The Sun. — London, England, 1840-05-15 00:00:00

~.VENING EDITION. ilt s t hink there was sufficient evidence with reg ard t ° ti ei l udlow t o j ust if y t h em i n w ithholding the writ. There place be a question whether proceedings had not taken at the present and other elections, to show that cor eoP,ll°o was not as the phrase was, " carnal" in the ei ri ou gh. He would observe merely that the Committee t , ,, !10t go into that question, and therefore he did not k sufficient evidence had been laid berme them to jus elothem in refusing to accede to the Noble Lord's inn the,' But although he would not undertake to pursue gene inquiries, he wished the House to consider the bad been prevalence of these practices, and to state what R u been done in former times in that respect. After the bribery, it appeared that there was a great influx of thrY , and that these practices became more frequent they had been, in consequence of %Which the House became extremely vigilant and severe. The Fame thing t hese after the passim ,. of the Reform Act. On bsth g r eat events occurring, the one and the other giving a st at extent of popular influence, attempts were made at the time of the revolution, and immediately after the pass_ gof the Refor m A d egrade and subvert the elec to A ct, to b of and to endeavour, whether by means of direct bribery, t i at Y means of sinking the electors into that degraded When they thought of nothing but feasting andbe, urunkenness, to prevent that great measure from et n lg carried into effect. Attempts were therefore made the revol u ti on o f 168 S, and after the passi n g of the Refo rol Act in their day, to carry on practices by means of Which the corrupt influence should no t be destro y ed, buet, that, diverted into another channel , it should flourish as r '' as ever. He now wished to state to the House er 4. • Were the proceedings adopted by the House of Corn )ns after th e R e volution under these circums tances. He %1 'thed to show that if it were objected that he had not ° PPosed t h e suspens i on o f t h e writ, it was for no want of P r ecedent s w hi c h h a d then been adopted, or for no want tb r emedies which were then thought not on l y to be within e te b Power but the duty of the House of Commons. led " the House found corruption becoming more frequent of destroying the independence as well as the character e o ie he House, the only means of preventing it were those t ee h he had already mentioned as proposing—general to asures to be adopted by Parliament—one with respect bribery, and another with respect to treating. But oth er proceedings had been taken on this subject with hr r s Pect to boroughs in which corruption had been found exist. Wi t h respect to Stockton the writ was in h d h e Suspended. With regard to Aldborough, 1696, eri e , writ was ordered to be suspended, and an inquiry was 'ered ores with respect to that borough, and the writ 4 f 4 t i Aot tored until December 1697, twelve months e r , When it was restored only upon the electors confess ofg their guilt and throwing themselves upon the mercy t he House. With regard to another boroug h, the y ordered that no new writ should be issued that es s i oe Writ With regard to Bishop's Castle n o new , was issued , and the candidate was thro wn into ai te, uY• In 1781 the candidate for New S arum was corn „"d, and no new writ issued for some time. In 1703, for i `n W e e ,"ltle-Under- Line no new writ was issue d that Session, G To did not stop with regard to those cases; but in the T r :- of the Shepherds, the elder Shepherd was sent to the - ter ; the House thus showing itself d etermined, b y t'Y Means it could adopt, to prevent the corrupt prac e'esPrevailing. With regard to Corfe Castle and Wot - t ik Bassett, they took similar proceedings , and showed a ° determination. He wished to state he m entioned these Ce res bec ause h e th oug ht the House should be reminded of W hat had been done in former times with respect to cases of Cor ruption and that in agreeing to the motion of the N oble L or d , he did not w i s h t o be precluded from following su ch a course if it should be thought necessary o n a fieure d e e casion. H e co n s idered these precedents as good precc - Qt s• He thought they did well in taking ever y means to Prevent such corruption from prevailing; and however th_ere these precedents had been, and whatever objection might be to the course adopted in a constitutional ee. yet he considered the evil was so vital a nd so de fie'active t o th e cons titution of Parliament, as to be a jus stion for a d op ti ng su ch proceedings. There was another p l "u i e S e ec eding to which he would call the attenti on of the ho had b ecause h e th oug ht it was still stronger than those o ,„ h ad mentioned, but which he thought, if they found all 4(lQer resources failed, Parliament would be justifie d in ° P ti ng, and in which Election Committe es were directed a! Parliament to act for the destruction of these practices. i vas thus in 1691 with regard to the borough of Twicken tos) when a person was found guilty of corrupt practises, Committee not only prevented him taking his 4% but ga ve it to the next on the poll , Tilenst whom no such practises could be shown to exist. t oe 7re was an objection to this practice that it was not al ving the majority their votes on this occasion, but it was e more than was done with regard to any person who An a found t o b e di squ alified by law, in which case the C ommittee set aside the election, and gave the scat to the other party, notice being given to the electors—not that e meant to propose this in the Bill he meant to introduc e, b ut to show there were other means. If the candidate W ere guilty of corruption he proposed it should be com petent to give him notice that he was disqualified, and that the votes thrown away should be given to the other Candidate, and if he were found guilty of treating he should not be seated by a majority of votes, but his opponent Would ; and on this it appeared to him, if these contests Were carried on by two parties, each striving against the other as to which should obtain the most votes by bribery, he should be very glad if some person to whom that prac tice had become known should declare he himself took n o part in such proceedings, but gave notice to the other ildidate that proceedings would be commenced against sloth candid a te ; and that he who bad the minority of votes, e lt had refused to give as a bribe even a single crust of b: t t( l . would have his scat. He believed he had stated whi ei t l i te measures he meant to propose, and the course th ou the House had taken on similar proceedings. lie t o ght that was the time in which they ought, not only sh _ take advantage, but to seize any occasion to an they were disposed to adopt measures to put n. end to a system so disgraceful, so injurious, and so 'Qat to the Constitution.—( Hear, hear.) It was by those who were afraid of the extension of popular privileges that these attempts were made. These persons looked to the voters to whom these rights were extended as vultures or e nTrion crows, flocked to the field of battle, and made that W hich was in itself a great benefit, an evil and a slur upon te count r y. Perhaps he had taken an a gg ravated view of th ese 47 evils, which might by som e be considered as neces sary evils, which would exist in s p ite of the law. He would not use words of his own, but quote those of an eloquent ' Wri ter, in concluding what he had to sa y on this subject, because he thought both the words, and the occasion of their utterance, which was not a political one, should give Weree xtend, i—" But the further the expensiveness of elections i t - r T e nfl, the further they promote every kind of vice, to the family of [ The Noble he morals and interests on botto h o say that he trusted f the voter and his ;r ata " uca to publi c opinion for the suppression of the se cor rupti Practices—(Hear, hear)—and he hoped the Noble n :rie connected with this particular borough w o uld use their influence against them.—( Hear.) Men of all parties :Ititist see th a t t h ese practices tended to make the electors o f country unworthy of their privilege ; and , i f allowed ° continue, must sap the very vitals of the Constitution. s's( Hear, hear.) The Earl of DARLINGTON begged to say that he almost entirely concurred With the sentiments of the N oble v r d•—( Hear, hear.) Mr. HAWES regrette d muc h that the Noble Lord should have negatived inquiry. Lord J. RUSSELL begged to explain. He had stated that he w o uld vote for the issuing of the writ, but ,he h ad_ reserved to himself the right 'hereafter to support fur tur inquiry, though at present he saw no reason to p ro p ose -- (Hear, hear.) •Mr• HAWES rose to move as an amendment that a Sel ect to Committee be appointed to inquire as to the ext ent eo which brib er y an d treating prevailed at the late election r th e b orough of L u dl ow, an d t h at t h e wr it for a Member o serve in Parliament for that borough be suspended in 8 °? meantime. He agreed with the Noble Lord (J. Rus ") that the bribery was co-extensive with the treating , and that those persons were as bad who made men drunk as those who gave them money. The Hon. Member then 'end extracts from the evidence of instances of men being enticed to public houses and made drunk, and kept in that state until the election was over. As to the case of a wit ness named Tyler, one of the witnesses upon whose e vi _ uence the decision of the Committee had been formed,he was Paid 501. for his vote. [The Hon. Gentleman read further extracts amidst great interruption from cries of " Divide, divide," " o:der, order," &c.] He was quite willing to adjourn the debate if the House was unwilling to hear him. --(Cheers, and cries of " Oh, oh.") He could imagine that the discussion of a case of bribery was distasteful in that House, and especially amongst those who did not represent as large constituencies as he, and others near him, represented—( Cheers)—and he hoped to sec the time when those small and corrnpt constituencies would be done away with.