The Sun. — London, England, 1840-07-24 00:00:00

THE SUN% LONDON, FRIDAY, JULY g 4, Lord not to d o away --SEYMOUR said the object of the c lause was away with the responsibility of Three tors,Goveret b ut t h ere were cases in which an i nspect i on by a A case ent officer might be of great use to the p ublic. e had been brought before the Committee, n which a very dangerous arrangement had been made, on the Greenwich and Croydon line, by which the sta tic)" Of the two Companies were placed so that the Whole traffic was dangerous.—(Hear, hear.) There were other cases in which one line crossed another upon a level, and collisions from that circumstance had taken place on many of the Northern lines. The clause merely gave the Board of Trade the power to send 4° `" an inspector to see that the Act of Parliament had been complied with. He was willing to treat the first claus e as the principle of the Bill, and if it was rejected, he would withdraw the Bill. Mr. HAWES did not admit that there was anything of a monopoly in these railway!, and that was the only argument that had been urged in favour of the superin tendence which the Bill provided. He would ask what evil had arisen from the power which the railway com panies at present possessed ? Had the public petitioned the House against these powers? He thought no grounds had been stated for bringing in a Bill of so inqui sitorial a character, more especially when the second leading of the Bill had taken place at two o'clock in the "inning, no opportunity being afforded for discussion. The Noble Lord had referred to inconvenience and mischief which would result from railways crossing turnpike roads upon a level, but the present Bill would not remedy that evil. Many of these railways were .now in existence, and the Bill did not authorise the Go vernment inspectors to go so far as to say, " you must go over or under this road—we will not allow you to cross it upon the level." In fact, whatever practical evil or danger might result from the system would con tinue to exist. It appeared that the Committee had recommended a general superintendence of the ac counts, financial returns of the companies, and they bad not objected to that . ; but where a Bill was put a,,, into the heads of Hon. Members, by which the in eee; spectors were not only empowered to inspect the books i,eee e _.and accounts, but to prescribe the very form in which 1' ,4 1e ethos , were to be kept—when it was found that they ilia not only power to institute prosecutions, but that they could make out their case by a reference to the I ,?neks of the companies themselves, he must say that tt Was a most objectionable and tyrannical Bill. The Noble 'ird had said that the principle of the Bill Iv !t 3 involvei! in the first clause, and if that were so lie h n uld certainly' vote against the Bill by voti n g a g ainst " ) ,rst clause. 5 ,,,,! 4 r. SHELL said there appeared to him to be e mistake as to the principle of the Bill being in t'ived i n t h e fi rs t clause. It appeared to him that t he 1111 ses of the Bill dial not exceed to any extent the , 4 " e chmmendations of the Committee, which went to the Providing a system of by-laws, and a control vested in the hands of competent a uthority. By the 37th c haise Copies of the bye-laws of the company were to be submitted to the Board of Trade, who vet re empowered to disallow them. Again the lath clause authorised the Punishment of the com an '• servants who misconducted themselves. It was p generally ildmitted that that V ge h r t not to be 1 ft to the company itself.—(Hear.) acalayutsheatwtalsi e also a provision for the punishment of per sons obstructing railways. It was absurd, therefore, to Mendee principle of the Bill depended upon the first could d o r hWadithallrue,sipeoc,tittoaptpheeanreotice to which the Hon. benefit to the pub • , dto him that the notice no barn and might be productive of great and he would remind the Com mittee that the Go -rnment had no power whetever to prevent t h e opening of the railway. the The e.innitei ATTitOR, N EY-GEN ERAL would suggest that was proceeding in a most. irregular ta . l th ner, and th at tem proper course would be to discuss clauses one by one, instead of discussing the prin ciple of the Mr. RICE observed that it was only in very da.- grant eases that the interference of the Government in spectors could take place, and he should support the clause. Mr. EW ART complained that the House had had no opportunity of discussing the principle of the Bill, in consequence of the hurried manner in which it had been passed through its various stages. He did not see • , , why a different syste m should he adopted towards Rail wotayompanies. f rom that a d o pt e d as regge d e d C ana l Companies, G as CO mpan i es , W ater W or k s , ae env h public Companies. He should vote against the clause. Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Committee divided, when there appeared— Fer the clause B4 Against i' Msjority On our return to the gallery we found Capt. BOLDERO protest* against the Bill as ob noxious in its nature and tyranwical in its principle. It might be said that these railroad': were monopolies, but so were canals, and other joint eeeek companies, and yet it was never thought proper to apply such restrictions to them. There was no power which the Government tc quired for the purposes of taxation that they did not already possess. It was said this Bill was framed in consequence of the Second and Third Reports of the Railway Committee, bnt those Reports touched very delicately the powers of the Government. There was no recommendation that they should have this inquisi torial power.--(Hear.) He was much of opinion that at the present moment it was doubtful policy to tax railways at all. Look at the circumstance : about 90 Railway Bills had received the Royal Assent ; out of these about eleven were at a premium, and the pre miuni of many of these was so nominal that he ques tioned if a profit would be realised by a sale of shares. There were only about five railways at a very high premium, and he could see no reason why they had arrived at pramium. Reilw, ys, in his opinion, were at present but in their infancy—( Hear, hear) —and who could say but in a few years locomotive engines might not be in general use? Therefore, if they crippled the energies of railway proprietors at present, they would do an injustice to them and to the public. Why should railways be taxed and cot steam nasigation ? He be ll 'ed the Noble Lord below him (Lord G. Somerset) bed an amendment to propose, which, unless the Go vernment acceded to, he should feel it his duty to divide the Committee against the clause.—( Hear.) Lord SEYMOUR said the Railway Companies having a monopoly, and with the sauction of the House, the object of the clause was to enable the Board of Trade to call for all accounts to show what charges were imposed on the public. He would readily agree to any clause that would give that information.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the public should know how the items of charge were composed. He also wished to have statistical details, to show to the publie the ad vantages afforded them ; but he had no desire to give the inquisitorial powers spoken of.—(Hear.) Mr. HUME was glad the Noble Lord had stated what his object was, for he had feared, from the word ing of the clause, that it would interfere with the com panies in the management of almost all their affairs. But perhaps the Noble Lord had not attended to the 7th section of the Standing Orders of the House, which he submitted gave him the greater part of the powers he sought, and which, with a little alteration, would render almost unnecessary the present clause. Lord G. SOMERSET cooled not agree to the total omission of the clause. He was for asking for all possible information that waield be of use to the public, but he did not wish to give any power to ask of a Railway Company more than a private individual how they managed their private ad'airs.—(Hear, hear.) He thought the powers in the Bill as now drawn were amply sufficient. He had consulted many gentlemen connected with railways on the Bill generally, and parti cularly on this clause, and they had stated that they were not inclined to go so far as the Noble Lord's pro position, and had therefore put on paper what the pro prietors would freely concede. This had been framed into a clause which he thought might be adopted by the Committee. Its purport was—To enable the Board of Trade to call for accounts with regard first of all to the total number of passengers and the aggregate number of miles which they travelled, on each railway. Then for accounts of accidents at tended with personal injury to passengers ; also the total number of tons of merchandize conveyed, and the aggregate number of miles; and then the tolls a nd rates levied on passengers and merchandize. They moreover required that these returns should net be re quired of a particular Company, but of Railway Corn• panics generally. In addition to this, he (Lord G. Somerset) would propose that the returns should be made within 30 days after the demand for them, under a penalty of .5/. for every additional day. They did not wish to return the number of servants employed, or of the salaries given to servants, or in what manner they conducted their business, except so far as the public were concerned. Nor did they wish it should he known what they gave for their locomotive engines, nor the railways, outlay to b e compare d betwixt the different which they said were inquisitorial powers which could be productive of no public good, and which, there fore, they hoped the House would not sanction. He thought they should look at railways in a somewhat dif ferent light to canal and other Companies, because they were monopolies ; and he thought the public should have some protection since 'they abrogated other modes of travelling. He therefore proposed this as an amend ment to the clause of the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.) The CHAIRMAN said it would be more regular it it were proposed as a new clause, which, after some con versation, was done. Lord SEYMOUR said he had no objection to strike out the clause as it there stow!, and make some alteration, hut the clause of the Noble Lord did not quite provide what he wanted. He wished to know, and he thought it important that it should be known, what was the accommodation railways gave to the la bouring classes.