o f Utrecht, by ea th they would inherit rights from the Infanta Luisa Fernanda. It is manifest that no claim transmitted to them by the Infanta could counterbalance or set aside the positive disqualification which they will inherit from the Duke of Montpensier. Nothing is more common than that the disqualification inherited by children from one of their parentsfrshomoutldheinovthaleir.: invalidate all the qualification whic h the y inherit But if there were any value in this implied assertion of the French Government, and if the marriage of the PRICE SD. Duke of Montpensier with the Infanta would really free his descendants from the disabling effects of the renun ciations of Utrecht, how could the conclusion of that marriage be reconciled with the above quoted engage ment of the Crown of France solemnly taken, "et par parole de Roy," never to do nor to permit to be done, anything which could be capable of preventing th ose renunciations from having their full and entire effect? The French Government., therefore, must either admit that the descendants of the Duke of Montpensier are excluded by virtue of the renunciations in the Treaty of Utrecht. or they must acknowledge that they have violated the engagements contained in that treaty. M. Guinot, however, quotes instances of marriage of two Princes of Spain with Princesses of France, and of a Prince of France with a Princess of Spain; and he says that the last instance is remarkable, because it was the heir to the Crown of France who married one of the heiresses of the Crown of Spain. To these instances her Majesty's Government would reply, that even if they were cases in which the stipula tions of Utrecht had been overlooked, the fact of their having been so overlooked by statesmen in the last cen tury would be no reason why they should not be appealed to and observed by statesmen in the present century, if those stipulations are in themselves clear, positive, and indisputable. Doubtful stipulations may receive an interpretation from precedents ; but a treaty that is plain and precise can only be invalidated by an act as formal as itself. A law is not abrogated for one man, because another man has abstained from appealing to its enactments ; and a treaty is not annulled for one generation, because another generation, under circumstances essentially different, may have allowed its stipulations to lie dormant. — But the cases quoted by M. Guizot are very different from that of the marriage of the Duke of Montpensier. In all these cases the Salic law was in force both in France and in Spain, and the Princesses in question, instead of being immediate heiresses to the crown of the country to the Royal Family of which they respectively belonged, were, in the two first- instances, by the law of France altogether excluded ; and in the third instance, by the law of Spain, exclud ed until all the male heirs should be extinct. It is obvious that while the Salic law was in force in both countries, the strict enforcement of the stipulations of Utrecht in regard to women might well be considered as less important than it has now be come, since the change which has of late years been made in the law of succession in Spain. But with respect to the cases quoted, it may be observed as to the first, that, after that marriage, the treaty between Spain and Austria in 1729, still further confirmed and recorded the exclusion of all French Princes and their descendants from the throne of Spain ; and with respect to the third, that no descendants of that marriage have succeeded, or have claimed a right to succeed, to the Spanish Crown. M. Guizot, indeed, says that the stipulations of Utrecht will suffice for the future, as they have done for the past, for the interests of peace and for the balance of power in Europe. If her Majesty's Government are to understand by that sentence, that, whereas no French Prince or his descendant has since the Treaty of Utrecht claimed to succeed to the throne of Spain, no French Prince or his descendant will ever claim so to succeed in future, her Majesty's Government would admit that the question at issue between the two Governments was divested of much of its practical importance. Her Majesty's Government, however, cannot admit that the experience of the past, as asserted by M. Gui zot, has demonstrated that foreign influence has no power of swaying the international policy of Spain. On the contrary, the history of the last century affords many examples to show how, in consequence of that in timate connexion which, notwithstanding the Treaty of Utrecht, continued to subsist between the Crowns of France and Spain, Spain followed France into war, and made peace only when France did so too. It is true, indeed, as M. Guizot reminds her Majesty's Government, that in the present century Spain made a great and successful effort to vindicate her national in dependence ; and it may be remarked that the unani mity of feeling which then crowned