—( Cheers.) He would ask any man if the evidence was not such as to call for the most search ing inquiry ? To issue the writ was nothing more nor less than to tell the electors of Ludlow that the House of Com mons was indifferent to their corruption, and that they had only to be more acute and cautious in future. Was there t iny certainty that the other House would pass the Noble (Word's Bill ? and if so, were they to allow gentlemen in the Mean time to go down to Ludlow and tell the people there that they would be paid for their votes, and that they need not be afield of the House of Commons ? The cases of debau c h ery were so flagrant, that he did not think a no bl e l family, who were in all other respects most estimable, would descend so low as to encourage them, if it were not for the indifference of the House or Commons. He was e glad that this was not a party question, as both the candi -4ateB, the one a Whig and the other a Tory, had been Proved guilty of bribery by their agents. Mr. HUME seconded the motion. The Noble Lord had made out a full case for inquiry, and every Member ro ust have sosed, whilst the Noble Lord was s p eakin g , th at he meant t o move for a Comm ittee. The Noble Lord admitted that the Commit tee had stopped short in ell' inquiry, but that what had been proved before them W a 6 most atrocious, Why did the Noble Lord quote pre cedents to show that unreforme d Parliaments had sus pended wr i ts on account of bri ber y even for two menths, e he did not intend to move for its suspension ? The Noble Lord expects t h at pu bli c o pinion would put down the prac ` .tee, but how could that be if the House of Commons treats it as venial? He thought the writs for Ludlow and Cambridge should be suspended until it was seen whether the Nobl e Lord's measure should pass the House of Lords. The Noble Lord had always shown a great anxiety to put down corruption. He had brought in the Reform Bill, f or which ho merited the thanks of the country, although it Was not quite perfect, and in justice to himself he ought to Punish the corruption of these places. Sir ROBERT PEEL had already said, that in this Case ther e was no t round for suspending the writ , a nd , agreed with the Noble Lord (John Russell) that ” 10 course taken in respect to it should not be a precedent in respect to other cases. He himself had, on more than One occasion, moved for the suspension of a writ, but the C A 4SO of e ac h b or ough ought to stand on its own merits. "u inquiry by a Select Committee, which had not as much power as an Election Committee, w o uld l ea d to no• mg. The opportunity of ascertaining the truth was greater in an Election Committee through the hostility of the parties, who were each desirous of convicting each other. He was mainly influenced in voting for the writ by the proceedings of the Committee itself. He never witnessed a greater desire to ascertain the truth, or a greater absence of party spirit. lie entertained a strong impression that the prevailing sense of the Committee was, that there was not sufficient evi dence to justify the suspension of the writ.—(Hear. ) One Hon. Gentleman alone observed, that there was suf ficient ground for suspecting that a system of bribery and treating prevailed. The majority of the Committee differed in political opinion from him ( Sir R. Peel) but he must say that their conduct in the inquiry was marked by the greatest impartiality, and he had thought that if they considered any further step accessary, one of them would have mooed fur it. The impression which the circumstances left on him was, that in their opinion bribery did not prevail generally. He certainly was aware that treating was a medium of bribery, and the evidence as to general treating was quite conclusive ; and it could not be deniedahat treating served the purposes of corruption. If they pleased, let them establish a new law making treating as great a crime as bribery. Hitherto the law had made a difference between the two cases, and it would be a harsh measure to apply a new principle, and disfran chise a borough by a prospective law. Upon the whole case the House was not warranted in suspending the writ for Ludlow. He had no party views in voting for the is suing of the writ, notwithstanding the information of the Hon. Member for Finsbury, who said that if the writ went down, Ludlow would certainly return a Member op posed to him ( Sir R. Peel); he with that ringing in his cars would still vote for the issuing of the writ. lii coming to the decision he had done upon the case, he had not been influenced by any party views. With respect to the general measure, of which the Noble Lord had given notice, he thought it would be more decorous in him to say that he would most heartily concur with him in put ting an end to all species of bribery and treating of a cor rupt nature, than to bind himself to any specific measure. He should have no objection to put an end to treating of a corrupt nature altogether, if it were possible, for he saw no reason why candidates should treat. In some cases it might be entirely innocent, while in others it was moat corrupt and demoralizing ; for instance, suppose a candi date, or his agent, were to invite eight or ten of his friends to bis house, in order to talk over their prospects, or make arrangements—that he had been previously on habits of social intimacy with them—that would be treating, but of an entirely different description to the indiscriminate open ing of houses, and accustoming the electors to almost habitual drunkenness throughout a contest. He was afraid that the suggestions of the Noble Lord would not attain the object he had in view. The Noble Lord pro posed to prohibit treating within a month before and after an election, but that could easily be evaded by the candi didate giving notice that after the expiration of the month the voters would be treated as usual—that clearly would not extinguish treating. But the Noble Lord pro posed to go further, and make treating equal to bribery—then that might be effectual, for it would run for six years—that period would include the month—then where was the necessity for it. His advice to the Noble Lord would be not to attempt too much, or by aiming at much lose even the benefit of the little. Then, with re spect to the question of bribery, the strict letter of the law was, at present, strong enough. Even in the present case they bad inflicted upon both parties the penalty of exclusion from the House, and the Noble Lord had forgot one other punishment to which the parties were liable, viz , that of a prosecution by the Attorney-General. The widening of the scope to which Committees might go in their inquiries might expose, and no doubt would expose many corrupt practices. But he thought it would be found necessary that the Committee should have power to adjudicate at once upon the cases of those parties who appeared before them. It would be hard upon those parties to expose them to the enormous expense of a long inquiry when that in quiry was for the public good, by showing the delinquences of the borough after the Committe e had decided, or were ready to decide upon his case. The consequence would be, that if parties were subjected to such expense, no party would appear before an Election Committee. He would advise the Noble Lord not to throw more difficulties than at present existed, in the way of parties appealing to an Election Committee. The Hon. Member for Lambeth bad said that no one on that (the Opposition) side of the House had expressed any abhorrence of these practices. —( Hear, hear.) He could only say that in his opinion it would be for the benefit and advantage of both parties if they could put an end to such practices altogether.— ( Hear, hear.) He was most anxious that an end should be put to both bribery and treating. He was only afraid that they might defeat their own ends by attempting too much, but he would express a strong desire generally to concur with the Noble Lord to put an end to them. Mr. SANFORD, as Chairman of the Ludlow Elec tion Committee, begged to express his thanks on behalf of himself and the Gentlemen who sat with him, to the Right Hon. Baronet for the manner in which he had thought fit to speak of the proceedings of that Committee. He spoke the feelings of all the Hon. Gentlemen who composed that Committee, when he said that he felt deeply the responsibility which bad been thrown upon them as the first Committee under the Right Hon. Baronet's Bill. He (Mr. Sanford) had sat upon a great many Election Committees, and he could assure the House that be had never seen any gentlemen upon a Committee who had so thoroughly discarded party feeling.—( Hear, hear.) In the few remarks he was about to make, he would state his own impressions, and would speak merely as an individual. They had before the, Committee, a limited number of cases of bribery, and they thought it their duty to investigate them ; but the moment they had come to a decision upon one of the cases, they thought it their duty to intimate to the Counsel that they had come to a resolution in his favour, for one case served his purpose as well as many. The Committee felt that they had no right to ask any person to put himself in the situation of public prosecutor, and prosecute other cases without any prospective advan tage to himself. He was bound to state that even as far as the opening statement of Counsel went, as an individual he could not have made up his mind that bribery was alleged even to have been so extensive as to justify a suspension of the writ. With respect to treating, the case was otherwise ; most un• doubtedly an extensive system of treating pre vailed among all classes in Ludlow. Even the most respectable inhabitants attended the open houses, and the houses were opened in a very peculiar manner, without any order either from candidate or agent, and upon a full and complete understanding, he supposed, from what had oc curred at previous elections, that the candidate in whose interest they opened would have paid their bills. In those houses were to be found the candidate, the agent, and the voter, each having refreshment and liquors of any kind without payment ; and it had made a strong impres sion upon the minds of the Committee, as well as upon the minds of the public, that, when the Committee felt it their duty to call for those accounts, some of them were falsified when they were produced. The question then was, whether the writ ought to be suspended, in conse quence of this extended system of treating? He had made diligent inquiries whether, in any previous case, a writ had been suspended upon such a ground, and he believed that no such case was to be found. He had therefore come to the conclusion, that in the present case the writ ought not t be suspended. The vote he had given upon a former evening was not for the suspension of the writ, hut for the postponement of the question according to what he consid - red a clear understanding existing between the two parties, and he had not voted a second time. Ile felt bound to state, that, in his opinion, the Chairman of a Committee under the Right Hon. Baronet's Bill ought not to originate any initiative measures after an inquiry, unless directed so to do by the Committee—( Hear, hear) —and he thought it was not the duty of a Chair man to move a writ or its suspension without direct orders from the Committee. He concurred in all that had fallen from the Noble Lord be:ow him—he only wished he had gone a little further. Composed as such an assembly as that was —composed of such a class of men, there ought to be no difficulty in the way of a Member coming to that table, and making oath, that, neither by himself nor his agent, had he been indebted to bribery for his election.