—(Hear, bear.) And what, therefore, were the number and classes of passengers ; next, the period of arrival and departure. He also thought it would be of great advantage to have accidents classeto d, as to the injuries to perso n and propert, and also y know what rates, tolls, and other charges were im posed on the public. With these additions, he should have no objection to the classe. With respect to the registry of servants, his object was to prevent persons discharged for improper conduct on one railway, being employed by another ; but if there was any objection to that, he would not press it.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. LOCH said, as a Director and Railway Pro prietor, it would not be supposed he should ask for any returns which would be detrimental to those great schemes of national improvement—Railway Companies. They stood in three different positions. In the first place, as taking toll ; secondly, as to their locomotive power ; and thirdly, as carrying goods. It was important to ascertain whether or not the traffic in goods was in jurious, and whether the passengers paid for the traffic in goods, or the traffic in goods paid for passengers. The former was the opinion of the Secretary of the Manchester and Leeds Railway. Mr. EAST HOPE contvaded that the clause would place railway proprietors in great difficulty. It would render it penal for them not to render correct accounts of accidents, while it did not point out any way in which they could obtain such accounts. He could assure the Committee that accidents frequently took place on railroads, with which the proprietors were wholly unacquainted, or which were made known to them by the merest accident. Lord G. SOMERSET said that there should be some parties responsible for accidents, end though the Directors might be deceived in certain instances, they could in general rely on the fidelity of the servants they might employ. He doubted whether it would be desirable that the public should know to what expense railway companies were put in the transfer of passengers, and what expense in the transfer of goods, and what was the profit they derived from each of those sources. He did not wish that the public should be made acquainted, further than might be absolutely necessary, with the private affairs of those companies, or that those affairs should be too closely pried into. Sonic such accounts might be obtained from the Liverpool and Manchester Railway Company, which was forced to carry goods at a certain price, whether they were losers or gainers thereby, but in every other case the Act of Parliament had left the subject to the discretion of the' companies themselves. Mr. LABOUCHERE said that the House seemed to think that the clause el his Noble Friend might be altered with advantage ; and, on the other hand, he be lieved it would be dangerous to adopt the clause of the Noble Lord without further consideration. He' would, therefore, advise his Noble Friend not to ask the House to assent to his clause s and that he would, in the report, avail himself of the suggestions thrown out in the course of the debate, and introduce a new clause on the subject. He thought it better, therefore, not to go on then with the discussion. But at the same time he wished to take the opportunity of stating his opinion that the proprietors of railways seemed determined so to limit the powers of inquiry on the part of the Board of Trade as to render such inquiry altogether nugatory. Those gentlemen were not only the owners of the road, and the owners of the tolls levied on them as the Act of Parliament alovved, but they were also the sole carriers on those roads—a power which they had not acquired by Act of Parliament. Now, he wished the Board of Trade could separate the receipts of railway proprietors into two heads—the one their profits as proprietors of the roads, and the other their profits as carriers. Those returns, however, could not be obtained without due inquiry on the part of the Board of Trade ; and if that inquiry were too limited they coul d not ex p -ct ver y im p ortant results th f ro m it. He should again observe at bethought it would be better that h is Noble Friend and the Noble Lord , should withdraw those disuses, and that they should intro duce an a mended clause in the Report. Mr. FINCH said that the House should obtain every in formation which would unable them to determine what might be the c harges which Railway Companies should s h y i p , ;i g l d a , ton ho w p s e r r e r m , b i l e e i w nl o p u o l s d s i r b e l m e u f o n r e r a p t s e r l t i h a e . jevy on the pu blic for locomotive power. En g ineers had 6Pmtaier:nPt4rite:t4afiali'aanf'yirttlimits on tbet subject unless the Board of Trade could institute an inquiry into locomotive charge,. Parliament had authorised the Companies to levy tolls, but 1 j o s contended that Parliament had intended that on payment o f to u k l) it jpdividual bade railway i ;i w g: y t s t !, a . i ii , n n t introduce d t huee ewlocomotivetanks, , public had 06 - the F 9 4,4, tt might, however, be said th a t t h e tanigts t along the different h 4 lines. .4 hp udblic the use n ofo right thought that those who paid the tolls enjoined by p4 r 4= meat had such a right. Mr. WARD couldnot approve of the doctrine of th e Hon. Gentleman who hind laet eddresse4 the compettge, notHe thought pried that into the more affairs n m o f i g r h a t i i ll a i Y o u c n o d th P 'i a n n d i i e s s p e s n h a l l d y necessary. Lord SEYMOUR said that le was ready to withdraw tbsielause for the relent On the bringing up of the 1, _-66 report he intended to introduce a clause which wculd re quire railway companies to give returns of ttie total num ber of passengers, and of the time of arrivals and departures of trains as well as the number of trains and the accidents attended with injury to the person, or injury to property in cases in which compensation was required, He thought that in that last case there would be no difficulty in furnishing the returns. He would also raise the penalty of 51., which he did not thick sufficiently high. Lord 110 WIC K said that he thought it would be bet ter that the House should adopt the principle of periodical returns, and not give the Board of Trade the power of calling for returns whenever it might think fit. He did not think that the returns which might be made could by any possibility be too particular. He was persuaded on the contrary, that every detail should be entered into in the periodical returns; and he was convinced that every well-managed company would be glad to give such details, because such a company would have nothing to fear from publicity. It was important, too, that the public should know not only the charge of tolls, but the amount of profits received by the company ; and it would be highly desirable that they should have an entire knowledge of those profits, because he believed that such a knowledge would be a great check on companies not to attempt to obtain exorhi tant charges. It should not be forgotten that they had given those companies far larger powers than they bad intended when the B:11 was first passed. The truth was, that the measure was not fully understood at the time. A provi sion had been introduced into the Act, by which railways were to be left open to the public, on the payment of cer tain tolls. That provision, however, had turned out to be entirely nugatory. The companies had the power of refusing the use of stations and other conveniences ; and it was, besides, impossible that different locomotive en gines could progress on the same line without great dan ger. So that the provision was inoperative, and the com panies were armed with greater powers than had been ori ginally contemplated. It appeared to him that, in order to insure the convenience of the public, they should have not only returns of the rates of tolls, but of the amount of profit which the company derived ; and he therefore hoped that the Noble Lord, in framing the clause anew, would take care that every possible information should be given with regard to conveyance on railroads. Mr. HAWES said that one of two things must be done either a clause mutt be drawn so minutely as to suit the views of the Noble Lord the Member for Nor thumberland, or to give a general power to the Board of Trade. The effect of framing so minute a clause as the Noble Lord wished could only be to give to rival carriers —suppose to canals running parallel to the railway—the means of ascertaining the expenses and profits of carriage on the railway.