The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1841-08-31 00:00:00

1836, from Mr. E. S. Boult to the defendants, in which the former stated that he had been introduced to the house by Mr. Hudson, of London, and proposing to do business with them on the understanding that they should have half the commission. The letter also contained an assurance that be (Boult) did not intend to do business on his own account, hut merely as agent, and that, in all instances, he would give the defendants the names of his principals it' they wished it. An answer to that letter, from the defendants, was next read, and approving of the proposal, stating that they had much confidence in Mr. Hudson; that there was no necessity for sending the names of the principals, unless in those cases where stamps were required. Another letter was next read from Mr. Boult to the defendants, relative to some business transactions, announcing that he had entered into an arrange ment with Mr. Thomas Addison to become his partner, and that the firm would, for the future, be carried on under the title of Boult and Addison. To this an answer was returned by the defendant, who stated that they had seen M r. Hudson on the subject of the partnership, and he seemed pleased with the arrangement. Other letters were also produced and read, which had passed between the parties,. and showed dealing in shares to a considerable amount. Mr. John Swab, who had been clerk with Messrs. Boult and Addison, was then called, and he proved the dealings of the parties, and that sometimes half commission had been charged, and sometimes the whole, but in the latter instance the half had been taken off afterwards. In cross-examination the witness stated that it was the general custom between broker and broker, in all their tran sactions, to allow each other half the commission, even when no agreement to that effect was entered into. He added that latterly, up to the time of their failure, Boult and Addison had been in the habit of doing business extensively on their own account. Proof of the sale of eleven North Midland Railway shares (the shares in question) by the defendants, and the receipt of the money by them, was then adduced, and also the execution of the transfer of the shares by Mr. Martineau, the plaintiff; Mr. KNOWLES then submitted that the plaintiff had failed to make out his case. The present was an action for money had and received, and there was no proof whatever that the defendants had received any money for the use of the plaintiff. There were no instructions from Mr. Martinean to the de fendants to sell the shares, and any notice from Mr. Marti neau to Messrs. Boult and Addison could not bind the defendants. The learned JUDGE said it had been conceded by the counsel for the plaintiff, that if the transactions between the parties did not establish a partnership there was no case, but they contended that it did, and if so, their notice to Boult and Addison was notice to the defendants. Smith was then called, and he proved that Mr. Martineau had notice of the sale of the shares in question, on the 18th of May, that Boult and Addison did not fail until the 21st of June following, and that during the time the plaintiff had re ceived from Boult and Addison three several sums of £lO5, £l2O, and £2O. In answer• to questions by Mr. Cresswell, the witness stated that Boult and Addison sold other shares for the plaintiff in Leeds, and had received for those £374, but this sum was received two days after the first payment had been made. Mr. KNOWLES addressed the jury for the defendants. He said the proposition of his learned friend was so startling, that if transactions like that were to make persons partners, every broker in the kingdom was in a perilous position, and he could never be certain whether he was solvent or not ; for there was no knowing for what debts he might be liable. He should lay before them the whole of the transactions which had taken place between the parties, and he should show them' that his clients, in resisting that unfounded claim, were act ing fairly and honestly, and had no other desire than that of dealing as honest men with honest men. His learned friend had read a letter from Mr. Boult, in which the latter stated that he did not intend to carry on business on his own ac count, but merely as an agent. However, he had deviated from that prudent course, and had begun to do business on his own account. In that letter it was stated that they were to divide the commission on all orders which one gave to the other. Now he (Mr. Knowles) apprehended that the mean ing of that was this, that all business Boult and Addison did for the defendants they would only charge one-half commis sion, and that all business the latter did for the former a si milar charge only was to be made. He contended that the plaintiff had no remedy at all against the defendants ; that he made Boult and Addison his bankers on the occasion, and that after he had neglected to obtain the money from them, he could not turn round and claim it from the defendants. A discussion then arose as to the propriety of turning