— (Cheers.) That was his opinion, and he begged to give notice that he would introduce it in a tangible shape upon a future occasion. It might be necessary, to give effect to these regulations, that there should he a public prosecutor. Mr. WA RB URT 0 N rose, amidst cries of" Question," and said he was astonished that any one should doubt the necessity of an inquiry.—( Hear, hear.) Why the Coun sel had opened ten cases of flagrant bribery, and only proved one. Ought not the other nine to be gone into ? Hear, hear.) One of the best preventatives against such corrupt practices was the dread of exposure. That would be done away with if the exposure in such a case as this did not take place.—(Hear, hear.) The plan of the Noble Lord, it was greatly to be regretted, did not give any checks against the disgraceful practices of intimi dation and coercion—( Hear, hear) —and though the Noble Lord proposed that a Committee might continue their in quiry if they thought necessary, further than the parties to a petition required, yet he had not provided for the ease (which was not unusual), of the two parties uniting to stifle the inquiry, of which they had equal cause to be in dread, and refraining from presenting any petition for inquiry. In such a case, which might be a most flagrant one, ought these not to be the means of es tablishing an issquiry?—( Hear, hear.) That the corrupt practices at the boroughs of Ludlow and Cambridge would be repeated at the next election, he had riot the smallest doubt, and he for one should do his best to prevent this, by resisting the writ,—( Hear, hear.) Lard SAN DON denied that the Committee had stopped the inquiry. And he remarked that Gentlemen opposite could not lay claim to purity of election, when the re nowned Secretary to the Reform Club had been found guilty of bribery the most flagrant.—( Loud cheers.) Let bribery and treating be pnriued with the utmost rigour of the law, but not beyond it, and not retrospectively.— ( Ironical cries of " Hear, hear.) Mr. G 0 RIN asserted that, on a suggestion from the Chairman of the Committee, the inquiry had stopped with the first case.—( Hear, hear.) And he expressed himself strongly for the inquiry. Mr. WAKL EY begged his Hon. Friend the Member for Lambeth to withdraw his proposition for the present, and bring it on as a separate motion, not entangling it with the suspension of the writ.—( Hear, hear, hear.) He therefore said, let the writ then issue, they having opposed it as long as they could with any useful effect, but let an inquiry before a Select Committee take place after. wards, and lie advised his Hon. Friend not to press a di vision, but to bring the matter forward at a future day as a substantive motion. Sir R. PEEL explained that lie had not, as the Hon. Member had said, pledged himself as to the course he should take in the future prosecution of this inquiry. Mr. AGLIONBY rose amid cries of ." Divide, divide," and said he should strenuously recommend his in. Friend, the Member for Lambeth, to press his amendment to a division, and if he did so, were there but half-e-dozen to join them, he ( Mr. Aglionby) would divide with them. He asked what new circumstances had transpired to render that course wrong now which was right the oilier night. If he had not thought the Noble Lor4 (Lord John Russell) entertained the same view of this question with himself, he would never hive persisted in those divisions. The Hon. Gentleman then entered into a detail of the proceedings of the Committee, and said he could not but think the Counsel were of opi- THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY, MAY 15, 1840. Ilion the Committee had done their duty, and that it was I n ot necessary for them to proceed further, as the matter would be investigated before another tribunal. On these grounds he voted with the Hon. Member for Lambeth, and would remind the Hon. Member for Liverpool (Lord Sandon) that he (Mr. Aglionby) had never, since he had the honour of a scat in that House, been guilty of taunting any party, and he thought the %cry circumstance men tioned by the Noble Lord made it imperative upon him to show that he was not acting in this business from party motives. As to,the suspending of the writ, and the Com mince of Inquiry afterward , , they must take place toge ther or not at all. The Noble Lord at the head of the Government had quoted a variety of precedents; and when he (Mr. Aglionby) thought he was going to act upon them, he found he meant to act directly contrary, and to consent that the writ should issue 2 • but although the Noble Lord had not con vinced himself, he had convinced him ( Mr. Aglionby), and he should therefore support the amendment of the Hon. Member for Lambeth.—( Hear, hear.) Sir THOMAS ACL AND, amidst loud cries of " Di vide," and " Question," said a few words in explanation of the course pursued by the Committee. Mr. H 0 R. SINI AN rose to explain some observations which he had made on a former evening, but from the up roar and cries of " Divide," was inaudible in the gallery. Mr. ELL lOT (amidst loud cries of "Divide, divide" from the Tory benches), rose to order. He said that in justice and decency the Hon. Member for Cockermouth ought to be heard.—( Cheers.) Mr. 110 RSM AN proceeded. The case of Ludlow was marked by the worst features that ever distinguished any case. It was understood from the begiuning that the election was to be carried by money. The public-houses were all open, but no one knew who was to pay the ex penses. No proof could be obtained by any other means than what was technically called " buying the traitor." Every one who sat upon the Committee then felt that the facts proved were such as to excite the utmost disgust. The question was not whether those traitors were respectable, but whether the information they gave was correct. The information could only be ob tained from base sources, as none but the basest instruments were employed. The Committee unseated Mr. Alcock on the unsupported evidence of Mr. Tillett, because Mr. Ccppock who could refute, if it were false, was not called. On the same ground the evidence of Mr. Revis ought to be received, because not one of the six or seven persons who could contradict him was called for that purpose. Evidence was certainly produced to prove that he had been a bankrupt, and to lower his character in other respects ; but all the unfavourable facts alleged against him, took place before he was employed by the Conserva tives about the election—indeed, before 1838, when a piece of plate was presented to him by the Clive party, and as a testimony of their sense of his high character and worth. The Honourable Member then read several testimonials addressed to Mr. Revis in the year 1838, by the leading Conservatives of Ludlow, expressing for him the highest esteem, and lamenting his departure from that borough. One of the testimonials, written by a Director of the Com mercial Bank, said that the name of Revis would never be forgotten whilst it could be lisped by the youngest Con servative in Ludlow. —(Great laughter.) He (Mr. Horsman) did not say that he believed the statements of Revis, after the contradiction that had been given by the Honourable Member for Berwick, bnt they were before the public and were uncontradieted.—(!dear, hear.) It had been asked why he did not move for an in quiry ? Ilis answer was that he did not think that a Member of the Election Committee ought to take the initiative in such a case. He had done his duty on that Committee, and in endeavouring to detect the bribery he had taken that course. Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE said, after hearing the Noble Lord, the Member for Liverpool say that the tes timony of Mr Revis was not credited by the Committee, he felt bound to state that he had this morning received by post a petition to present to the House from Mr. Revis, who prayed to be examined at the bar with other witnesses, in corroboration of the statements which he had made before the Election Committee. He ( Mr. Duncombe) had not presented it in the absence of the Hon. Member for Berwick, but he would do so after the close of the debate. The Hon. Member then, amidst great laughter, read several extracts from the evidence, to show the extent to which treating had prevailed, and concluded by stating that be would support the amend ment, as he thought that in the cases of Cambridge and Ludlow, the writs ought to be suspended, until the Bill of the Noble Lord, the Member for Stroud, became law. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw. The House divided, when there appeared— For the Motion Against lO4 Majority for the Motion - 78 WRIT FOR CAMBRIDGE Sir JOHN WALSH then rose to move a writ for Cambridge, when Mr. WARBURTON begged leave to present a peti tion from certain electors of the borough of Cambridge, complaining of the bribery, and praying for full inquiry, and that no new writ be issued until they were protected in the -use of the franchise. Sir JOHN WALSH then moved that Mr. Speaker issue anew writ for the borough of Cambridge, the late election having been declared void. Mr. WARBURTON said although the proof of bribery in this case was not so strong as in the former ease, still, as bribery had been clearly proved against one party, he thought it his duty to make the same motion as had been done in the last case by his Hon. Friend, the Member for Lambeth, because of the evidence given before the intimi dation Committee, which proved that bribery was systematic in the borough, and the evidence upon the late inquiry showed that it was persisted in up to the present moment, and no doubt would again be practised in a few days. The Hon. Member read a document published in 1831, after an election, which was signed by the most eminent of the in habitants and professors of Cambridge, deprecating the bribery and intimidation which had taken place at the former election. He moved that a Select Committee be appointed, to inquire to what extent bribery had lately prevailed, and that the writ be suspended dnring such in quiry. Mr. HUME, after referring to the decision of the Cam. bridge Election Committee, appealed to the House, if they would refuse to institute an inquiry into such proceedings as had taken place at that election. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when the numbers were— For the amendment Against the amendment 162 Majority —67 The writ was then ordered to be issued. The Dropped Orders of three previous days were then read over for the purpose of being replaced on the books. ABOLITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT. The SPEAKER having called on Mr. FITZROY KELLY, Mr. F. MAUL E hoped the Hon. and Learned Mem ber would postpone his motion upon the subject for a few days, as his Noble Friend, who took a great interest in the subject, was absent, and recent circumstances had pre vented his bestowing any attention upon the subject. Mr. F. KELLY said it was quite impossible, under the circumstances, to refuse compliance with the Hon. ourable Gentleman's request. At the same time as great ansi:ty existed on the subject, he should give way with the greatest possible reluctance. He should now, with the lea is of the House, postpone the motion till that day week, and he begged to state that it was his intention to exclude both high trcascn as well as murder from the operation of the Bill. AFFIRMATION OF OATHS. Mr. HUM E postponed the Affirmation of Oaths' all till that day fortnight. RELEASE OF STOCKDALE AND HOWARD. Mr. T. DUNCOM BE said the House had been so ex tremely lenient in the case of Ludlow and Cambrilge that he hoped no objection would be given to the motion he had to make for the discharge of Stockdale and Howard. Lord N 0 RR E YS seconded the motion. Mr. WARBURTON did not object to the discharge cf these individuals, but for very different reasons, namely, because the House had placed it out of their power to n psat the offence —(llear, hear. ) Mr. HUM E fully concurred in the observations of the Honourable Member for Bridport, and would offer no opposition to the motion. He considered this a night of general gaol delivery—(Laughter)—and he would include these persons among the culprits of Lud low and Cambridge.—( Hear, and cries of " Oh 1") Mr. PILYME thought the House ought to have peti titions from these individuals expressive of their regret for the offence they had committed. If that was done, he should not object to their discharge, but until that was done, he thought they ought not to be liberated by the House. Mr. I, ABOUCHERE did not think these individuals were entitled to any peculiar indulgence from the House, but having now obtained the means of preventing a repe tition of the offence, they ought not to persevere any longer in so unequal a contest. They would best consult the public feeling by consenting to the motion of the Hon. Member for Finsbury. Mr. BAIN E S hoped the clemency that was about to be shown towards Stockdale and Howard would be ex tended to poor John Thorogood.—(Loud laughter.) The motion was then agreed to without a division. Mr. WALLACE moved for a return showing, in columns, the total number of Civil Bills or causes (includ ing ejectments and replevins) heard or tried before the Chairman of Kilmaiaham, and each assistant barrister respectively in Ireland, in the year 1839 ; the number of dismissals and decrees ; the highest and lowest sum for which a decree was given ; the number of causes in which recourse was had to a jury ; the largest and smallest num ber of persons of whom juries were composed, and the manner in which, according to the practice of the Court, juries were constituted; and how and by whom it is deter mined whether recourse shall be had to a jury :—also, the amount or extent of the jurisdiction of the Court in each form or kind of action ; the periods of the year at which the Courts were held, with the usual hours of the sitting and rising of the Court; and whether the Court sits daily until the whole business is disposed of, or exercises the power of directing a part to stand over for any and w h at time. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from Mr. Revis, respecting the late election for the borough of Ludlow. VACCINATION. Mr. WAKLEY obtained leave to bring in a Bill to prevent inoculation for small-pox, and to, extend the practice of vaccination. The House adjourned at fire minutes past 10 HOUSE OF LORDS, MAY 14. Their Lordships met at Five o'Clock. A message from the House of Commons brought up the Tunstall Market Bill, the Gravesend Improvement Bill, and other private Bills. The Marquis of DOWNSHIRE presented several pe titions from congregations of Presbyterians in the North of Ireland against intrusion of ministers in the Church of Scotland. On the motion of Lord DUNCAN NON, the Tithes Compensation Bill (Ireland) was read a second and third time and passed; and the insolvent Debtors' Bill (Irelami) was read a second time. The Marquis of WE STNIE AT I-I presented a petition I from the Guild of St. John against the Irish Munic►pal Reform Bill. The NOBLE MABQUIS, in reference to the question which lie hod intended to put to the Noble Marquis, the Secre tory for the Home Department, observed that the office of Master in Chancery in Ireland was filled up, a new writ having been moved in the House of Commons in the place of Mr. Sergeant Curry, lately a Member of that House. Although the question of which he had given no tice was rendered unnecessary by that appointment, he could not help saying that it was a most extraordinary omis sion on the part of her Majesty's Government to leave so important an office vacant for more then two months. He now begged to ask the Noble Marquis, if there was no ob jection, what the salary of the newly appointed Master was to be ? When Mr. Gould was appointed there was an understanding that the income should not exceed 2,0001. yearly. The Marquis of NORMANBY said that he was not aware of any arrangement having been entered into with respect to the salary of the new Master of Chancery in Ireland. As regarded the inconvenience which the Noble Marquis had stated to have occurred in the Court of Chancery in Ireland, he (the Marquis of Normanby) had not been informed that any such inconvenience had taken place. He believed, on the contrary, that the business of the Court in question had of late gone on as usual. The Earl of HA D DINGTON presented a petition from the Western Division of 'the County of Ross, against the Law of Evidence ( Scotland) Bill ; also a petition from a parish in the county of Edinburgh, praying that nothing should be granted in the sense in which it had been demanded by the non-intrusion clergy, until they had given obedience to the law as it now stood. The Noble Earl presented a petition to the same effect from Stew ' arton, in the county of Ayr. The Earl of RADNOR presented a petition from a place in the county of York, in favour of a repeal of the present Corn-laws. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (IRELAND). On Lord KENYON moving the Order of the Day for the hearing of Counsel on the Irish Corporation Bill, The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that though he did not intend to oppose the motion of the Noble Lord, he wished to call the attention of the House to the subject. Fie confessed that when he considered how often the prin ciple and details of the Bill had been before the House, he was himself of opinion that it could not be considered a very harsh proceeding towards the petitioners, if the House declined to hear counsel in their favour at the bar. From the importance, however, which some Noble Lords seemed to attach to the allegations contained in the Report of the Commissioners on Irish Corporations, he was un willing to refuse the petitioners the opportunity of con tradicting those allegations. At the same time he hoped it would be understood that Counsel should not be heard against the principle of the Bill, but against certain de tails which they might consider militated unfairly against the interests of particular parties. That was the course which had been followed in the only other instance in which counsel had been heard on a similar sub ject. He alluded to the case of the English Nlunicipal Bill; and he thought there could now be no objection to follow the example laid down on that occasion. Lord KEN YON said that he merely wished that coun sel should be heard on the same principle, and in the same manner as in the case of the English Municipal Corpo rations. The Marquis of WE STM E ATH thought that the ob servations of the Noble Marquis would have been more properly made at the time when her Majesty's Ministers consented to allow counsel to be heard. The counsel had by this time prepared themselves as to the points on which they should speak. Lord ELLENBOROUGH thought the course which was followed in respect of the English Corporation Bill ought to bo adhered to as closely as possible ; but it would be better and more convenient to instruct the counsel before hand, than to