—( Hear, hear.) lie would prefer to give the power to the Board of Trade rather than to insert in an Act of Parliament such a clause as was proposed. The Noble Lord below him (Lord Seymour) wished to ascot-- tain the classes of passengers. Now, how was that to be done ? The classes of the trains could be ascertained, but not the clews of the passengers. Lord SEYMOUR—It can be ascertained what accom modation is afforded to the labouring classes. Mr. H AWES—But the passengers could not be distinguished. It could not be ascertained what persons travelled in fine cloth coats or in flannel jackets. The railway directors could not object to give every necessary information. Lord SEYMOUR said that all the charges made ought t be distinctly stated ; and it was desirable, as far as could be ascertained, to have a return of the different classes of the passengers, so that it might be known to what extent the working classes were accommodated. Mr. LOCH, who could not be distinctly heard in the gallery, was understood to complain of some observations made by a gentleman above him. Mr. AINSWORTH knew the case of a railroad lessee (the only one, he believed, in this country) who had taken two railroads on lease, and who would be seriously injured by the clause now before the Committee. He hoped the Noble Lord who had the management of the Bill would allow him to bring in a clause to meet the case of this in dividual. Lord SEYMOUR did not think there was any reason to bring in a clause especially for this individual. As far as the public were concerned, this individual was the rail way proprietor. He made what charges ho thought pro per, and should be subject to the same regulations as the company. Mr. BROTHERTON did not think the railway company could object to give any information that could be derived. Is was impossible that railways could be any other than a monopoly, and no carrier on a railway could compete with the company. Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET had beard a great deal about the difficulty of competition on railways, and very contradictory evidence was given on the subject in the Committee. But the fact was, that at present the Grand Junction Company used a part of the Birmingham Rail way, and in all the great linen the same thing was done— one company running upon part of the other's line—and the competition was found to be very useful, and had tended to lower the rates. With respect to the expense of loco motion, he did not think it possible for any company to give an exact return. Sir ROBERT PEEL protested against the doctrine of an Hon. Member who bad said that Parliament had no more right to investigate the accounts of a railroad than those of an individual trader. But Parliament had this reason for requiring to know the profits of the railroad company—it had given them special privileges.—( Hear, hear.) On the same principle it could call upon the Bank of England to give information, which it would not require from an individual trader.—( Hear.) He thought, however, that the Act ought to specify the general objects which were desired, without entering too minutely into particulars, but placing some confidence in both parties, in the public department in which the superintendence was vested and in the railway company.—( Hear, hear.) With respect to employing carriers on the railways, he thought it necessary that they should, for the safety of the public, be subject to the regulations of the railway directors, and he believed that a carrier who had not the goodwill of the company would have great difficulty in using the road.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. EASTH 0 PE thought that those who opposed full inquiries with respect to railroads were their greatest ene mies. He was anxious that legislation in this respect should be as definite for the interest of the public as pos sible. As to any concealment of the charg e s and profits of the railroads, he should think it unworthy of any railway company.—( Hear, hear, hear.) In fact, it was impossible, because the profits must necessarily be known to the proprietors. He concurred with the sentiments of the Hon. Member who had spoken last, that it was to the interest of the railway companies to go in union with the public.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. MORRISON thought it ought to be understood that railroads were monopolies, and that they should be treated as such. Mr. BAINES considered that railroad companies had been large benefactors to the public, and ought, therefore, to be supported. He thought that no information should be required from them further than was necessary, and he did not approve of an inquisition into their affairs, that would be harassing and troublesome. After a few observations from Lord G. SOMERSET, clause 2 was struck out of the Bill, as were also clauses 3 and 4. Upon clause 5 being put, which authorised the appoint ment of inspectors of railways, Mr. HA WES objected to the appointment of more than one inspector, and moved to strike out the words authorising the appointment of inspectors, to the insertion of words allowing only one to be appointed. Lord SANDON objected to the amendment, feeling confident that one inspector would not be able to accom plish the task assigned to hint. Mr. AG LIO NBY thought the words at present in the clause were far botter than those proposed to be inserted by the Hon. Member for Lambeth. Mr. E W ART opposed the amendment. It would be impossible for one individual to attend to the whole of the railways throughout the country, Mr. FRENCH was also of opinion it would be advisable to retain the clause as it stood. Captain BOLDER() suggested that the inspector should be selected from the corps of engineers. Sir R. PEEL was of opinion that an immense advan tage would be derived from employing occasional in. spectors. He was opposed to any permanent appointment and, above all, would object to any thing like superan nuation allowances being made. The parties appointed ought to be men of honour and high character, and he knew of no class of men who could be confided in more titan the corps of engineere.—( Hear.) After a short desultory discussion, the amendment was negatived without a division. Mr. H AYT ER then moved the following proviso, in stead of the proviso in the clause.—" Provided always, that no person who shall hold any office of trust or profit under any railway or canal company, or shall be interested or concerned in any contract with any such company, or who may have held any such office or place, or may have been so interested or concerned within three years pre . ceding the passing of this Act , shall be appointed for any such purposes as aforesaid." N o twithstanding reh th ende e discu thes• sion that had already taken place, lie app Government would appoint one p erson to be an d Inspector-General of Railways, and if such per son were appointed, he would, under the provi sions of the Bill, be clothed with considerable powers. He would have great influence over all persons connected with railways. What he wonted to secure was, that such an intervening time should elapse between the period be held any situation connected with the line, and the period of his appointment as inspector, as would satisfy every person be had divested himself of all interest in the con cern, and for that purpose he had fixed the period of three years. Sir R. PEEL thought he would be very unwise to men tion any single disqualification. There were 50 or 100 disqualifications that ought to be attended to ; and if one was mentioned and the others were not enumerated, the dis cretion of the parties having the appointment of the officer might be fettered.—( Hear, hear,) Mr. HA WES was of opinion that If no such proviso were agreed to, there ought to be a declaration set out in the Act which the inspector should be called upon to sign. Mr. LABOUCHER E thought the proviso was alto gether unnecessary.—( Hear, hear.) It would he th e duty of these who had the Appointment of' the inspector to see that he was an entirely disinterested party. Lord SEYMOUR opposed the proviso. Mr. MIL DM A Y thoug ht that the p rovis o ought to i inserted. Thereiwere certai nl y some s ituations which o ught not to be held in coilunctiol vxith O r e app o i n t ments under the act, ' Lord SANDON was unde rstood to o pp ose the proviso. Lord SEYMOUR thoug ht it ver y desirabl e that the appointments should not b e g iven to p ersons co nnected with railways. But be fou nd that there we re vary fewfito bo were not e rn n o g r i c ne o er r and ess even connected. military th r f a n i r g w in a e y e s t . t. v‘ He therefo re suggested that,, the clause should be withdrawn, upon the understanding that, as Far as pos sible, the p ersons appointed ahould be unconnected wit h g n y eellsre,y, After a 'few words from feord G.SQMF:RSET, the re proviso ed t w 2 t: witilaiwyn, and the as amended, wa s pauses 0,7, 8,9, 10, and 11, were then agreed to without discussion. On clause 12 being proposed, Mr. EASTHOPE proposed to substitute one year for two years, which was agreed to. On clause 13 being proposed, M:. E A STHOPE said he thought the clause should be postponed. It was notorious that the greater ptopor tioa of danger and accidents arose from the misconduct of the engineers He thought they should pause a little be fore they legislated on this subject. A case had come within his own knowledge of an engine driver who had been guilt) of gross negligence, by which three carriages, which were fortunately empty, were shattered to pieces in such a manner that had there been any persons in them they must have been destroyed. The man was eppre hooded and taken before a Magistrate, and everything was done that could be done by the railway directors to have him properly punished, but the Magistrate felt that all he could do, though there was no doubt of the man's identity, or of his gross misconduct, was to fine him 403.