the facts into a special case, and at length it was agreed that a verdict should be entered for the plaintiff for £Bl7 195., subject to a special case for the consideration of the court, the facts being taken as they appear on his lordship's notes, and it being agreed that should there be any question on which the jury ought to have given an opinion—such ques tion beingalso left for the consideration of the court. KAr V. BROOKS-TROVER In this case Messrs. Cresswell and Watson were counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr. Cross for the defendant. The action was brought to recover a deefrof some property be longing to the plaintiff, situate in the neighbourhood of Bury. A verdict was returned for the plaintiff, there being no reference to the action, for £6OO, to be reduced to 40s. if the deed be given up within a month. LANE, ASSIGNEE, V. DAVIES AND PARKES. This was an action of trover, the question arising out of the bankruptcy of Richard Riley, and an alleged fraudulent removal of effects. It occupied the court for the remainder of the evening, but the details possess no interest in this locality. SATURDAY LYON V. HAYES. This was a special jury case. The jury having been sworn, Mr. Cresswell, on the part of the plaintiff, said he was happy lo inform them, that this case would not give them nay trouble. It was a question arising out of the affairs of the Northern and Central Bank of England, which had pro duced some very complicated pleadings upon the record, which, if investigated, would give a very great deal of trouble, and end, at last, in a point of law. An arrangement had, therefore, been made, by which it was agreed, that a special verdict should now be entered for the plaintiff, and an in vestigation into the facts made by a gentleman at the bar. The duty of the jury, under these circumstances, would be to find a special verdict for the plaintiff, subject to the award. Mr. DUNDAS, on the part of the defendant, said this was the better course. Mr. CnEsswEtL said it had been agreed to refer the case to his friend Mr. Robinson, and it was proposed that he should have the same power to make amendments in the record as the learned Judge. The JuoGE.—Certainly. Reference to Mr. Robinson, as an arbitrator, to take the evidence and state a special verdict. COBB V. STEWART This was also a special jury case. The declaration stated, that, by a certain memorandum in writing. addressed to the plaintiff, signed by the defendant, and sent to the plaintiff, the plaintiff made an engagement to deliver to the defendant, on or before the 10th of October, twenty-five shares in the London and Birmingham Railway, at £99 premium per share, and that, if the defendant failed to pay for them at the time agreed upon, the plaintiff should be at liberty to resell them, and charge the defendant with the difference between the prices on the day of delivery and the day of sale. Mr. Cresswell and Mr. Crompton conducted the plain tiff's case; Mr. Martin that of the defendant. Mr. CRESSWELL said this was an action in which the plaintiff, Mr. Timothy R. Cobb, sought to recover from the defendant the sum of about £9OO, the difference in the value of twentv-five shares in the London and Birmingham Rail way, on the 10th and 19th of October last year. ,On the 17th of June, 1840, a contract was made between the plaintiff and the defendant, Mr. Stewart, in the presence of Mr. De Ccsta, to deliver and receive the shares named in the declaration on or before the 10th of October. The learned counsel here read the contract. The defendant was not ready to pay them on the lath, and he so informed the plaintiff, asking him to hold them over till the 14th. This was agreed to, and the defendant not paying for them on that day, they were sold on the 19th. The action was to recover £902, the difference in the value of the shares on the 10th and the 19th. Mr. MARTEN, for the defendant, said, his client never attempted to dispute Mr. Cobb's right to recover the dif ference upon these shares ; but he said the plaintiff was not entitled to that which he demanded, but only to that which the plaintiff was ready to pay. The only question for the jury to try Was, what was the amount of the difference which the defendant ought to pay to the plaintiff; but he (the learned counsel) submitted that he ought to pay only the difference between the price on the 10th and the price upon the 14th. Before that time his client found himself unable to pay for them, and he immediately communicated the fact to them, also proposing some terms, which were declined. The defendant requested that the matter might'stand over to the 14th, which was acceded to : this being a departure from the original contract, he contended, that the plaintiff was entitled only to recover the difference in the price on the 14th.. The JUDGE ' in summing up, told the jury that the only question for them to consider was, whether the loss should be calculated as if the shares had been sold upon the 14th, or. as from the actual sale on the 19th. The Jury, after a few minutes conversation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and