interrupt them every moment, and discuss the question whether they were in order or not. The Marquis of L ANSD 0 WNE thought it would be sufficient to let Counsel understand to what points they should confine themselves., After some further conversation, Counsel were called in' Sir CHARLES WETHERELL presented himself at the bar as Counsel for the City of Dublin. He said he ap. peered to oppose the Bill as far as related to that city. He regretted much that the duty had not devolved upon some gentleman from the four courts in Dublin, who wouli be better =painted with the local interests and feelings which the Bill affected. The Corporation of Dublin contended that whatever principles the Legislature might be pleased to establish with respect to the altera tions of other Corporations, that City ought to be exempted from the operation of the Bill. He would confine himself as much as the general import ance of the subject, and the interest of all Ireland and the British Empire, would allow him, to that portion of the Bill which related to the City of Dublin. He was here to maintain that the city of Dublin ought not to be included in the present Bill. The Corporation of Dublin consisted of the Lord Mayor, two Sheriffs, 24 Aldermen, and 144 Common Councilmen, who are elected by 25 guilds. These guilds in some measure resemble those of the City of London ; but in Dublin there is not, as in London, a separate election of Common Councilmen by wards. In Dublin these are elected by the guilds. Again, these guilds are composed of freemen, and make freemen. The object of this Bill is to take away from 1 - 1 e freemen the election of the Common Council, and to give the election to a new body of inhabitants, upun their qualification, the same as that fixed for the Parliamentary franchise. The City of London having been left an ex ception to the reform of Corporations in England, the Corporation of Dublin contended that they had—although he did not like to use Irish words, though sometimes they were very good—a " precursor"—( A laugh)—in that ex emption, and that they had a right to claim that they should not be included in the Irish Corporation Bill. The proposed scheme was to reduce the number of Aldermen to 15, and the Common Council to 90; at the same time depriving the freeholders of a voice in the nomina tion of the representatives and officers of the Cor poration—(Hear, hear) --although the Irish Parliamen tary Reform Bill left them in possession of their privilege of voting for the election of Members of Par liament. Of some of the clauses of the Bill he must say that, after a great deal of study, he was unable to decide whether they were ever intended to have any meaning or none.--(A laugh.) In the first shedule there were eleven corporations, amongst which Dublin was included—was inmated, if he might say so-_(A laugh)—was domiciled, if he might say so—was householded, if he might say so. --( Great laughter.) The election was to be taken from the freemen and given to the 101. householders ; but he would show that the 101. franchise was not even a 5/. franchise—was not even a ss. franchise, if even indeed it was so good as a one shilling franchise. The Learned Counsel proceeded to say that the great objection made to the Corporation of Dublin was its exclusiveness. He doubted, however, whether exclusiveness was necessarily and under all circumstances an evil. But if the old Corporations were exclusive, it was clear to him that the new Corporations could riot be less so, and he believed that no one who was acquainted with the subject, could have any doubt upon that head. It was true that there had been under the eld system no Catholic Mayors in Dublin, but under the Bill before the House there would be no Protestant Mayors there. It would, however, be a mcst extraordinary solecism to abolish existing Corpora tions on such grounds, and his first objection to the Bill was, therefore, that, while it imputed inconveniency and impropriety, it substituted similar inconvenience and im propriety in their stead. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to state his objections to the rating clauses in the Bill. The principle of the Bill was rateability, and that rateability was to be proved by actual payment for the first three years After that period the qualification was to extend to persons who paid no rates at all. He protested that that was the meaning of the 21st clause of the Bill. A part of his Bill had been to compare the Irish Municipal Bill with the English Municipal Act, to see whether what was called equal justice was really so; but he did not in the Irish Bill see such clauses as were entertained in the English Bill. The Bill proposed to establish what was called Household Suffrage, or Universal Suffrage, for the two were pretty nearly synonymous. The distinction be tween Household Suffrage and Universal Suffrage, accord ing to the principles of the Bill, was a flimsy pi etext, an ideal distinction. He next begged to call their Lordships attention to what the powers of the Lord-Mayor of Dublin were to be. He was to be elected from the Common Councillors,and was to decide on the rights of the freemen of Dublin; and under the Bill as it stood' the Lord-Mayor in certain cases was con , tituted an unappealable judge. Then the Bill contained clauses with respect to cffices and salaries. There was a power to remove every officer in tbs city of Dublin, and to give compensation ; but be wished particularly to put their Lordships in possession of the practical machinery of the Bill, as far as it re lated to the electionof Common Councillors and the powers and executive management of the Common Council. He should now call the attention of their Lordships to the taxation clause. Their Lordships would find that if any further sums were required in the Corporation of Dublin, after the corporate funds were expended, the municipal body was vested with the power of taxation—a power bor rowed from the 9th George IV., called the Pa v i ng an d Lighting Act. They could put a tax upon the inhabitants, in the same way as the Chancellor of the Exchequer might be supposed to exercise his authority in this country. Houses under 10/. were liable to be rated to the amount of 9d. in the pound, and houses above that value were liable to be taxed Is. in the pound, which was equal to 5 p er cent. Such were the provisions of the 135th clause of the Act That was a tremendous power of taxation ; an d he would show their Lordships what the extent of these powers was. The rateable property of Dublin, according to the schedule of the Sheriffs, which was a very low esti mate, was 704,000/., and 5 per cent. upon that would give the large sum of 35,0001. per annum. It might be asked what was the proportion of that property which was under 5/. a year? He was unable to state that, but the amount was so small, that it could scarce be taken nto account at all. And yet men holding property o f that low estimate, were entitled to exercise the office of councillor; and the taxing body might be corn posed of men who paid nothing, and who posed heavy taxes, at their own arbitrium, upon the great bulk of Coe community. That might be called jus tice to Ireland, but their Lorships would, he was satisfied, consider it nothing but the grossest tyranny and injustice. If Ito looked at the next clause, he found further absurdity and carelessness. The marginal note was nothing more than an ignis fatuiss to deceive the reader. It stated that there was to be an appeal to the Recorder or Assistant-Barrister; but when he looked at the ckuse, lie found no such appeal whatever. The only business the Assistant-Barrister had to do with the Bill was properly made. Th e Bill was to see that the rule provided that the accounts of the annual expenditure of the corporation should be laid before the Lord Lieutenant. That he thought was calculated utterly to destroy the in dependence of the corporate bodies; and it was a prin ciple which had never been acted upon in the history of their corporations. He did not understand why the Go vernment should exercise any control over that expendi ture, because its manifest object must be to render these corporations subservient to the administration for the time being. He might suppose the case of a Lord Lieutenant lending himself in the most Unjustifiable and improper manner to the party views of a Government, and directing the levy of a tax of 30 or 40,000/ upon a borough or city, which had fallen un ler its displeasure. The Bill, with its sham checks, and pretended protections and sophistica tions, then provided that the Lord Lieutenant was to send an abstract, under general heads, of the annual expendi ture, to be laid before both Houses of Par ltament. He asked whether it was consistent with any principle of the British Government to allow a Bill of tb is sort to pas:, through their Lordships' House. Ho would now come to the clause conferring the power of making by-laws, which it ap peared were to be submitted for the approval of the Lord- Lieutenant. The clause to which he had referred gave a power which no corporation or Court of Law had ever possessed, and which nothing but motives of the greatest expediency could justify. No such motives, however, cx. istcd in the present instance, and those by-laws would be most dangerous, and it would be most imprudent to pass them. Having pointed out the defects of the new corpo rations, the next question to be discussed was, why were the existing corporations to be pulled down ? He had looked through the Reports connected with the subject, and he could not find any instances of malversation against the Corporation of Dublin. It had been said it was true that the corporation was in debt, but that was to be attri buted to the failure of their treasurer, about twenty years ago, to the amount of 30,0001. There was not a word, however, of peculation alleged against the corporation itself. He believed that the real objection to the Dublin corporation was its exclusively Pro testant character. But he would repeat that the result of the Bill would be to establish an exclusively Ca :hone corporation in its stead. Let their Lordships look at the details of the subject. The number of catholic householders, as