—( Hear, hear.) This man, and men like him, 'N ould go to a distant place and obtain similar employ ment.—( Hear, hear.) He submitted the clause intended to provide against this evil was extremely insufficient. He was quite aware the subject was attended with great diffi culty, and that what he might feel necessary to meet the case, the Attorney-General might think a violation of the existing law, and by those who properly regarded the rights of British subjects, as some encroachment on them; but he thought it was of the utmost importance for the security of those who travelled by railways, that those men should feel they were responsible for their conduct. The Noble Lord would confer great benefit on the country if be would de lay this clause till Hon. Members had directed their atten tion to it, and were enabled to meet with some practical remedy to the evil he wished to point out.—( Hear, hear.) Lord SEYMOUR had put in the clause at the special reqaest of the Directors, and he believed it would tend to prevent the misconduct the Hon. Member had referred to. He did not, therefore, wish to withdraw it, but if the Hon. Member could make it more effectual, he would have an opportunity of doing so when it was brought up. Mr. EASTHOPE said be thought the clause had been drawn with considerable haste, or taken from some Local Act. Mr. HUME said the clause gave a summary jurisdic tion to some one Justice to inflict a punishment of two months' imprisonment, or a fine of 51. He should be sorry to allow a larger penalty, but he thought one Justice not sufficient. Mr. LABOUCHERE thought it desirable that the punishment should be summary in cases of this kind, and that this would be difficult with more than one Justice. Ile thought the clause sufficient in its present shape. Lord SANDON made some observations which were aLnest inaudible in the gallery, but which were understood to imply that he thought the clause did not sufficiently provide for punishment in aggravated cases. After a few words from the Attorney-General, Mr, Easthope. and Mr. Puulett Scrope, which were inaudible, Mr. EASTHOPE said he thought ano ther p rovision might be beneficially introduced, making it imperative of upon a Company to give and receiv e a certificate character with their servants. Atter a few words from Mr. GOULBURN, the sug gestion of the Hon. Member for Leicester was withdrawn. Tho clause as amended was then ordered to stand part of the Bill. On clause 14 being moved, Sir R. PEEL said that there was a provision in the clause which in his opinion should be altered. It was proposed that any one who might throw stones or any other impediment on any part of a railway which the trains might pass over should be liable to certain punishment. He thought, however, that the provision should extend to the placing of impediments in any part of a railway what ever.—( Hear.) Mr. HUME wished to know whether the clause had emanated from the Noble Lord himself? Lord SEYMOUR said that the provisions of the clause had been recommended to him by the Directors, and that he merely submitted them to the consideration of the House. Mr. HUME complained that the Noble Lord had not himself taken care of the framing of the clause. Mr. AGLIONBY wished to know whether the pe nalty would extend to parties whose cattle had strayed on the roads during the night? Lord SEYMOUR said that the clause did not extend to that case, as it was considered one which should not be so severely dealt with as the other. Lord G. SOMERSET said that the question was a serious one, but the companies themselves were often an swerable in such a case as that referred to, as they did not pay sufficient attention to the raising of their fences. Mr. EASTHOPE said that that might have been the case fotmerly, but the raising of fences was now duly at tended to. On the suggestion of Sir R. PEEL, the clause was atended by rendering persons who should do any a:t to obstruct the engines liable to the penalties provided by the Act, Clauses 15, 16, and 17, were agreed to with a few verbal amendments. • Clause 18 was agreed to after a short discussion. The preamble was agreed to with a few verbal amend ments. The House resumed, and the Report was ordered to be received on Monday next. RATING STOCK IN TRADE. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL then moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee on the Rating of Stock in Trade Bill. Sir CH ARLES DOUGLAS must oppose proceed ing with the Bill at that late hour (a quarter to twelve). He wished to know why the Bill had been delayed so long. Many Hon.!,Gcntlemen bad gone away, under the notion that the Bill would not be proceeded with at a late hour. —(Cries of ‘• Go on, go on.") If the House was against him, he would not of course press the postponement. Mr. GOULBURN thought it would be unfair to call upon the House to discuss the Bill, for the first time, at twelve o'clock. Lord J. RUSSELL had known Bills brought in and discussed at two, or three, or even five o'clock in the morning. Mr. B ROTHERTON—That was a very bad practice, Sir.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) The question being put that the Speaker do leave the chair, Mr. GOULBURN said, if the Government in-, Fisted upon pressing the Bill at that late hour, he would shortly state his objections to it then, but should feel it to be his duty to renew the discussion at a future stage of the Bill. There would, therefore, be two discus sions instead of one upon the principle of the Bill, but perhaps the Government preferred that mode of facilita ting the business of the House. The Bill proposed to I exempt that class of property comprised under the term ' stock in trade. The Bill, strictly speaking, would infl'et an augmentation tax, and that to no inconsiderable ex tent, upon every other species of property. In many parishes the practice had prevailed of rating stock in trade, and he had received statements from many persons that if the Bill passed their burthens would be considerably increased. The principle of the statute of Elizabeth was that the rating should be equal, but by this Bill the liability of one species of property was removel, chile the liabilities of other property were increased. He did not deny that there were difficulties which ought to be removed, but it was not enough, he contended, for the Hon. and Learned Attorney-General to come down with a Bill to meet the apparent evil of the moment. The House was bound to view the whole question, and to take care that the remedy was such as would leave all parties upon an equal footing. The owners of tithes would be placed in a most peculiar situation by the Bill. The Bill would impose heavier burthens upon the tithes than were imposed upon the land, whereas the tithes wer e heretofore exempted from burthens to which other pro perty was liable. The injustice to the tithe-owner w as the greater in consequence of the arrangements to which he had come under the Tithe Commatation Act. By that Act Parliament gave a pledge to the tithe-owner that he should be subject to no further charges. Besides, the value of the tithes was fixed and known to every body in the parish, whereas the value of the land was changing every year, and the landowner had many means of evading the rate to which he might be subjected as to its amount. The tithe-owner was also the only person whose propor. tionate income was subject to any such charge. The clergy_ man was also precluded from having recourse to any other means of increasing his income than the pursuit of his pro fession ; whereas the landowner might, at the same time that he derived an income from the property subjected to this tax, derive additional income from other sources. It was, upon every consideration, a great injustice to the tithe-owner to subject him to this rate without any compen satin.. advantage. Lf this Bill had been introduced only for the purpose •of taking the whole question of rating iiito consideration at a future time, he should not object to it. In this case it was proposed to tax the clergyman for purposes for which no other professsional man was taxed.—( Hear, hear.) A deduction ought at least to be made from the tithes to be taxed of so much as would amount to only a fair rem unerat i on for the dis charge of the duties of the clergyman, io that t i h s : fo c r le h r is o p m ro a - n fessnal labour. W hen the Le g isl ature was about t o exempt from the bur then a p articul ar kind of property, and to subject to t he burthen a s p eci es of property tha ' t , was before exempt from it, the case of ought to be fully and fairly considered, The ATTORNEY -GENERAL said, that from the n e sp h eech o f t h e Right Qntlem. 