her exertions with success, was much strengthened by the deep impression produced throughout Spain by the secrecy and surprise with which those proceedings were conducted which were intended to lead to the establishment of a French Prince on the Spanish throne. The British Government has not, as M. Guizot seems to suppose, forgotten those events, nor does it fail to render justice to the patriotism then displayed by the Spanish nation ; and her Majesty's Government are convinced that on any analogous occasion the same spirit would animate the whole Spanish people. But her Majesty's Government would deeply lament that any such occasion should arise again to let loose on the Peninsula a tempest of angry passions, and again to pour forth on the soil of Spain a deluge of human blood. The calamities of such a conflict, however great they may be, are not too dear a price for a people to pay for the maintenance of their national independence ' • and though other States may be involved in the evils con nected with such a struggle, sound policy may lead them to choose immediate exertions and sacrifices, rather than encounter the future dangers which apathy and inacti vity would render too certain. But great would be the responsibility which would weigh upon those who should wantonly have been the cause of such evils; and if those evils, besides being unnecessarily produced, bad their origin in breaches of treaties and of engagements, that responsibility would, indeed, be heavy and overwhelming. I have to instruct you to read this dispatch to M. Guizot, and to send him officially a copy of it.—l am, &c., (Signed) PALMERSTON. M. GUIZOT TO COUNT JARNAC. Paris, Nov. 22, 1846. Monsieur le Comte, --I send you herewith a copy of the dispatch from L ord Palmerston, dated the 31st of October last, which Lord Normanby communicated to me on the 4th of the prosent month. Having answered already most of the allegations repeated in this docu ment, I shall confine myself to correcting the more seri ous of the errors which it contains, and to reiterating, conformably with the truth, the more important of the facts to which it relates. The only effect of lengthened controversy is to throw obscurity on the controverted matter, and to raise animosity between the parties to the dispute. Whilst it asserts the rights and the interests of France, the King's Government is earnestly desirous of maintaining the most friendly relations with the Govern ment of her Britannic Majesty, and to this sentiment I shall remain faithful. Lord Palmerston endeavours to make out that the King's Government has not kept the engagements re lating to the Spanish marriages which it entered into into in September, 1845, at the Palace of Eu ; and that it has broken the Treaty of Utrecht, with the ob ligations which that treaty imposes upon it. Such are the terms of his dispatch ; and the more unmeasured these terms are, the more anxious I am to reproduce them without attenuation, that I may give them an unre served answer. Lord Palmerston declared, in his dispatch of the 22d of September last, that he had not found in the Foreign office any convention or arrangement between tho French and English Governments relating to the Spanish mar riages. He insists, in his dispatch of the 31st of October last, on the engagements relating to the same matter, which, as he says, were entered into by the King's Go vernment at the Palace of Eu, affirming, at the same time, that there is not in the Foreign. office any trace of the memorandum written by me on the 27th of February last, and communicated to Lord Aberdeen on the 4th of March following. I might ask, in my turn, whether there exists in the Foreign-office any trace of the engagements contracted at the Palace of Eu? I might, moreover, urge (with some surprise at the inconsistency) that, while he affects a perfect knowledge of engagements not attested by the faintest official evidence, he disputes facts and documents which it would. not be convenient to admit, on the ground that there is no official trace of their existence. This (might it not be said ?) is a striking contradiction, and evinces an extreme partiality for his own view of the question. I shall, however, do nothing of the sort. I shall not dispute the engagements contracted at Eu, because no record of them has been found by Lord Palmerston in the Foreign•offace. Where Governments are connected by mutual confidence and respect, public business is not unfrequently transacted without official documents. There are even circumstance in which this course is dictated to them by propriety, and in which, therefore, they are bound to pursue it. Such was the case in re spect to the Spanish marriages. As the question related substantially to the domestic concerns of Spain, it in volved considerations which regarded her independence and dignity. Lord Aberdeen cud myself (who were de sirous of acting in concert throughout the affair) did not think it fitting