that the loss should be fixed from the sale upon the 19th : damages, £B5B, the difference between the verdict and the sum claimed being caused by money received in dividends. lIORNBY, CLERK, V. DEAKDEN. This case, after the opening of Mr. Wortley, was referred. The question was as to the minerals under some land belong ing to the plaintiff, at Heywood, near Rochdale. Mr. Cress well appeared for the defendant. OCCLESTON AND OTHERS V. ROONE This was an action to recover the value of 13,000 horn: from the defendants, William and Joseph Boone, dealers it iron and steel, at Sheffield, by the plaintiff, a tanner, at Hoo green, Cheshire. Mr. Cresswell, with whom was Mr. Atherton, appearec for the plaintiffs : Mr. Baines and Mr. Martin for the de fendants. It appeared, that, in 1839, the plaintiffs sent to a person named Winks, who was carrying on business, in Sheffield, as a commission-agent, 13,000 horns. Winks kept these horns till the year for sale. intending to go abroad, he advertised his stock Mr. Mitchell was employed to value it. The defendants. bought the stock, including the by thre t e iie ) n ills of exchange, two of horns, and paid for it which had been taken up by and the third was still running. Some time afterwards Winks became bankrupt, and now the plaintiffs sought to recovertheNmlue of the horns, alleging, that Winks bein g onl y a fa ctor, had no right t o se ll the goods, an d that there was no bo na fide Cl'irleeCted the jury , After hear i n g the evidence, the JUDGE that the only question for their consideration was, whether they were satisfie d that the horns wer e sold by Winks to Roone with the r est of the stock, and wheth er the payment p for the horns an d the rest of the stock was inc luded y i three bills, the amou nt of which was £6OO. T herewas t n h o e question as to whether the d fendants got the horns : the jury would have to consider whether they had paid for them or not. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants. TAYLOR V. TAYLOR AND ANOTHER. This was an action in replevin to recover the value of cer tain cows detained by the defendants, in consequence of their trespassing upon their fields. Ma. Watson and Mr. Hill conducted the plaintiff's case Mr. Knowles and Mr. Wilkins that of the defendants. The defendants justified the taking of the cows, on the in their grounds. The ground that the cattle were trespassing plaintiff answered, that, after and before the taking of the cattle, he tendered the sum of £1 in compensation for the damage done by the trespass, which sum was sufficient. In their replication, the defendants said the sum tendered was not sufficient. A discussion arose as to the right to commence. After some argument, the learned JUDGE decided, that, as the defendants undertook to prove that enough had not been tendered, they ought to commence. Mr. KNOWLES then opened the case. The plaintiff, Tho mas Taylor, kept the farm called Hill's Mount, Butterworth, near Rochdale, in this county, and the defendants kept an adjoining farm. The plaintiff was in the habit of overstock ing his farm with cattle and keeping his fences in bad condi tion, in consequence of which his cattle frequently trespassed upon the defendants fields. On the 26th September last six of the defendants' cows being in one of his fields, the plain tiffs cattle got among them, a fight ensued between them, and, it being a wet day, considerable damage was done. in consequence of this the cattle were impounded by the de fendants, as the plaintiff refused to pay more than £1 for the damage done inasmuch as it amounted to between £2 and £2 10s. The present action was brought to recover the value of the cattle. Evidence was produced to show the amount of the damage done. Mr. Causswuti, then addressed the jury on the part of the defendant, contending, that sufficient had been tendered. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff. lIROCKLEBATIK V. TAYLOR. In this ease Mr. Cresawell and Mr. Crompton appeared for the plaintiffs: Mr. Hoggins and Mr. Cowling for the de fendant. The action was brought to recover compensation in damages for an alleged breach of an agreement which the plaintiff said was made with him, and also the price of his labour in making some plans and specifications. The defen dant is a publican, at Rochdale, and the plaintiff is a car penter. The former intended to build a public-house for himself, upon piece of ground called the Brick Croft, which was in the possession of the plaintiff, who had upon it a saw pit and a quantity of timber. The defendant agreed with him, that, if he would give up the land, he should have the build ing of the house. He did so, and drew out some plans and specifications ; but, afterwards, the defendant refused to fulfil the contract. . ---- --:- ------ -- - - The jury found a verdict for the plaintiff : damages, £l3 lOs FLETCHER AND ANOTHER V. MOTHERSILL The plaintiffs are corn-merchants in Manchester, and the defendant is a carrier between Manchester and Leeds. The action was brought to recover 1:25. ss. 104., the balance of an account for oats supplied. Verdict for the amount