4 n, and the length of it, he had expected that thet •Gentlem an would G but he E was RA Gee tTi nn th b he l e i elGsidAiebntnelot‘t Gentleman, that Committee.t et this ho would.d—aythree conclude Ie ti t s y . ATTORNEY -GENERAL a th lo a s t s t h o e kn h o a w d ck what he had to answer. all through the speech of the Right Mr. GOULBURN said he had forgotten to say, that conclude with 01 1 ° 11 y. ; of t .i r n a deee,n consequence lie intended to move an amendment relating to the rating th g li tt a e d n been ee nf ftohuen meansd moving W i t h r e sthat- t had of evading it. im possible to enforce which the tradesmen The injustice of enforcing the rating pect to the rating of stock in trade as it now existed would be monstrous. aman bad 50/. worth of stock in trade in one pariah, te might evade his liability by re siding in the next. If there were two partners having an equal interest in the profits of their business, if the ho one lived in the same papists,would be liable to be rated as an inhataitarit, while if the other lived in an ad would not be liable. joinina perish he There were many ether anomalies which rendered the present system quite of the st° rate, odious, and except in rare . instances hardly any attempt had been made to enforce it, and the usage undoubtedly was to confine the rate to the occupiers of the real property. Such being the case what h was the pr o p er course? Was i t not to make that law Ahic now was usage? The Right lion. Gentleman had not complained of any grievance to the landowner nor ev en to the titheowner, but bad only said that one particular class, the ecclesiastical ohiss, would have reason to complain. Now first there was the grievance to the landowner, because they were understood to bo a 11nCde4 ore o w land, and what was the distinction between the landowner and the titheowner ? There a,s no greater burden, comparatively speaking, upon the one than the either. The case of the Queen v. Kent did not affect the rase in the slightest degree. There was no more truth in saying that the owner of tithes was subjected to greater bardens under Mr. Scrope's Act than that there was any distinction between the ecclesiastical and rlay owner. He felt no interest in the Bill ; but as the 1 Right Honourable Gentleman had asked his opi- 1 nien, he said that be thought the Bill ought to I pass as it was drawn, and that he should resist any amendment. Before the Queen v. Capel was decided, he had been asked to introduce a clause to overturn the decision in the case of the Queen v. Jodrell, and had said that he would not do so, but with regard to the occupiers of land every thing should remain precisely as it was. Now the Queen v. Capel had been decided, he should resist any alteration which would affect the re sident liability of the occupier of real property. The ec clesiastical owner received his tithes subject to the charge that they were subject to in the reign of Elizabeth, and had continued subject to till the present time. He should further resist the exemption of coal mines, canals, and gas companies, the proprietors of all of which were rateable as occepiers, and as he wished the law to remain as the usage was, all he proposed to do was to meet the ' grievance that was complained of, namely, of inhabitants, as such, being liable to be rated for personal property. The Bill now introduced remedied that grievance, and he therefore hoped it would receive the approbation of the House.—( Hear, hear.) Sir EARDLEY WILMOT did not rise to oppose the Bill, being assured some such Bill must pass.— ( Hear, hear.) But the question was not only the rating stock in trade. But what was stock in trade. There were great difficulties in this subject, and this was peculiarly felt in Birmingham in the case of machinery. Gentlemen conversant with machinery must know the great difficulty there was in deciding what of this was free hold and what not.—( Hear, hear,) What he there fore wished to call the attention of the Attorney-Ge neral to was this—the propriety of having a clause providing how far and how much of the machinery should he considered as real property, end rated accordingly. lie wished to know, therefore, whether the Attorney- General would resist any alteration in this respect in this Bill? The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said he could Lot agree to any alteration in the Bill. Mr. DARBY thought there would be many appeals under the Bill, and he also thougl.t there were many questions respecting rating which must ultimately come before the House, to be decided by it after the most mature deliberation. He thought it would be much better to make this Bill a temporary measure, and at an early pe riod next Session to lay the whole question before the House. Mr. WOOD quite agreed in the necessity of passing this measure. He deprecated the practice of the Poor-law Commissioners issuing their mandates to overturn the law. Mr. P. SCRO PE said the tithe-owner had always paid the full proportion of rate for his tithe. Mr. MUNTZ trusted that the lion. and Learned Gen tleman would make the measure more general in its appli- cation. The House then went into Committee on the Bill. On the first, and only clause, being proposed, Sir C. DOUGLAS moved as an amendment that gas and water pipes should be excluded from the operation of the Biil, which was negatived without a division. Sir E. WILMOT proposed a clause for the purpose of defining what parts of machinery were connected with the freehold, and what not. The clause was negatived without a division. Mr. GO ULB URN proposed to add a clause to exempt the incumbents of benefices from rates upon tithes, which, after a short discussion, was negatived. Mr. DARB Y proposed a clause limiting the operation of the Act to the Ist of October, 1841. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the clause. After a short discussion the clause was negatived with out a division. The House resumed. CANADA CLERGY RESERVES. Mr. BERNAL brought up the Report on the Canada Clergy Reserves Bill. Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated that he proposed to insert a clause to extend the sale of Clergy Reserves to the Lower as well as Upper Province. He also proposed to insert a clause, declaring more fully than the first clause did, that the Act of 1791 should be no longer in force, with respect to any future reserva tion of the grants of Crown-lands. The clauses were then brought up and agreed to. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE BILL. The second reading of the Administration of Justice Bill was postponed till Monday. The Soap Duties Bill was read a third time and passed. The East India Shipping. Bill was read a second time. On the motion of Mr. FOX MAULE the Insane Pri. boners Bill was read a third time. The Fisheries Bill went through Committee. AFFIRMATIONS BILL. - _ Mr. HAVES brought up the Report on the Affirms, tions Bill which was ordered to be engrossed, and the Bill to be read a third time to-morrow (this day). The Reports on the Turnpike Acts Continuance (Ire land) Bill, and the Turnpike Acts Continuance Bitl, were received. The Bills were, after a short discussion, ordered to be read a third time (this day) to-morrow. The Linen Manufacturers' Bill (Ireland) went through Committee, and the Report was ordered to be received to-morrow (this day). The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the Huuse adjourned at a Quarter past Two o'Clock. SPORTING INTELLIGENCE. TATTERSALL'S-YFSTERDAY. The alterations in the betting this day may be described in a few words. For the Goodwood Stakes, Hetman Platoff and Oreha were hacked with considerable spirit, the horse hav ing the lead at the finish ; Clarion underwent .a further de cline; and the other favourites (if such a term can be ap plied to them) were in very little favour. The Cup betting was confined to a small number ; to I was taken eagerly about the first favourite, and in some instances a shade less ; two or three small sums were also laid on Hetman Platoff, Beggar- Man, Pocahontas, and Romulus, but we did not observe any •{ eagerness" to get on about either ; Lanercost was friendless. A. : few engagements were entered into on Galen, Dr. Caius, and iSferoon for the St. Leger, without causing any material change Gibraltar, for want of supporters, dropped to 15 to 1, and the Only bets weheard again,t the two favourites were at sto 4 against them jointly. The following were the prices at the close of a very dull afternoon :—. GOODNVOOD STA K FS. 6 to 1 agst Hetman Platoff—taken 7 to 1 agst Orelia—taken 12 to 1 agst" Clarion 2) to 1 agst Forlorn Hope 30 to 1 agst Black Beck—taken 30, to 1 agst The Drama L-taken 33 to 1 agst The Ruler—taken 500 even between Pocket Hercules and The Drama—taken GOODWOOD CUP. 20 to 11 agst Charles the Twelfth-2 to 1 taken freely 6 to 1 agst Hetman Platoff—taken 10 to 1 agst Lanercost 15 to 1 agst Beggarman—taken 20 to 1 agst Pocahontas—taken 20 to 1 agst Amurath—takf n 25 to 1 agst Romulus—taken ST. LEGER. 