to make the question the subject of nn official correspondence. Out of respect towards Spain, and considering our own position relatively to her, we thought that we should act with more propriety by con fining our correspondence to those less formal com munications which were rendered natural and easy by our mutual confidence. It is for this reason that Lord Palmerston has not found in the Foreign-office any trace of the negotia tions or arrangements which, in his dispatch of the 22d of September, lie styles a bargain. But the engage ments contracted at Eu, with the declarations in the memorandum of the 27th of February, ure not, on that account, the less real or serious; and, so far am I from disputing theta, that I am anxious to acknowledge their existence, and to assert their true and serious character. It is, however, my duty, whilst making this acknow ledgment, to re-state them correctly arid completely. Now, in referring to the engagements contracted at Eu, Lord Palmerston forgets, or omits to say, that these en gagements were mutual and conditional. •Whenever we have adverted to them, we have coupled them with two reservations : first, that the Queen of Spain should choose her consort amongst the descendants of Philip V.; secondly. that the English Government, in concert with us, and according to the measure of its should help us to secure the accomplishment of means, tiiai object. We could not, indeed (without the most culpable im prudence), have restricted our liberty matter of such serious importance, unless of action ipti we had limited ,ier engagements by conditions demanded from us by the * interests and dignity of F rance I have openly, an d on every occasion, announced our line of policy in respect to the matter in question. I have frequently conversed on the subject with the English r~ ~~ / -.-----___ Ambassador at Paris; and I haver orTwarned him, in4ll . re \ k -d i ' S tis,. 4,\ my conversations with him, of the mune iihte't, ,i. - 0-.7%!**.q." should pursue, if a Prince not descended from ' , ;;;V:4V.i . ! '. . (and especially if the Prince Leopold of Sin bi n, '), - i• ) should oiler himself, with a prospect of sucAig,\ - , s kli k it i-. 171i!":„: 4 ; didate fur the hand of the Queen of Spain. \"rhet:-& g _,a-- --- lish Government, therefore, was fully apprise lribe IS Y. reservations annexed to our engagements, adif4e tlie concurrence which we expected from it. . It told us, I admit, that it could not adopt the prin ciple of our policy; and that in respect to this question it could not place itself in our position, or hold our lan guage, or pursue our line of conduct. It assured us, however, that it would act in the same spirit and pursue the same object. Nor was there in this conduct of the two Governments anything in the nature of a bargain. It was, on both sides, a conduct perfectly rational, unre served, and sincere. We constantly relied on its conti nuance. According to Lord Palmerston, the Marquis of Mira fibres, during the last summer, was sent on a mission to Paris by the Court of Spain, for the purpose of persuad ing the King and his Government to acquiesce in the marriage of Queen Isabella with the Prince of Coburg. This assertion is entirely groundless. During the two months which he passed in Paris, the Marquis of Mira tlores never made to the King's Government any com munication or overture of the purport indicated by Lord Palmerston; nor did he ever address to me a single word to that effect. I pointed out, in my dispatch of the sth of October last, that the placing Prince Leopold at the head of the three candidates for the hand of Queen Isabella was calculated to prod uce the effect of an i n di rec t recommen dation of that Prince. I then added, " admitting that Lord Palmerston did not intend to propose or to recom mend the Prince of Coburg, he would certainly acknow ledge himself that he said nothing to induce him to withdraw his pretensions, or to dis courage the Spanish Government from persisting in its designs." Lord Palmerston entirely mistakes the meaning of this sentence. "M. Guizot," he says, ‘‘ directly admits th a t her Majesty's Government had uo intention to put for ward or to recommend Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg; that admission is an acknowledgment of the exact truth." The intention of Lord Palmerston to recommend Prince Leopold, of Coburg, by his instructions of the 19th of July I neither admitted nor contested. It is not the intentions, but the effects, which it is my pro vince and my duty to determine. I endeavoured to show the effect which these instructions would naturally produce at Madrid, even admitting hypothetically that Lord Palmerston did not intend to put forward or to recommend that Prince. Proceeding to discuss what I said to you (in my dis patch of the sth of October) on the effect of his instruc tions of the 19th of July, ut Madrid, Lord Palmerston quotes, as if it were extracted verbatim from my dis