claimed. NORTH AND OTHERS V. STOPFORD This was an action to recover the amount of a promissory note, dated 26th March, 1818. The plaintiff was nonsuited, in consequence of the principal witness being an interested party. The Court adjourned at six o'clock MONDAY. VIGNOLLES V. THE RIGHT HON. THOS. LEFROY. This was a special jury case. Mr. Dundas, Mr. Mai tin, and Mr. Watson appeared for the plaintiff; and the case for the defendant was conducted by Mr. Cresswell, Mr. Wort ley, and Mr. Cleasby. _ _ WATSONMr. opened the case. The declaration was for work and labour done by the plaintiff as a civil engineer for the defendant, and also for money paid by the plaintiff for the defendant, upon an account stated. To this the defen - dant pleaded first that he did not promise in the manner and form stated, and second, that, if he did promise, he had paid all the sums of money due to the plaintiff. The plaintiff in his replication said the defendant did not so pay ; and upon these two counts issue was joined. Mr. DUNDAS said he had the honour to attend the court and jury to-day as counsel for Mr. Vignolles, the plaintiff in the action, a gentleman whose name very likely was not un known to some of them as a civil engineer of the highest reputation, a man of great skill in his profession, and a per son of experience in all operations within his province: When he told them that his was the skill and genius that had planned and achieved the North Union Railway, the Mid land Counties Railway, and the Dublin and Kingston Railway, he had given them only a sample of what he had been able to perfo► ; m ; and no doubt it was . in respect of his known and tried abilities that he was called upon to act as engineer in the case they were about to inquire into. Mr. Vignolles was a suitor in this court for a clai,n of between £5OOO and £6OOO due to him for his services as a civil engineer, and for disburse ments and expenses he had been necessarily at in the conduct of the service upon which he was empiciyed. This claim the defendant answered by saying that he had never con . tracted with the plaintiff at „ all, or that if he did contract, he had paid him the full amount of his charges. These were the two issues the jury had to try, namely, whether there was such a contract as the plaintiff set up, and if there was, whether there had been payment to Mr. Vignolles for his services. The defendant in the action was the Right Hon. Thomas Lefroy, a gentleman whose name might also be not unknown to several' of the gentlemen whom he had the ho nour to address. Mr. Lefroy was a gentleman of high dis tinction at the Irish bar; he was member of parliament for the University of Dublin ; he was connected with some of the best pe . ople in Ireland ; a man of property and known respect ability in the county of Longford, of which at the time of these proceedings his son had the honour to be the representative in parliament. The defendant was sued by the plaintiff as the di rector of a railway company ; and he should be able to establish to the entire satisfaction of the jury that such director the de- fendant was in the year 1836, tindthat such director he con- tinned to be ditrirc , the whole of that year,—during all the time, indeed, over which Mr. Vignolles sought to recover a verdict for the services performed by him for the company. The jury would find Mr. Lefroy not only a director, but a very active director, managing with great enterprise and skill, as far as in him lay, the concerns of the company. He did not mean to say that Mr. Lefroy was the only person who could be liable by the contract. Mr. Lefroy was liable as one person who had contracted with the plaintiff'. Mr. Vignolles sought to recover against him as the managing director, the person of whom he had seen a great deal in the course of these proceedings; and if, by their verdict, he re covered against Mr. Lefroy, Mr. Lefroy might have his remedy against his co-partners with him. He had stated that the services performed by Mr. Vignolles were with re gard to a railway company's affairs, and now he would ex plain as clearly and as shortly as he could the whole circum stances of the railway, out of which these transactions arose. In the year 1836 there was a good deal of speculation afloat on the subject of railways. Both in this country and in Ire land many persons, some from public motives, and others from motives of private advantage, conceived plans of rail ways in various puts of the empire. In Ireland there was a very strong feeling that a railway which crossed the centre of the island, in some way or other, would be of great im portance to the interests of the empire, that it would open a most important internal communication for the resources of the country, and afford for commercial operations very great facilities as respected Scotland, England, and the United States of Atterica. Some gentlemen, both in Longford and in the neighbouring counties about 30 or 40 miles from Dub lin, conceived a plan of carrying a central railway from Dublin across the island to Sligo, a distance of 120 or 130 miles. They met together for that purpose