3 to 1 on the field 14 to 1 agst Galen—taken 15 to 1 agst Gibraltar—taken 24 to 1 agst Dr. Cains—taken 40 to 1 agst Maroon—taken 500 to 400 on the field agst the two favourites—taken EDINBURGH RACES. (From the Scotsman of Wednesday.) The races over the Musselburgh course, for 1840, com menced yesterday. The attendance of spectators was thinner than has been known for many years. This may be accounted for in some measure by the uncertain character of the wea ther, which made people afraid to venture out. The day, though dull and threatening, kept up till between three and four o'clock, when it rained rather heavily. The fallowing is the result of the racing : A Plate of 50 sovs. given by the Duke of Buccleuch, for horses, &c. which never won 100 sovereigns at any one time, in cluding their own stake (two miles). Three to start or no race. Earl of Dunmore'sbr h Aladdin, five years okl. Mr. J. 0. Fairlie's gr g Pyramid, six years old. Mr. Bowman's hr g Easingwold, four years old. A beautiful race, and won by ab 3ut a neck. The third not beat by more than half a head. A Handicap Sweepstakes of 10 sovs. each, h it. One mile and a quarter, for horses the property of, and to be ridden by, officers of the Queen's Bays. (Nine Subsaribers.) Mr. Dallas's b m, Cuttysark, llst 101 b. Captain Campbell's br g, Mango, six years old, list. Mr. Knox's br g, Newbold, six years old, 10st l'2lb. Captain Mildmay's b in, Countess. Won by a head. Her Majesty's Plate of One Hundred Guineas, granted to the city of Edinburgh (under deduction of fees at Exchequer, &c.) (Heats, two miles). Mr. Ramsay's bl h, The Doctor, six years old. Earl of Dunmore's Aladdin. Mr. Robertson's Olympias__ Won easy. It it were but considered what dangerous conse quences to vision must inevitably result from the continued use of faulty or improper spectacles, the dreadful effects would be cautiously 'prevented by the removal of the cause; hence visual diseases would be considerably diminished and good sight preserved to the community to extreme old age. These ob servations are called forth in consequence of the distinguished recommendation from some of the most eminent practitioners in Europe, that is bestowed on the "Patent Preservation Spectacles," manufactured by Mr. E. Solomons, optician, No. 1, Old Jewry, City, and 36, Old Bond-street, and their disposal exclusively secured to these establishments by " Royal autho , ity," which, while they are contradistinguished in their pre serving and strengthening powers from the irremediable injury that is to be apprehended from the pernicious attributes of the ordinary common glasses, convey a sense of coolness and plea ure to the eyes during their protracted use, thus affording the most delightful present enjoyment and prospective benefit. It will no doubt be gratifying to that poi tion of our readers afflicted with deafness, to know that the distressing effects of which they have to complain may also be as wonderfully re lieved by the application of Invisible Hearing Instruments, recently produced by Mr. E. Solomons, which not only restore hearing to the deaf, enabling them to distinguish the faintest inflections of a distant speaker, and to participate in all the serious enjoyments which its privation has hitherto excluded, but that the torpid pirits which generally prevail on such sub jects, give place to the most lively and pleasurable sensations. In consequence of the various attempts to counterfeit the above invaluable inventions, particular attention should be paid to the proprietor's address, namely, No. 1, Old Jewry, City, and 36, Old Bond-street, Piccadilly COMPLETION OF MR. JESSE'S "MEMOIRS Of THE COURT of ENGLAND."—We are requested to state that the third and fourth volumes of the work en titled " Me moirs of the Court of England under the Stuarts,rby_Jen Me moirs Jesse, Esq.," are published th is da y bY 1%1 ;r Majesty, New Burlington-street, Publisher in Ordinary to h and can now be had of all Booksellers. D ETERMINED SUICIDE. --Thursday morning a respectable young mar., named Christopher Latimer, a trades man residing in Eaton-lane South, Pimlico, destroyed himself by cutting his throat with a razor. The body was found about nine o'clock by the deceased's brother. The deceased, who was about thirty years of age, had been for some time in an ' ailing and desponding state. The body lies at the house where the fatal act was committed, to await a Coroner's Inquest. The various parishes in Dublin are getting up meetings in support of Mr. O'Connell's present plan for ob taining a repeal of the Union ; as yet, however, no person of any note hasjoined him in his object, EnITION.. I Lord G. SOMERSET sa'd that he would persist 1 ; 11 the amendm en t, an d if it were found that it would ,9t carry out his intentions, it might hereafter be mo uified. Sir R. PEEL said that the words would give a direct temptation to parties to open their railroads s ooner than they might otherwise do, in order that they 'rngh • i u t avoid the necessity of giving she notice. , I ‘, I '..HAWES did not see any inconvenience in t h e ' lll „, l rnitd* bein g o p ene d sooner th a n was at first intended. i • a ir. :• wished to know if parties would be liable to any penalties s who opened their railroads ag ainst t he wish of the Board of Trade. L ° lll SEYMOUR thought it would be unnecessary t °lmpose such penalties, as it would be the interest of Parties not tA throw open railroads when the Board of T rade had decided against their being in a fit condi tion. He had thought it better to leave minor matters to the remonstrances of the Board of Trade. After a desultory conversation, in which Lord Sey %our, Lord G. Somerset, Sir R. Peel, and other Hon. Members took part, it was agreed that the words which 1 13 t i r i. as proposed to strike out should stand part of the Mr. AGLIONBY expressed his opinion that the Directors should be compelled to listen to the remon strancesrneitte of the Board of Trade. He thought the Com ought to give a power to the Board of Trade to Prevent the opening of any railway where they consi dered such opening would be productive of danger to t re the Public. H e wou ld be glad to see such a clause in duced into the Bill. Lord SANDON did not think any such arbitrary Power at all necessary, for there had not been a single Instance of a railroad being opened except in a perfect sta te ; for the sake of their owa interests, companies would he most careful upon such a subject. Mr. THORNELY thought it very important that there should be a stringent Government inspection of all railway s for the safety of the public. Ile blank baying been filled up with " one month," °Pon the question that the clause stand part of the Bid, Sir J. GRAHAM thought the clause could only be defended upon the principle that the House was bound to Provide for the safety of the public. He was dis- P°sea to say that every railway had been prematurely °Pened, and accidents had been very numerous. He th ought one mont h' s not i ce was littl e enough, and the clause ought to be agreed to if any superintendence was necessary. H " ES said the best evidence of the neces sity of the clause was the railway companies generally made no objection t o it. Mr.AGLIONBY did not think the proposed clause ° ° 1 (1 Provide a remed H e wou ld s uggest that the ~, j"ard c f . Trade ought t y. to certify that a railroad was uelore it was allowed to be opened, even after the raitiee.° M r , E A 6 h ad n?t objected OPE said if the railway proprietors th a t to the clause, it was because they felt l _t_ . would prove a dead letter. The inspection could actin u°L add to the responsibility of the Directors g under the advice of their own engineer. . W ._ w ARBURTON said such an inspection as er7 c ontemplated by th e c l a u s e would be futile, for no it ieer could, by a mere i nspec ti on , s t a t e whether a ra ilroad was properly constructed or not. Mr. AGLIONBY observed that all he wanted was, if the clause was inserted for the prctection of the Public, - to make it efficient for that purpose. If it Was not made efficient then it ought to be rejected as ebildish.—(Hear, hear.) Mr. LABOUCHERE knew that the clause had bees, very much discussed in Committee. He be lieved the object of his Noble Friend (Lord Seymour) had „been to limit as much as possible the interference of the Board of Trade, but he could conceive cases Where Railway Companies had not complied with the terms of their Acts of Parliament with regard to the height or width of bridges, and so on, by which great i nconvenience, and even danger, might arise to the public. ~- --- (Hear, hear.) It was in consequence of the strong cases proved before the Committee. that they had thought it right to give that power which was conferred by the clause. He should therefore vote in favour of the clause. Mr. MUNTZ entirely agreed with what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Bridport. No engineer could go down the line of any railroad, and state that that line was fit to travel upon, unless he had attended .to the whole works of the line. He looked with great jealousy to the Governmen t interfering with railroads, . and thought it would be much better to leave the mat ter in the hands of the Directors. Mr. EWART observed that every argument that I l ia been urged against the clause, was an argument the Bill itself. Ur. EASTHOPE said that it would be impossible for any engineer to speak satisfactorily as to the effi ciency of a bridge which was covered with an embank ... ment of probably eighty feet in depth. All he could do would be, as any other person might do, to report `Von any glaring defect. air J. GRAHAM thought it would be useless to 260 0 with the Bill, unless the House agreed to this clause. His opinion was, that the control proposed to be given to the Board of Trade would prove of great utility, because there might be cases in which railroad s were pass i ng a t r i g ht angles, or in which one railway company might be running trains on the line of anoth er company to the great danger of the public. • He hoped the Noble Lord would take the sense of the Rouse upon this clause, and if it was rejected, he would tot press the Bill further, because if the House thought the first clause objectionable, he did not think i 8 t . 