compared with Protestant householders, was as two to one; and the Poor-law Guardians, who would be the main instruments in carrying the Bill into effect, as they were the valuators of the rate, were as 25 to 8 in favour of Catholics. The proportion of property, however, in Dublin, was as 8 out of 9 in favour of Protes tants ; so that the result of the Bill would be the swamp. ing of property by numbers. Not a single Protestant, he was convinced, would, under the proposed measure, ever become a Member of the Common Council of Dublin, and vain and delusive would be the hope of any man who was of a contrary opinion. Ireland, he believed, would thus be reduced to the same condition in 1840 in which she was placed during the rebellion of Tyrconnell in 1687. It was upon these grounds that he thought proper to call their Lordships' attention to the principles of the Bill, with which, as he had stated before, he had no concern, except for the Corporation of Dublin, by which Bill, if their Lordships passed it, they would annihilate every Protestant corporation, and by which, if there were 3,e00 inhabitants in any town, a majority of them might petition the Queen for a charter of incorporation, and that corpo ration would be founded en the principles of a Republican Government, the religion of the State being excluded, and all considerations of property disregarded. Any man ho had watched what had been going on in Ireland lately, must have seen that every step that had been taken, and was being taken there, tended to no other finality but that of the repeal of the Union. He trusted their Lordships would not act on that principle. There was one clause, however. in the Bill, which he earnestly implored their Lordships to expunge, namely, the clause which did away with the necessity of taking the Catholic oaths prescribed by the Catholic Emancipation Act for the protection of the Protestant Church and Protestant Government. The lay powers conferred by the Bill would be employed to the subversion of the constitution of the Church of England.—( Hear. ) Complaints had been made in that House of the conduct of the Poor-law Commissioners in Ireland, and of the con duct of Poor-law Guardians, and yet these persons were to be employed in the machinery with which it was in tended to carry into effect the provisions of the present Bill. He had stated his principal objections to the Bill. lie had shown that it was intended to democratize Dublin o extend the influence of Catholicity, and to abolish these Corporations so far as their principle of Protestant exclusiveness went, and thereby they would aim a deadly ' blow at the Protestant faith and worship in Ireland. The extirpation of the Protestant religion was the avowed ob ject of those who advocated and supported the present measure. Every other Corporation which was to be con stituted hereafter, was to be founded upon a solely and ex clusively Catholic principle, and by giving their assent to the present measure, they were binding their hands behind their own backs, and they were binding the hands of the Crown behind the back of the Crown in all time to come ; so long as Ireland existed, and so long as an Act of Par liament had any force, they could establish no Cor porations in that country on any other principle. Ever since the Catholic Relief Bill had been passed, Ireland had been in a continued state of agitation— every fresh concession only stimulating them to in creased demands, and the principal agitator was an indi vidual who had only a few years ago been denounced in the speech from the Throne. If 'their Lordships con sented to pass the present measure, they would fall, un warily it might be, into the snares of the agitators and disturbers of the public peace, who had been heard to ary, " Give us the Corporation Bill, and we will take care of the rest." It would, he was satisfied, be an engine of immense and invincible power in the destruceon of the union between the two countries. If the present Bill passed, farewell to every Protestant Corporation in Ire land. Valete, valete, to all the Protestant Institutions in Ireland. If the Corporation of Dublin was treated in that manner, the Irish people, who were famous for their love of justice, would say, " Now that you have done justice to Dublin, let justice be done to London," and they would insist upon the same principle being ex tended to the English metropolis. It was true there was no parliament at present in Dublin, but let them once pass the present measure, and they would soon have it in all its pristine splendour. The Learned Counsel, after repeating his conviction that the Bill would lead to the overthrow of Protestantism in Ireland, concluded by thanking their Lordships for the patient hearing they had given him. Lord KEN YON then moved that the further heating of Counsel should be deferred till tomorrow. The proposal was agreed to, and the House adjourned. HER MAJESTY'S DRAWING- ROOM. The Queen held i a Drawing ROOM yesterday afternoon at St. James's Palace. Her Majesty and Prince Albert, attended by their suite, arrived from Buckingham Palace, escorted by a party of the Royal Regiment of Horse Guards, and were received on their arrival by the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, and the Lord Steward. In attendance on her Majesty were Lady Portman and the Marchioness of Nor manby, Ladies in Waiting, Hon. Miss Cocks and Hon. Miss Cavendish, Maids of Honour in Waiting, Viscount Torrington, Lord in Waiting. Major the Hon. George Keppel, Groom in Waiting, the Hon. Col. Grey, Equerry in Waiting, Mr. Cowell, Mr. Chichester, and Master Bing, Pages of Honour in Waiting. Ilcr Majesty was also at tended by Lady Barham and the Dowager Lady Lyttelton, Ladies of the Bedchamber; Hon. Miss Pitt, Hon Miss Spring Rice, Maids of Honour, and other Ladies and Women of the Bedchamber, and Maids of Honour. His Royal Highness Prince Albert was attended by the Groom of the Stole and the Treasurer of his Household; Earl of Morley and Mr. Francis Seymour, Gentlemen and Grooms of the Bedchamber; and Colonel Wylde, Equerry in Waiting. In the Foreign circle, Miss de Clamouse Browne, and Miss Julia de Clamouse Browne, two Portuguese ladies, were presented to the Queen by Madame Marques Lisboa, the Lady of the Brazilian Charge d'Affaires. La Baronne de Pfeil was presented to her Majesty by Lady Palmerston. Her Majesty's Hon. Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms were on duty, commanded by their Standard-bearer, Mr. Henry Robinson. The Drawing Room was attended by the French Am bassador; Noory Effendi, the Turkish Ambassador, ac companied by Mr. Salame, her Majesty's Oriental Inter preter; the Prussian Minister, the Swedish Minister and Countess Van Bjornstjcrna, the Wirtcmburg Minister, the Belgian Minister and Madame Van de Weyer, the Bava rian and Netherlands Ministers; Mrs. Stevenson, the Lady of the United States Minister; the Hanoverian, Portu guese, Grecian, Russian, Spanish, and Saxon Ministers; Baron de Nieumann, Austrian Minister, on a Special Mis sion ; Prince Castelcicala, Neapolitan Minister, on a Special Mission ; Commandcur M. Lisboa, Brazilian Charge d'Af faires, and Madame Marques Lisboa; Mr. Murphy, Mexi can Charge d'Affaires, and Madame Murphy; M. de Hummelauer, Austrian Charge d'Affaires ; G. Capero Gelesta dei Duchi di Regina, Neapolitan Charge d'Af faires ; Count de Rohan Chabot, Secretary, and Messieurs de Vandeul and Edouard Herbet, Attaches to the French Embassy; Mr. Benjamin Rush, Secretary to the Ameri can Legation ; Lo Baron Odelga, Consciller, and Le Baron de Lebzeltern, Secretary of the Austrian Embassy; Chevalier Rebello de Carvalho, Secretary of the Portu guese Legation; M. L. A. Pinto de Several, Attache to the Portuguese Legation ; M. Charles Drouet, Secretary, and Messieurs Victor Van de Woestync and Theophile Van de Woestyne, Attaches to the Belgian Legation ; Monsieur de Savigny Attache to the Prussian Legation; M. Muriel, Attache to the Mexican Legation; M. Agob, Secretary of the Turkish Embassy ; M. Gabriel Salame, Baron Bjornstjcrna, Baron de Pfeil, Secretary of the Wurtemberg Legation ; Count Bilk Brahe, Secretary of the Danish Legation, and Countess Bille Braila ; Lc Chevalier Perez de Castro et Brito, Attache to the Spanish Legation ; Baron Betide, the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Steward, the Lord Chamberlain, the Master of the Horse, the Captain of the Honorable Corps of Gen tlemen-at-Arms, the Vice-Chamberlain, the Captain of the Yeomen Guard, Viscount Combermere, Gold Stick in Waiting, the Treasurer of the Household, the Master General of the Ordnance, Sir Henry Parnell, Pay master-General, Archbishop of Armagh, the Master of the Ceremonies, Colonel Cavendish, Clerk Mar shal, Mr. Henry Robinson, Standard-bearer to the Ilonourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms, Major Hyde, Assistant- Master and Marshal of the Ceremonies, Sir G. tioulton. Ensign of the Yeoman Guard, Captain Sir A. P. Green Newal, A. D.C. in Waiting, Colonel Sir Robert Gardiner, and Colonel Baker, Royal Wilts Yeomanry, A.D. C. to the Queen, Mr. James Bunce Curling, Clerk of the Cheque of the Hon. Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms, Mr. Ellerthorp, Clerk of the Cheque of the Yeomen Guard, Mr. Samuel Hancock, Exon in Waiting, Sir Benjamin Smith, Lieutenant- Colonel Hall, Ist Life Guards, Silver Stick, Captain Courtenay Boyle, R.N., Groom of the Privy Chamber, and Mr. Strachan, Gentleman Usher in Waiting to the Queen, C o lonel Lambert, Field-Officer in Waiting, Mr, Lawrence, Surgeon Extraordinay to her Majesty, and the following : DucusssEs.