patch, the following passage :—(I place his quotation, and the passage in my dispatch, side by side.) LITERAL TRANSLATION OF TRANSLATED QUOTATION IN- • THE ORIGINAL TEXT. SERTED IN THE ENGLISH DOCUMENT. " The French Government "The French Government could not be mistaken as to was unable to deceive itself this state of things. In order as to the state of things,' and to obviate its consequences, saw that there was, on the it resorted at Madrid to the part of the Spanish Court, most direct and most legiti- so strong a desire for the mate means, and appealed to Coburg alliance, that, if the the free choice and inde- British Government should pendent will of Queen Isa- make no active opposition to belle and of her Government. it, and should remain only By the side of the combine- passive in the matter, that tion which was being pur- marriage would certainly be sued in evident opposition to concluded;' and that, conse its policy, it placed and of- quently, the French Govern fered a different combination. ment resorted at Madrid to It had a right to do so, the most direct and most having openly and positively legitimate means, and ap made a reservation of that pealed to the free choice and right to itself: It was its independent will of the duty to do so, for the con- Queen and of her Govern tingency in view of which ment, to bring about a dif that reservation had been ferent arrangement, By the made, and which the French side of a combination which Government had foreseen in was being pursued evidently its instructions sent to Ma- in opposition to the policy of drid, as well as in its declara • the French Government, Lions in London, became that Government (says M. more and more imminent. Guizot) offered a different This combination the Queen combination, and this latter of Spain and her Government one was accepted by the have accepted." Queen and her Government." On reading this passage, I felt, I confess, extreme surprise; the phrases which I have quoted are not in my dispatch; nor can I consider this interpolation as in different, since Lord Palmerston avails himself of it to impute to me " palpable contradictions." These contra dictions would be palpable indeed, if all the phrases from which they are said to result had really existed; but he must permit me to repudiate contradictions which are no production of mine. Speaking of the overture made in May last by the Court of Madrid, with the knowledge and concurrence of the English Minister, fur the purpose of offering the hand of the Queen of Spain to the Prince of Coburg, I did not mention that I had received my first information of that overture from Lord Aberdeen. Lord Palmerston expresses surprise at this silence. I thank him for this reproof. It is true that Lord Aberdeen was the first who gave me that information, which was soon after confirmed by the King's Ambassador at Madrid. Nothing, certainly, could have better suited the King's Government than giving publicity to this fact; since it shows at once the sincerity of Lord Aber deen, his engagement to aid us in preventing the Prince of Coburg from offering himself for the Queen's hand, and the fidelity with which he adhered to it. But, having received the information as a confidential and private communication, I felt uncertain whether it would be agreeable to Lord Aber deen himself that I should declare officially that it had reached me through him. It appeared to me that I could not make that use of it without his authority. It is with heartfelt satisfaction that I now offer this acknowledg ment to the undeviating sincerity with which, on this occasion, as on many others, be pursued that policy of entire confidence and intimate concert to which we were mutually pledged. I must draw one short comparison. In the month of May Lord Aberdeen gave me immediate information of the proceedings which first rendered it certain that Prince Leopold of Coburg was a candidate for the Queen's hand. lle disavowed these pretensions, and blamed the English Minister at Madrid for having taken any share in those proceedings. Tn the month of July following, without any notice, without any previous communica tion with us, Lord Palmerston himself proclaimed Prince Leopold of Coburg a candidate, and instructed Mr. Bulwer to express the sincere desire of the English Go vernment that the choice might fall on that one of the three candidates who might be most acceptable to Spain and to the Queen. And when, as soon as we were made acquainted with this dispatch, you represented to Lord Palmerston the serious objections which it suggested, and you asked him if it could not be in some degree reconsidered, he replied that it was already forwarded. Who will say that no change had taken place? Who will say that we ought, that we could have closed our eyes to such a change, and in blind inaction awaited the chances of what might occur? The most obvious duty and the commonest foresight prescribed to the King's Government