1 7 1 ° . 41 agree to the more stringen t p rovisions of the MARK PHILLIPS had great doubts whether th ia i; i clause ought to be allowed to stand part of the , Mr. a, the lay. ,omer- hurch ncum e dio ion of trade, Hon• of the fist be sainted mtition relative ut the fight to nadc in (Mr. , ther it notice uld not a 3 be )n, pro , !re wits a piaci Louse to ncaster, to give r.ql peti- , a water properti ;t of tile vat with SILL. ading ay-Genri e seem* Bill thst. lat there hould 1 ? e Dt appea r 'ought er 6 Lure de! -- rent coo p a broug' the cplus t i f )os tpooew the Day uld 6% " not fix l l ' Secrete lat m the , !; css prOoeell P'? l Y . on ntiOnr ~ o lUeStioll 0s n-paYqle he ill' act ; her it 1 11 titute 9 Clanks rent wo r, if 4 : r. ' )) B ll ' e I n go lye ° and Pl; vas rea Dornini tt"' E the Ir ital of the SO ° Siiiu bc,i t verCIY 1:1 • tiro' f 'to ti ng o o provo i ', o rcl: , t the I t c t, P joi e nartiCS. i t .,ja r a s to gv l'UliltlgH and EGYPTIAN FLEETS. The following is the detailed aecTant of the Egyptian and Turki h fleets RECAPITULATION'. (Ni.o MEN. 2 Ships of line 17 Ships of the line ....... 17 Frigates 6 Corvettes. - 1,050 9 Brigs 2 Cutters 3 Steam-vessels 2,940 35,460 Numbers of additional hands prepared to join from the dockyard, 6,000 ; two regiments of infauti y embarked, 6,000 ; making the positive force of the Turkish and Egyp tian fleets, 47,460. SHIPS OF THE LINE. GUNS. MEN. Dahalen-el Keubassde lOO 1.200 Mansoura Seanderye lOO 1,200 Aboukir 74 900 Mars (Pavillcn d'Amiral) Ake Horns Belan lOO 1,200 Halep lOO 1,200 Brule, dans l'arsenal — Sayoum lOO 1,200 Bensoneff FRIGATES. Balletic Nlenoufich 6O 800 Damiar 4O 500 Raschid 6O 700 Sir Djiad CORVETTES. Damanhour `(commanded by the s.2cond son of the Pacha) 26 240 Canta 24 200 Djena Bahari, Belemk Djihad 2O 150 Djihad Behar - --- - BRIGS. Chehas Djihad Samendi Djihad Cimsah Wasington lB 1 00 Sacia . 9O 120 Chaindersch S TEA M-V ES S ELS. 9 180 4 120 Nil Genera() Egyptien, pour le service pa:- ticulier du Pacha BO In all, ships of war, five frigates, five corvettes, six brigs, and three steam-vessels. THE TURKISH FLEET AT ALEXANDRIA. THREE-DECKERS. MEN. GUNS. 111ahmoudieh (with the Ad miral's flag) Mossondieh TWO-DECKERS, Fitouisch Mandouhie Bourg zaffar 9O 1,000 Fathie Raoufierie Reei3rifie Nousrahie Sourio Chaadie 6O 850 Elzraman Fad-el eht 7O 900 Nesamie Naahan Bahari M'vian zaffar . 50 700 • Chabal Bahari Nassim zaffar 4O 500 CORVETTE Husain farrar 24 160 BRIGS. Giaour zaffar lO , 80 Djai sara Fege saffir l2 80 In all, 3 three-deckers, 6 two-deckers, 12 frigates, corvette, and 3 brigs. UNIVERSITY OF LONDON. LIST OF CANDIDATES WHO PASSED THE FIRST EXA MINATION FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF MEDICINE,-JULY, 1840. ( Arranged Alphabetically.) FIRST DIVISION. Medical Schools. Barnes, Robert: .. Bartley, R. Trout Hawley.., Bristol Medical School Brush, John Ramsay St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Bucknill, John Charles University College. Carey, John Talbot Dispensary, Dublin. Carlill, John Burford University College. Cooper, Henry Univ. Col. and Middles. Hos. Goodeve, Edward Bristol Medical School. Heaton,', John Deakin University Col. and Leeds. Humphry, George Murray St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Miller, William Allen King's College. Nevins, John Birkbcck Leeds. S Mercers Hospital, and Peter- O'Meara, Thomas I street, Dublin. Parkes, Edmund.. University College. Potter, John Pon ell, Robert 11. Sewell, Charles Brodie University College. Strang, John Douglas Unwin, David University College. Waddy, Jonathan Mason... / St. Thomas's Hospital , and Webb-street. Way, William Wing, Edwin School of Physic in Ireland. SECOND DIVISION. Barnett, Adolphus London Hospital. Bateson Henry Guy's Hospital. Carpenter, Anthony French School of Physic in Ireland. Dodd, Robert Phipps King's College. Dunn, John Travis Leeds and Dublin. Fulford Charles Birmingham. 'Goodfellow, S. Jennings..... St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Hamilton, Edward Padden, John Powell, James R Smith, William Tyler University College. University College. University College. Rayner, William University College. Ridgway, Archibald London Hospital. Sewell, Robert Russell University College. Bristol Medical School. Sparkman, Fred. Robert Sydenham College. Williams, Thoma. Guy's Hospital. LIST OP CANDIDATES WHO OBTAINED HONOURS AT THE FIRST EXAMINATION FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF MEDICINE-JULY, 1840. (Arranged in the order of proficiency.) ANATOMY AND PHYSIOLOGY. Parkes, Edmund University College. Exhibition of 301. a-year for two years, and Gold Medal. Humphry, George Murray St. Bartholomew's Hospital. Gold Medal. CHEMISTRY. Parkes, Edmund University College. Exhibition of 301. a-year for two years, and Gold Medal. MATERIA MEDICA AND PHARMACEUTICAL CHEMISTRY. Parkes, Edmund University College. Gold Medal. EVENING, EDITION! bibition in the Court of Quarter Session, in his (the Learned Judge's) opinion, be had a right to make an amendment, but that should be no matter of complaint to them. The next objection was that the jurat was bad, inasmuch as it s'.ated teat the witnesttes were severally sworn in Court, instead of a jurat being appended to each of the affidavits. This, it was contended,was not a sufficient proof of each and evo7y of the parties having been sworn, and that it was net sufficient to support an indictment for perjury. He had referred to the practice on this subject, and he did not think the objection was sufficient to maketho articles of the peace altogether illegal. Then came the more importart question, which bad been ably commented upon by Ma, Dunn, namely, whether the facts stated in the articles were sufficient to conduce to the - conckision that there was ground for supposing that the defendant would da Miss Coutts bodily harm. Looking at all the cirettn stances set forth, he thought there was abundant ground for entertaining such a suppositien, and he was of opinion that any lady, circumstanced as Miss Coutts had been, could not have acted with more propriety and caution than she had done, and it was his duty to say that Mr. DURP was remanded. Mr. Dunn said all his friends were in the country, and if he were sent back to' prison for two yeoi - s his pitspects would be ruined. He could not find suret ies, but he could enter into his own recognizance to any amount, and pledge his word of honour that he would not further purstur Miss Coutts. Mr. Justice BOSANQUET said he had no power to alter the order of the Court of Quarter 'Session. Mr. Bodkin observed that the defendant had voluntarily embarked ;n this contention, and he should have considered this point before, instead of continuing his base cond uct even that very day before his Lordship. Mr. Dunn said he supposed 'he must rot in gaol, and he might as well cut his throattimmediately he returned . . lie was then removed in the custody of Mr. Kilsby and the turnkeys of the New Prison. INSOLVENT DEBTORS' COURT. LOAN SOCIETIES.—John 'Taylor Bryson, a baker, late of Bell-alley, London-wall, wire qn Tuesday heard on his petition. He was supprted by Mr. Cooke; with whom was Mr. Woodroffe. Tne insolvent had been discharged under the Act, and a bankrupt in 1837, for the same debts, and he had now about fifty creditors in the schedule. Mr. Commissioner Law supposed he hag, got money from loan societies to set him up in business, and he went over the schedule, repeating the names of about a dozen "loan societies," which occasbncd some laughter in Court. _ . The insolvent said two of his sureties had become in solvent, and one of his detaining creditors was an attorney of the Court, to ►whom he had given an undertaking to pay the costs of the case. Independently of the nurner ous loan societies, there were a number of millers, and he had, besides, given an accommodation bill for a friend. Mr. Commissioner Lew told him if the Legislature had not knocked out of the present Act of Parliament a good deal of common sense that was in the former, he should not be in a situation to how- him years, without the consent of his creditors. " And," added the Learned Commissioner, " if millers and flour factors have, after this, any more to do with you it will he their own fault." The COURT remanded him for three months from the vesting order, under the discretionary clause. wESTMINS iER COURT OF RE. QUESTS. CANDLEWICK WARD V. LITTLE BRITAIN.—In this important case the plaintiff sought to recover 7s. for a couple of tickets for a steam-boat excursion to the Nore. The plaintiff having stated his case, the defendant called upon him to prove the delivery of the tickets. .