—lnverness, Northumberland, Somerset, Gordon,chandos, Montrose, Leeds, Argyll, Buckingham and Dowager Richmond. MARCHIONESSES—Downshire, Cornwallis, ThOrLIOIId. COUNTESSES—POWiS, Bandon, Lovelace, Craven, Dowa ger Erroll, Manvers, Bruce, Pembroke, De Persano , Alb e marle, Sefton, Grosven o r , Wicklow , Airlie, Bridge. wate r, Durham, De Sails , Clanwilliam , Eldon, Cowp er, Hillsborough. VISCOUNTESSES Bernard, Corry, Beresford, Torring_ ton, Ilolmesdale, Dungannon, Hawarden, Palmerston, Bar rington, Eastnor. LADlES—Elizabeth Reynell, Augusta Cotton, Wheat ley, Paul, Gcorgiana Herbert, Louisa Tighe, Courtenay, Shelley, Denman, Parker, Dowager Kinloch, Charlotte Hill, Worsley, Stafford, Ashburton, Mary Pierrepont, Jane ChP.rteris, Katherine Douglas, Dufferin, Leigh, Harriet Bernard, Charlotte Ilertxrt, Saltoun, Margaret Hay, Lucy Herbert, Mcux, Isabella Douglas, Barton, Knowles, Hey tesbury, B. Johnstone, Augusta Baring, Sirah Ingestre, Disbrowe, Cottenham, Vivian, Emily Lambton, Augusta Milbanke, Anne Wilbraham, Hardinge, Gordon Cumming, ' Southampten, Stanley (of Alderley), Howard, Montfort, Campbell, Louisa Molyneux, Gore, Talbot de Malahitle, Crompton, Worsley Holmes, K►lmaine, E. Stuart Wort ley, Seymour, Mary Christopher, Brooke Pechell, Burg hersh, Poltitnore, Frederick Bentinck, Julia Lamloan, Hatherton, Anne Beresford, Stanley, Blantyre, Nightin gall, Mary Lambton, Morgan, Domvile, Charles Somer set, Clark, Cust, Louisa Fitzroy, Wenlock, Dowager De Clifford, Mary Berkeley, L. Cornwallis, Stepney, Eleanor Grosvenor, Thomas Hay, Harriet Howard, Mary Grosvenor, Maria Molyneux, Edwards, Bromley, Arthur Lennox, Pynn, Teynham, Braybrookc, Anna Grenville, Isabella Wemyss, Frances Hope, Jane R a:sh, De Ros, Acheson, Camoys, Brabazon, Bridport, Anne Fitzpatrick, M. Hamlyn Williams, Gosset, Stourton, Maclaine, Knig►htley, Rolle, Susan North, Stannus, Duff Gordon, L. Fortescue, M. Stanley, F. Howard, Colchester. HONOURABLES.—Sophia Wheatley, Lady Cockerell, Mrs. Norton, Adelaide Foley, Geraldine Foley, Mrs. G. Cavendish, Miss Fraser, Mrs. Sanderson. Miss M. Den man, Miss A'Court, Mrs. Goulburn, Caroline Lyttelton, Mrs. Rushout, Frances M. Stuart, Mrs. Stapleton, Emily Strutt, Catherine Stuart, Mrs. Bowles, Mrs. Pon sonby, Mrs. Gerald Fitzgerald, ►Mrs. Tottenham, Mrs. Heathcote, Mrs. Dawson Darner, Louisa Neville, Milabel Neville, Mrs. Mills, C. Barrington, Lady Williamson, Mrs. William Coventry, Mrs. Edward Vill;ers, C. Stonor, F. Hood, Mrs. Y. Scarlett, 0. Strutt, Mrs. B. Wil braham, J. Lawley, Mrs. Carleton, Mrs. Percy, Miss A. Pctre, Mrs. C. Petro, L. Stanley, Mrs. Rous. isTnEsss s— William Payntcr. Lawrence, John Round, Dickson, Brooke, Edward Buller, Charles Cra ven, Farrer, Prime, Asshcton Smith, John Foley, Henry Charles Hoare, Charles Richardson, Charles Lushington, Daniel Tyssen, Selby, Marshall, Bannerman, Sebastian Smith, William Erle, Evans, Cornwall Legh, Adrian Hope, Henry Kuper, Law, John Strachan, Robert Hale, R. Arabin, Charles Boileau, De Rothschild, Egerton . Loch, M. R. Scott, Henry 'White, Cuthbert, Lawson, Blair Warren, Vernon, Alexander Ogilby, Young, W. G. Hayter, Grenville Pigott, Edward Rice, Douglas Halford, Gwynne Halford, Labouchere, Wcld, M. C. Maxwell, Boyce, Hume Wiggett, W. Childers, H. D'Oyly, R. B. Wingfield, Hearle Stephens, Arthur French, G. Digby, Balfour, Middleton, Herbert Woodhouse, H. Hinds, El wood, William Beresford, Power, Dugdale, D. Gaskcll, Leader, Bramston, Gage, General Sleigh, Lennox, Greathed, Markland, Acheson Lyle. J. N. Gladstone, Scott Murray, Lalor Shell, Bethel!, V. Smith, B. Wright son, Fort, D. Harcourt, Fitzgerald, Ashworth, Grate, Peter Fitzgerald, R. Currie, H. Monckton, Hopkinson, A. Ogilby, Bullock, Beare, W. Heneage, H. Story, Mansfield, W. B. Evans, Bagshaw, Lloyd, Montagu, T. Teed, B. Alexander, 11. Dunlop, Mosley, N. Sutton, G. Wilkinson. Misses-Wheatley, Dickson, Fanny Dickson, Isabella S. Jerningham, Disbrovve, Hallifax, Pack, Elizabeth Pack, Meux, Charlotte Law, Hale, Craven, Louisa Percy, De Rothschild, Selby (of Biddlestone), Percy, Fountaine, Caroline Fountaine, Prince, Frances Annette Hoare, Little, Shelley, Boyce, Law, De Bernabia, Mar shall, Leigh, Smith, Holford, Chisholm of Chisholm, Percy (2), Cordelia Marshall, Disbrowe, Diana Hallifax, Augusta Stanley, Bellew ' Fort, Stapleton, Bl ac k c t t , Gage, Gordon Cumming, Elizabeth Bromley, Bromley, Domvile, Brooke, Dawson Darner, Caroline Dawson Da rner, Emily Ponsonby, Sterry, Bradshaw, Bullock, M. Emily Bullock, Napier, C. Mansfield, E. Mansfield, Lloyd, Gordon, E. Florence Jones, Rice, Monkland, Ni cholls, Stanley, Prime, Meynell, Power, Worsley Holmes, Leader, Hart, Ellen Power, Smith Neill, Skelton, Wlison, Anne Bcntinck, Baring, Hardinge, Sum ner, Coventry, Bligh, Augusta Scott, Bowles, Knighticy, Adolphus, L. D'Arey Irvine, Thompson, J. Thompson. Elizabeth Nixon, Scott Murray, Agnes Strick land, Des Voeux, Estcourt, Maria Grenfell, Sophia Shef field, Rose Parker, Elizabeth Parker, Gresley, Simpson, M'Leod, Compton, Ottley, Donclan, Ellen Ottley, Be thell, Julia Greathed, Emily Greathed, Harriet Pigott, Milbank, Clayton, Susan Drummond, Agnes Drummond, Maria Gore, Fanny Ponsonby, Harriet Alston, Caroline Alston, Elizabeth Balfour, Moore Halsey, Goulburn, Hervey Bathurst, Harriet Beresford, Hervey, Hume, Eliza Hume, Cicely Neville, Georgians Neville, Carleton, Sheffield, E. Balfour, Bagshaw, M. Drummond, Pierre pont, C. A. Drummond, Macfarlane, Bentinck, Maria Gore, Hervey Bathurst, Louisa Cust, Beresford, H. Be resford, Sutton, A. M. Sutton, A. Duff Gordon, Gosset, M. G. Wilkinson, G. Wilkinson ; Clara Coventry. The following Ladies had the honour of being presented to her Majesty : The Duchess of Gordon, by the Duchess Dowager of Richmond The Hon. Sophia Wheatley, on her appointment as Maid of Honour to the Queen Dowager, by her mother, Lady Wheatley Lady Worsley, by Lady Wenlock Lady Emma Vesey, on her marriage, by her mother, the Countess of Pembroke Viscountess Bernard, by the Countess of Bandon Lady Stafford, b y the Duchess of Leeds Lady Disbrowe, by Viscountess Palmerston Miss Craven, by her mother, Mrs. Charles Craven Miss Charlotte Law, by Lady Colchester The Hon. Adelaide Foley, by Lady Southampton Miss Meux, by Lady Meux Miss Elizabeth Pack, by her mother, Lady Elizabeth Reynell The Hon. Mrs. George Cavendish, on her marriage, by the Dowager Lady Waterpark Miss Dishrovve, by her mother, Lady Disbrovre Miss Hallifax, by Lady Bridport Lady Dufferin, by Lady Seymour The Hon. Lady C . ockerell, by Hon. Mrs. W. Coventry Miss Fanny Dickson, by her mother, Mrs. Dickson Mrs. Brooke. by her mother. Lady Augusta Cotton Miss Diana Hallifax, by Lady Bridport Miss Chisholm (of Chisholm), by the Duchess of Argyll Miss Smith, by her mother, Mrs. Sebastian Smith Miss de Bernabin, by Lady Stafford Miss Boyce, by Lady Augusta Cotton Miss Little, by Mrs. Law Miss Frances Annette Hoare, by her mother, Mrs. Henry Charles Hoare Miss Carolire Fountainc, by Mrs. Daniel Tyssen Miss Selby (of Btddlestone), by her cousin, Mrs. Selby Miss Isabella S. Jerningham, by the Duchess of Leeds Hon. Mrs. Norton, by Lady Seymour Mrs. Prime, by the Lady Elizabeth Reynell Mrs. Ferrer, by Lady Teynham Mrs. Charles Craven, by the Countess of Wicklow Mrs. Selby, by the Right Hon. Lady Camoys Mrs. Henry Kuper, by Lady Charles Somerset Mrs. Adrian Hope, by Lady Vivian Mrs. Cornwall Legh, by the Hon. Mrs. Bootle Wilbraham Mrs. Charles Boileau, by Mrs. Edward Buller Mrs. John Strachnn, on her marriage, by Lady Maclaine Mrs. R. Arabin, on her marriage, by Lady Meux Mrs. Robert Hale, by the Dowager Lady Dc Clifford Miss Brooke, by her sister, Lady Brabazon Miss Elizabeth Bromley, by her mother, Lady Bromley Miss Bradshaw, by Mrs. Mosley Miss M. Emily Bullock, by her mother Miss Bromley, by her mother, Lady Bromley Miss Dawson Darner and Miss Caroline Dawson Darner, by their mother, Mrs. Dawson Darner Miss Sterry, by Lady Montford Miss Skelton, by Lady Lyndhurst Miss Emily Mansfield, by Mrs. Mansfield Miss Gordon, by her mother, Lady Stannus Miss Emily Florence Jones, by Lady Gardiner Miss Caroline Ann Drummond, by the Dowager Lady Lvttelton Mi>s Macfarlane, by Lady Macfarlane Miss 13entinck, by Lady Hatherton Miss Louisa Cust, by her mother, the Hon. Lady Cust Miss Georgians Neville, by Lady Wenlock Miss Cicely ,Neville, by Lady Wenilock Miss Eliza Hume, by her mother, Mrs. Hume Miss Monklansl, by her mother, Mrs. Monkland Miss Nicholls, by Mrs. William Goodenough Hayter Miss Prime, by her mother, Mrs. Prime Miss Worsley Holmes, by Lady Worsley Holmes Miss Leader, by the Hon. Lady Butler Miss Anno Bentinck, by Lady flatherton Miss Hardinge, by her mother, Lady Hardinge Miss Sumner, by her aunt, Mrs. Douglas Halford Miss Coventry, by her mother, the Hon. Mrs. William Coventry Miss Augusta Scott, by Lady Vivian Miss Bowles, by her mother, the lion. Mrs. Bowles Miss Adolphus, by the Marchioness of Normanby Miss Thompson, by Lady Byron Miss J. Thompson, by Lady Byron Miss Rose Parker, by Lady Parker Miss Elizabeth Nixon, by her aunt, Mrs. Scott Murray Miss Scott Murray, by her mother, Mrs. Scott Murray Miss Agnes Strickland, by Lady Stourton Miss Maria Grenfell, by the Countess of Sefton Miss Gresley, by Lady Parker Miss Simpson, by Viscountess Beresford Miss M'Leod, by Lady Charles Somerset Miss Ottley, by Lady Gosset Miss Donclan, by the Duchess of Leeds Miss Ellen Ottley, by Lady Gossct Miss Julia Greathed, by her mother, Mrs. Greathed Miss Emily Greathed, by her mother, Mrs. Greathed Mrs. William Poynter, by Lady Nightingale Lady Knowles, by Lady Charles Somerset Lady Emily Lambton, by the Countess of Durham Lady Stanley, of Alderslcy, by the Countess Grosvenor Lady Campbell, by Mrs. Middleton Mrs. Ashworth, by the Marchioness of Thomond Miss Goulburn, by the Countess of Sandwich Miss Bagshaw, by Mrs. Bagshaw Lady Worsley Holmes, by Lady ileytesbury Lady Kilmaine, on her marriage, by Lady Wicklow Lady Julia Lambert, by Lady Hatherton Lady Bromley, by the Countess Grosvenor Lady Cainoys, by the Countess of Sefton Lady Edwards, by the Marchioness of Normanby Lady Louisa Forteseue, by Lady Courtenay Hon. Louisa Neville, by her mother, Lady Braybrooke Hon. Miss Charlotte Petra, by Lady Petro I The Hon. Mrs, Bowles, by Mrs. Lloyd, of Aston Mrs. Cuthbert by Lady Vivian lion. Mcs. Mills, by Viscountess Barrington Mrs. John Gladstone, by the Marchioness of Downshire The Dowager Countess of Erroll, by Lady Isabella Wemyss La Corntesse di Persano, by Airs. W. Goodenough Hayter Countess of Airlie, by the Duchess of Somerset Mrs. M. R. Scott, by Lady Vivian Mrs. Lawson (of Brougb Hall), by her Grace the Duchess of Leeds Mrs. Alexander Ogilby, by Mrs. Bullock Mrs. Leader, by the Hon. Lady Butler Mrs. Grenville Pigott, by her mother, Mrs. Lloyd Mrs. Labouchere, on her marriage, by Lady Ashburton Mrs. Weld, by Lady Stourton EVENING EDITION. be