its conduct. The Government had promised, in September, 1845, not to conclude the marriage of the Duke of Montpensier with the Infanta until the Queen of Spain should be married and should have a child, provided, however, that the Queen gave her hand to one of the descendants of Philip V., and that the English Government aided us in bringing about that result. The King's Govern ment has faithfully performed its promise. In Novem ber, 1845, a proposal was made to it, in order to de cide the marriage of the Queen with a descendant of Philip V., to consent to the immediate and simul taneous marriage of the Duke of Montpensier with the Infanta. This proposal it rejected. In May, 1846, we saw the hand of the Queen offered to Prince Leopold of Coburg, and in the July following that Prince offi ciily announced as a candidate, without objection or comment by the English Government. We could not but regard the chance of that alliance as probable and imminent. To obviate that chance, we were justified in consenting (and indeed bound to consent) t o t h e imme. diate marriage of the Duke of Montpensier with the Infanta. The King's Government has not in a single instance, nor im a single point, violated its engagements. It has, on the contrary, scrupulously observed them ; subject to the reservations and within the limits which it had constantly assigned to them, and which it had care fully made known beforehand. The King's Government has not been less observant of the Treaty of Utrecht than of its own engagements. The meaning of this treaty, and the consequences which it implies, are thus summed up by Lord Palmer ston :—That the Crowns of France and Spain shall be for ever separated ; that every Prince of the Royal Family of either country, tr gether with all his descendants, shall be for ever excluded from succeeding to the throne of the other ; and that this exclusion shall take efkct whatever be the nature of their title to such succession. The former of these principles, the perpetual separa tion of the two Crowns, I have fully admitted. Itd not, however, follow from this principle,srhaaitn marriages ate to be between the royal Houses of Franceand prohibited; or that princes issuing fromS Spanish Crown which such marriages are to lose those rights to the p_ may accrue to them as descendants of Philip V. Whilst I admit the princip le, I maintain that the inference (which nobody .in E ur ope ever thought of before) is not deducible from it. I will only reiterate one of the facts which I have al ready cited (and which I might have multiplied), to prove that this opinion was general in Europe during the entire course of the last century. In 1721 Louis 1., King of Spain, and son of Philip V , married Mademoiselle de M ontpens i er, daughter of th e Regent, Duke of Orleans, the very Prince who had signed, in 1712, the renunciation, by the Orleans branch, of its eventual rights to the Spanish throne. Now, if Louis I. had had children, a grandson of the Regent would have ascended the Spanish throne; and in presence of this fact, which would have happened in the lifetime of the parties who signed the Treaty of Utrecht, what would have become of the inference drawn from it by Lord Palmerston? _ _ _ "But, admitting (says he, in his dispatch of the 31st of October) that there were cases in which the stipula tions of Utrecht had been overlooked, the fact of their having been so overlooked by statesmen in the last cen tury would be no reason why they should not be appealed to, and observed by statesmen in the present." In reply to this answer of Lord Palmerston, I shall produce a fact more recent, and carrying with it a weight which he will not contest. In 1739, the Infant Don Philip, Duke of Parma, and son of Philip V., married Louisa Elizabeth, daughter of Louis XV. In 1765, the Infanta Louisa Maria Theresa, a child of this marriage, and therefore a grandchild of Louis XV., married Don Carlos, Prince cf Asturias, who was afterwards King of Spain, under the name of Charles IV. Ferdinand VII., King of Spain, was, there fore a great grandson of Louis XV., and his daughter, i ~ _~ ,=G PUBLICATIONS. T : IE EDINBURGH REVIEW, No. CLXXI., Is this day published.'='• g g CitYIrrEIVII4 1. DAVID HUME. 2. THE STREETS OF PARIS. 3. LOCAL TAXES OF THE UNITED KINGDOM. 4. BANCROFT'S HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES. 5. THIS CHET. BUNSEN ON THE BASILICAS OF ROME S. THORNTON ON OVER-POPULATION. 7. GENIUS AND WRITINGS F PASCAL. 8. ON CENTRALIZATION. London : Longman and Co Edinburgh :A. and C. Black. TO ALL ENGLAND. Shortly will be published a pArnphlet, entitled HOW to LET DAYLIGHT into the LAW. Also, A FEW HINTS on GETTING a BILL out of CHANCERY, which will be interesting to the celebrated George Robins and others connected with the knock-down system. By the same Author, PUGIN'S GROTTO, taken from the Bridge. Edmonds, 154, Strand. ceelL d sage. gale lokf ogee Lugi"' $1. 114 daer Jar' flOn . at of ,etbi I, of