• I took the tickets to Little Britain,'" said a per son in the body of the Court. •" That is where the defendant resides, I presume ?" said a Commissioner. "4 Oh! no, that's the name he's known by among his shopmates," observed the plaintiff._ " Little Britain" was a stout fellow, about six feet twn COMMISSIONER—You see Mr. Britton that the deli very of the tickets can be proved. " Little Britaio"—But I never made use of the tickets. Never went aboard of the steamer at all. COMMISSIONER—Never went on board ! • " No, ask • Candlewick Ward' if I did," said " Little Britain." COMMISSIONER (!auzhing)—Little Britain Candle wick Ward ! Why, what does Candlewick Ward know of the transaction i" It turned out that the plaintiff Ward " did file cot tons" for tallow-chandlers, and that his neighbours lrad prefixed the civic derision of Cantilewiet to his natair. The Court ruled that as there was an absolute sale of the tickets, " Candlewick Ward" was entitled to a verdict against " Little Britain:' LAW IN TELLIGEN CE. MOUSE OF LORDS—THURSDAY. The . House sat to-day to hear appeals. The Pee rs present were the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Thanet, and Earl Manvers. HILL V. PAUL. This case came before their Lordships, upon appeal from the decision of the Court of Session. The ques tion in the case was whether under a trust deed executed by the appellant, in order to secure his creditors, and relieve himself from embarrassments, he conveyed his right to his creditors to the emoluments of an office called the Keeper of the Registers of Sasines, in the Sheriffdom of Renfrew, in the regalities of Glasgow and Paisley, notwithstanding his holding of that office was not adverted to in the deed. On the case coming on before the Court of Session, the Judges of that Court decided that the deed did convey the appal lanes rights to the emoluments of the office in question, and from that decision the present appeal was brought. The LORD ADVOCATE and Mr. K. BRUCE appeared for the appellants, and the ATTORNEY -GENERAL and Mr. ANDERSON were counsel for the re spondents. The arguments not being concluded at four o'clock, were postponed to Monday. JUDGES' CHAMBERS• TDB QUEEN ON THE PRISECUTION OF MISS A. G. BURDETT COUTTS V. R. DUNN, ESQ• 'C A lo i c r. k, R in ic tu ar r d sua D n u c n e n o fi f t t order On of Thursday m r. B os A a N t Q t u e E n T Irish Barrister , wa s brought up a g ain before the Learned Judge at Chambers, to be heard further upon the Habeas Corpus that had issued. i; l s r. Brdett Mr. Bodkin, the Barrt,tcr ; Mr. Humphreys, the Soli citor ; and a gentleman from the o ffi ce of Messrs. Farrar, of Lincoln's Inn-fields aattseonlidceitdoro,nabeecohmalpf accompanied f ie M d Coutts, and Mr. Kirk , Dunn, who was brought front the New Prison in a c oac h, i n t h e cus tody of Mr. Kilsby, the Governor, and two turnkeys. M r . Jones, the Master of the Crown-office, and Mr. Edmunds, the Deputy Clerk of the Peace, were also in te sti ce certiorari B o v atte ndance. i‘ Jones s t a q i which hadt commanding been e n issued t h at e the J u stices of the Peace for the county of Middlesex to re turn instanceof read Mr. h . u into the Court of Queen's Beach, the articles of the peace that had been exhibited by Miss Angela G. Bur dett Coutts against Richard Dunn, Es q. Mr. Jones added that the return thathad been made to the wri • t was that the articles of the peace were annexed. The articles were here handed to the Judge. Mr. Dunn then addressed the Judge at great length and occasionally with great violence, and amidst re peated interruptions. At the conclusion the Learned Judge, without calling upon Mr. Bodkin to make a single obser vation in reply, went through the four objections made to commitment by the defendant, and decided that the . Court of Queen's Bench possessed the power to amend and alter a commitment, and that if the articles of the peace were informal, the Judges were empowered to alter them if they were exhibited in their own Court, and in, this view he was borne out by the Master of the Crown.office, who had informed him that he (Mr. Jones) had seen Lord Denman upon one occasion alter articles of the peace with his own hand. With respect, therefore, to the objections that the articles bad been altered since their ex. lIIISR ASSIZES. (From the Dublin Evening Post.) REGORD COURT, ENNISKILLEN. SEDUCTION.-...GRAHAM V. WYLEY. This was an action for seduction. Mr. Major, Q.C., stated the case. The parties were in humble but re. spectable circumstances. Tile plaintiff was a farrwor, who had a large family of daughters, of whom t he sub ject of the present action was the eldest. Ile had reared his family respectably, and they knew not what sorrow or disgrace was until his eldest daughter mot the defendant, who was•aito a farmer and miler, in com fortable circumstances, and who, by promises of mar riage and other stratagems, succeeded in seducing the young woman, who gave birth-to a child. Margaret Graham, a decent-looking young woman, apparently about twenty-five years of ago, deposed, that the defendant lived in the next townland, and that she knew him fnr several years, but had no particular intimacy with him until one day he met her at Maguire's Bridge, when he brought her into Dunbar's Hotel, and treated her to some punch, and told her that he wanted to marry her, but that he could not do so un less she lived a little while with him first ; that the reason of so many unhappy marriages was people get ting married without knowing each other properly ; she believed him, and wet him in several places afterwards, but when all was over be refused to marry her. Mr. Justice TORRENS—ReaIIy this cannot be called a case of seduetion. I would recommend the with drawal of a juror. This was acceded to on the part of the defendfint, and the unfortunate woman, who spoke in such a low tone of voice that scarcely a word she said cold be heard, almost fainted as she came down from the wit ness box. THE MARKETS. COUNTRY MARKETS. W heat. Barley. Oats. 15eu..a, r0..9.. Per Quarter s. to s. s. s. s. to s. s. to 54 !lath Biandtbrd 70 75 SO 05 30 •; LO Bridport 68 ••••••• Ch ar d CO 74 28 36 28 32 48 54 Gloucester.-- 68 72 42 45 32 38 52 54 Lae' er Guildford 40 46 OS 54 40 44 Newbury 52 73 27 33 28 34 i 47 53 Reading 56 82 22 42 26 35 45 4S Salisbury . '59 77 i 29 34 26 36 44 56 Shirborne 66 72 a) 34 j 26 30 j4A s ept on Mallet 56 76 32 48 31 31 48 36 Uxbridge 37 42 128 32 Warminster 4B 77 24 46 27 33 4e 52 Winchester 64 76 —I 156 63 i3O 38 _3O tl. 34 39 S. ~ 40 44 r,7 40 38 46 0 48 LEEDS CORN MARKET.—JaIy 21. Wheat, Norfolk and Sunlk, 601 b. ,-- York. and Lincoln. 601 b. Barley, Norfolk and Sutlblk , l,ss. to :ISt. ~ --- Yorkshire and Lincolnshire -- Grinding 13eatas - Oats, l'otatce v9a. ma :3.4.0 .rs ---I%lcalolg, For. --(I. to—d Eng. 15%d. to 18361. per :not. Abcl;irg 3Ai. to 40,1. per loin ' DEVIZES CORN MARKET. Per Sack. s. ti. s. d. Per Quarter. a. d. s. d. iirstWlica• •... 37 6to 39 0 Oats.... ......... .... 23 oto SI , 0 ;;econd 34 0 36 0 Beans (per sack)... 22 0 0 mini • 9.3 0 SO 0 Flour (per bag) — 0 "ail 0 rinricy 27 0 34 0 Bread (per ga11.)... 1 0 -- - -- ---- CHELTENHAM MARKETS. Per lb. Per Bushel. s. d. to s. d. - d. to d, Wheat Harley 4 4 5 0 Mutton Oats 4 6 5 0 Veal - 6 7 Beans. - ... 01 7 incase 6 0 6 6 Limb f,... ..... . .7 10 hay 3/.58. to 41. ss. Od. I , ,er tdn. CANTETIBU RI MARKFA'. Wheat, white...—. 728. to :55...—. 01d......... —s. to —s. red—........... 6rs. to 705.....,. (Rd....—. 686. to —s, Barley, Malting --.. 378. to 4:15...—. Grinding.. —s. to —a. Oats , . --. 295. to 345...—. Old---- --s. to —s. 8ean5......................... ON to 425...... Old---- 4SO. to —s. Pease .......--..--....... 445• to -5...,... Grey ..... 40s. to Cs• CHELMSFORD MARKET. Wlteat, White 73 to 77 Oats ..... ..... It cd Barley Chevalier 19 41 Beans, Tick 46 Grinding ~ 3O 34 Brazagan .4r * 442 --- - . A YOUNG HIGHWAYMAN.—At the late as sizes at Chelmsford, a boy, twelve years old, named Charles Alineth, was indicted for assaulting John Dellew upon the Queen's highway, putting him in fear, and taking front his person two sovereigns and twelve shillings ; and the indict ment also charged that the prisoner at the time of the rob bery, struck and beat thuproseeutor. Mr. Wordsworth, who conducted the prosecution, stated the facts of the case, and called the prosecutor, a little boy eight years old, but who, notwithstanding his tender age, gave his evidence in a meat di s tinct and intelligent mann er. He stated that he was in the service j u o l f y, lNl h r i . , Gmlamsstceorckg,aavefahrminear a fi atCvl:Tpeoruinngd note to get, and, on the changed at th eshop elolr. Poynter, a tradesman in the vills,,e, The note was secury placed in a purse, m awl he took it e io outside and rJri, but when silver,uiere Nv h he i c a l - 4 a s w d a i s r a e l e s t o e dp,uatn in d received the purse the ;an dehwahngene it given to the prosecutor, the prisoner was observed st T an , h ,:ng he had got some the ti e littleslio p , boy got apparentlyou t ofw watching i s n h t p w h h e a t w w a s a s go g n o e i . n g prosecutor then proceeded on his way home, and when upon his refusal, the prisoner him , aid hold of him, and took out e f I distance, the prisoner met and told ', hp , to scop; .1, .ter with the purse s t o o m him e and held him Iforcibly, and pulled the purse from him, the money, and returned the remain gs had been taken out of the purse. i I and then ran away. When he p:Jt home, it was found th s >: t j T u h ry e i f , n ri n s n on d er th w e as pr a is ft n e a r e w r ar g d u s u t ty a . k , and a quantity of silver . in his pocket. The i two pounds twelve shillin gs e a n nd at he C w hes aa hn a n en t te w n i n th ed a t n n e: suit of clothes on, I transported ivir.Fseo f r o t r e ten u y e ea , years. new Liberal candidate for 1 Louth, has addressed the _constitlency ; he says, ~ the me i awes introduced by her Majesty s present Government hays generally met with Isis approval." The election is flied for Friday next week, in Hon. lam pre- into tt~tn,