Hon. Mrs. Percy, on her marriage, by the Duchess of Northumberland iss Weld, by her mother, Mrs. Weld iss Caroline Alston, by Lady Pctre Mrs. Marmadukc Constable Maxwell, by Lady Stourton The lion. Mrs. Goulburn, on her return from abroad, by the Countess of Sandwich Miss Milbank, by Lady Augusta Millbank The lion. Mrs. Stapleton, by Lady Barham Miss Marion Drummond, by the Duchess of Nortbumber. land Mrs. Wiggett, by Lady Denman Miss Moore Halsey, by the Countess of Bridgewater Miss Susan Drummond, by the Duchess of Northumber land The Hon. Mrs. Edward Villiers, by the Countess of Cle rendon The Hon. Charlotte Sionor, by her mother, Lady Camoys The Hun. Lady Williamson, by the Viscountess rington Miss Agnes Drummond, by the Duchess of Nortbum• berland Lady Frances Howard, by the Countess of Wicklow The lion. Mrs. Tottenham, on her marriage, by the Vivountess Hawardee The Hon. Mrs. Dawson Darner, by the Dowager Lady Lyttelton ___ Mrs: W. Bertram Evans, by Lady Montford. Mrs. Montagu, on her marriage, by Lady Gore Hon. Mrs Gerald Fitzgerald, by Lady Talbot de Mmlahi(le Mrs. Ilearle Stephens, ou her marriage, by the Duchies of Argyll Mrs. Arthur Fr,nch, by the Countess do Salis Mrs. Herbert Woodhouse, by the Dowager Ladd• L yt teltoti Mrs William Bet csford, by the Viscountess Beresford Mrs. Power, by Lady Normanby Mrs. Dugdale, by Lady Portman Mrs. General Sleigh, by Lady De Ros Mrs. Lennox, by her sister the Duchess of Argyll Mrs. Greathead, by Lady Cottenham Mrs. Acheson Lyle, by the Marchioness of Normanby Mrs. John Neilson Gladstone, on her marriage, by the Marchioness of Downthire Mrs. Scott Murray, by her Grace the Duchess of Buck. ingham and Chandos Miss Ilarriot Pigott, by the Duchess of Argyll Miss Sophia Sheffield, by Mrs. George Digbv Mrs. Henry Monckton, on her marriage, by Lady %Idea Somerset Mrs. Alexander Ogilby, by Mrs. Bullock Miss Blackctt, by Lady Anne Wilbraham The Lady Margaret Hay, by the Dowager Countess of Erroll Miss Stapleton, by her mother the Hon. Mrs, Sta pleton Mrs. Peter Fitzgerald, by Mrs. Fitzgerald Miss Augusta Stanley, by her mother Lady Mary Stanley Mrs. Grote, by the Marchioness of NormanFy Miss Fort, by her mother Mrs. Fort Miss Bellow, by Lady Maclaine Mrs, Fort, by Lady Camoys. The following gentleme►; were present : DuKEs--Montrose, Argyll, Leeds. MARQUISES—Downshire, Headfort, Norrnanby, mend. EauLs—Bandon, Selkirk, Mangers, Powis, Eustou, Grosvenor, Wicklow, Cavan, Sefton, Hillsborough, Eldon, De Grey. ViscouNrs—Corry, Ingestrie, Bernard, Acheson, Holmcsdale, Palmerston, Melbourne, Bereaford, Barring ton. Bisnop of Derry. LORDS—Talbot dc Malabide, Leigh, Courtenay, Peire, Cremorne, Brabazon, Braybrooke, Bridport, Rayleigh, Arthur Lennox, Hatherton, Burgnersh, Colchester, Kilmain, Camoys, Poltimore. BARON—Lionel de Rothschild. RIGHT HONOURABLES—H. GOlllbUrli, Henry Pierre pont, Sir Edward Thornton, Lalor Shiel. HoNoußAßLEs—Henry Boyle Bernard, Rev. W. Hetifit. ker, Capain Cavendish, R.N., Captain Cary, R.N., R. B. Wilbraham, P. Campbell Scarlett, W. A'Coutt Holmes, Lieut.-Colonel Sir E. Cust, Wm. Coventry, Geo. Fortescue, S. Lyttelton, Captain Rous, R.N., It Currie. SIRS—John Johnstone, Bart., John Dean Paul, Bart., Hcsketh Fleetwood, Bart., M. P., R. Westmacott, Chas. Des Voeux, Baronet, F. Knowles, H. Williamson, R. Bateson, M.P., Wm. Molesworth, J. Edwards, G. Wilkinson, C. Domvile, R. Sheffield, R. Jarvis, T. C. Morgan, W. Gordon Cumming, W. Worsloy, Bart., W. R. Clayton, Bart., M. P., J. H. Williams, Wm. Goaset. RET. DOCTORS—Williams, Schwabe. REV. MESSIEURS—CharIes Wetherell, J. Wiggett, J. W. Mackie, J. C. B. Warren, W. Beresford, George Bythesea, M. R. Scott, W. W. Ellis, J. M. Halsey. DOCTORS— Maxwell, Adolphus. The Lord Provost of Glasgow. MESSIEURS—Edward Buller, M. P., William Erie, M. P., Q.C., Parrott, Ferrer, Basset, M.P., Charles Craven, J. Booth, Arabin, William Paynter, John Foley, W. E. Surtecs, Bannerman, M.P., Robert Hale, M.P., Law, Holford, Selby, Sebastian Smith, William Chicken' , Plowden, Sanford, Henry Charles Hoare. John Round, junior, Keeper, Cornwall Leg h, Egerton, Boyce, Thomas Teed, Tighe, Thomas Hallifax, Charles Plowden, Henry Vandeleur, Cheeks Stewart, Boyce, Estcourt, Sackvillc Lane Fox, Sanderson, M. P., Woodhouse, W. Bertram Evans, R. N. Fynn, Monteith, W. Heneage, Christopher, Hopkinson, A. French, Buis lock, R. Holland, Gerald Fitzgerald, R. F. Maitland, G. Hcathcote, M.P., Bedingfcld, Hume, M. P., E. B. Roche, M. P., .1. St. George, A. C. King, Bag haw, H. Bolingbroke, D. Trant, T. S. Carter, Fort, Stapleton Cotton, Mosley. G. Wilkinson, A. At. kinzon, H. Berkeley, Young, Napier, Hutchins, Tottenham, R. Currie, Tiley, Power, Letehwort* Blacket, Stanley, T. Cocks, Disney, Sumner, Priam., H. Ricketts, B. Wrightson, R. Neville, W. Barron, R. Bourne, Bellew, W. Leader, G. Ilushe, B. Powell, M. Jones, Alston, Stileman, J. Gladstone, Lucas, Bramstoa, Lennox, Robertson, Lawson, Balfour, P. Fitzgerald, S. Barry, F. Morris, R. Alcock, Johnson, W. Childers, B. Colvin, R. Alston ' E. Rice, R. Wingfield, D. Holford, Blandy, C. Grenfell, C. , Strange, Weld, E. Bligh, Dugdale, Moakland, R. Hodg son, T. Mitford, H. Story, P. Johnston, B. Alexander, H. Frye, H. Marryat, N. Grenville, T. Price, D. Gas kell, H. S. Leger, Evans, T. Baker, P. Welch, Middleton: ADMIRALS—Sir William Packer, Sir R. Bromley. . GENERALS—Sir Robert Brrton, Taylor, C. 8., Sir E. Stannus, Monckton, Bradshaw, Sleigh, Sir J. Johan, D'Oyly, Frederick, Sir R. Macfarlane, Sir H. Pinn, Sir G. Adams, Sir J. Macleod, Sir J. Hammond, Dicnon. COLONELS—Henry White, M. P. , Ashworth, Eva*, Sir R. Shaw, Grant, Cameron, Baker, Bowles, Pigott, Sir F. Watson, North, Newton, Rolt, Copland, Elwood, Webber, Sir W. Warre, H. Molyncux, Thornhill, Sir A. Maclaine. MAJORS—Waymouth, J. Burns, Y. Scarlett, Boileau, Holford, Waters, Chetwynd, Ilenderson, Trevelyen. CA FTA INS—Daniel Tyssen, Madan, Drew, Hamilton, Be lingfield, Bulkeley, Ellis, Munday, Newman, Bushe, Beare, Stephens, Darner, Croughton, Carey, Price, Lovell, Foulkes, Kelly, Knox, White, Lord Dufferin, Montagu, Dickinson, Harcourt, Collard, Sainthill. COMMANDERS—Gooch, Richardson, Knox, APllwaine, Drummond, Washington. LIEUTENANTS—Danis Pack, Lord Blanty% Budd, Dacres, Grascll, Lloyd, Lang, Buckworth, Smith, Salle, Cocks, Inglis. CORNET —Morewood. ENSlGN—lnglis. The, Queen gave audiences to the Lori Chamberlain, the Field-Officers in Waiting, and the Captain of the• Gaird. Her Majesty and Prince Albert attended by their Suite, returned to Buckingham Palate after the Drawing Room. The Mess of her Majesty's Honourable Corps of Gentle men-at-Arms dined together last evening (the - second meeting this season) at the Thatched House. The Queen inspected, yesterday, at Buckingham Palace, the original sketches made in the Holy Land by David Roberts, R. A., who is recently returned from the East. Mr. Moon had the honour of submitting the sketches to her Majesty. M. Dedel, the Netherlands Minister, has returned to town from the Vague. LADIES' DRESSES. HER MAJESTY. Dress of white tulle over white satin ; the body and sleeves richly ornamented with diamonds 14ml - blonde ; the skirt elegantly trimmed with a deep blonde flounce, pale roses, and diamonds ; train of pink Irish poplin, richly brocaded in silver, trimmed with blonde and silver, end lined with a white satin. Headdress, feathers, and die,. monds ; necklace and earrings en suite. DUCHESS OF NORTHUMBERLAND.—MaiItCaII of rich black. Genoa velvet, lined with black silk, tastefully ornamented with bouffants of satin, and a flouncing of lace ; corsage Of the same, elegantly trimmed with lace, and a magnileatt stomacher of diamonds ; petticoat of black satin, with a lace flounce. Headdress, black flowers studded with dSa. monds, a splendid bandeau, white plume, and lappets. Declass OF SOMERSET.—A manteau of superb Tart. ton satin, brocaded with gold thistles, lireewlsdewitohf whditso, satin and ornamented with magn ifi cent emeralds, and amethysts, forming the rose, thistle, sad shamrock ; a petticoat of white satin, splendidly embroi dered with the rose, thistle, and shamrock, in gold. Head dress, white ostrich feathers and tiara of diamonds. COUNTESS OP AMLIE.—Rich white satin dress, trimmed en tablier with Brussels point lace, bouquets of sweet pees, fine grass, and wild flowers ; manteau of most okras violet and gold brocaded satin, with a magnificent snit of Brussels point lace, headed with flowers to correspoid with dress. Headdress, fine diamonds, feathers, and Brussels point lappets ; ornaments, diamonds. COUNTESS OF BRIDGWATER.—Dress of white satin, trimmed with a blonde flounce, and ornamented with gold lama ; train of a rich violet satin, lined with white satin, and richly trimmed with blonde and lama to correspond; blonde mantilla lappets, and sabot s fagoohnldsb.londe. Headdress, feathers, and o im diamonds. B ARONES S DE ROTHSCHILD.— Rich satin dress, bird of paradise co lour,lined r i c hly trimmed with lace ; train of Hum. with the same colour , tastefully trimmed t w o i n th la l loco, e ce and ribbons. Hcaddrcss, feathers, lappets, die monds, and emeralds. B NARD —An elegant white embroidered VISCOUNTESS Ell. • crape dress over satin; train of rich perruche glace sa ti ny lined with white , and richly trimmed with blonite and rot.. leaux of satin; bodice to correspond, tastefully trimmed with blonde and flowers. Headdress, blonde lappets, fik thers, and diamonds. VISCOUNTESS PALMERSTON•.—Habit de Cour, composed of rich white satin, trimmed with superb point lace and diamonds ; manteau of blue brocaded silk, liticd with poult de soie, and trimmed with lace and diamonds. Headdrsse, ostrich plume, point lace lappets, and profusion of mag nificent diamonds. LADY STAFFORD.--Train of rich maise satin, tilt:timed with bouffants of tulle and rillbon ; blonde tacker and ruffles ; rich blonde petticoat, over white satin. Head dress, feathers and blonde lappets ' • ornaments, diamonds. LADY HATHE RTON .— Costume do Cour, composed of tulle, over white satin, with a flounce cf handsome gold lama , train of blue French satin, with trimming to eon. respond. Headdress, feathers, lappets, and a superb of diamonds. ( • ' ,< l 7; :'' --. - -_,# -i -... to, , ?-.1, \ . v,44';:k,5 1 , - , '''''' =, • • .\ I