in Dublin and formed a provisional committee in the early part of the year 1836; good names being of course of great importance in such works, they appointed patrons; they appointed directors, — men of the first station and respectability in Ireland; they appointed officers, and all the staff that such a concern as a great railway company in Ireland would seem to require; and they advertised their prospectus in the public prints. It occurred to them also that without an engineer the machine would be very incomplete, and accordingly the directors set about to seek for the best engineer they could find, in order that he might be appointed to the office, with a view, as early as possible, to make a survey of the country through which the line was to pass, and to carry the bill of incorporation through parliament. Mr. Lefroy, the defendant, both from his knowledge of business, and from his station and con sideration in the country, as might be expected, took a very great lead in the concerns of the provisional committee. They had in Dublin for their solicitors Messrs. Young, Murdock, and Lea, of Merrion-square, at whose office the provisional committee used to meet, and he (Mr. Dundas) should show that Mr. Lefroy was their chairman upon all those occasions. The solicitors in Dublin had also a partnership in London, and had their offices in New Palace yard, Westminster, near both the houses of parliament. The name of the firm in London was Lea, Murdock, and Co. ;—it was composed of the same gentlemen as the Dublin firm, but in the latter case the name of the last partner was put first. These gentlemen were solicitors to the company both in Dub lin and London. The jury would find that in London Mr. . . Lefroy was repeatedly appointed, and he acted as, chairman. He (Mr. Dundas) had told the jury how important it was, for the interests of the concern, that an engineer should be appointed to it. A gentleman named Walker was first pro posed for the appointment, but afterwards it was decided, very much at the instance of Mr. Lefroy himself, who had conceived very favourable notions of Mr. Vignolles, that Mr. Vignolles's services should be secured for the company, and that an offer of the appointment of engineer should be made forthwith to him. Accordingly, Mr. Lea, acting for the company, had an interview with Mr. Vignolles in the month of June, and communicated to him the wishes of the provi sional committee. Mr. Vignolles required that the offer should be put upon paper, and a letter was given to him dated tl.e 2d June, 1836. The learned counsel then read this letter, which was ddressed to the plaintiff from New Palace Yard by Messrs. Lea, Murdoch, and Co., on behalf of the directors of the Great Central Irish railway. It stated that they sent him the prospectus of the undertaking, con taining the directors' names, and they were desirous of ascer taining if he would undertake, in his capacity of engineer, the management of the line for the directors, so as to be ready for the next session of parliament, the line by Mul lingan to Sligo to be first commenced. In the prospectus, which contained the same names as the advertisements in the papers, the name of the plaintiff was not published to the world, for he was not then appointed ; and he only referred to it to prove the fact that there were eight patrons, names of the greatest respectability, and among the list of directors (who had the power to add to their number) stood first the name of the Right Honourable Thomas Lefroy, of Carne glass, in the county of Longford, of Anthony Lefroy, M.P. for the county of Longford, and of Thomas Lefroy, jun., standing counsel to the company, and son of the present de fendant. Mr. Vignolles having taken proper time to enquire into the respectability of the concern, and as to the parties with whom he was to do business, finding they were persons in whom he had thorough confidence, accepted their retainer. On the 3d June he accepted the office of engineer, and agreed to proceed with the work. On the 4th June he re ceived from Mr. Lefroy a letter in reply to his accepting the appointment, in which the defendant said, " We request you to have a survey made, so as to enable ds to apply to parlia ment for a bill of incorporation." Therefore, there was an appointment on the part of the directors of the plaintiff, and an acceptance of such appointment. Mr. Vignolles set about the business forthwith ; he was at the time engaged in seve ral other undertakings, and had a host of people, assistants and others who were disposed of in different parts of Eng land at the time, but he sent three or four of them to Ire land under the direction of Mr. Nimmo, a young gentleman of the age of 26—a clever man, but who had never acted in dependently for himself, but always under Mr. Vignolles, yet a person whom Mr. Viguolles thought competent to be entrusted with the headship or superiutendance of the men he sent over to Ireland. He gave Mr. Nimmo a small sum of money to carry him across to Ireland, and to commence operations. Mr. Nimmo went across with his people, and about the 13th of June, Mr. Vig nolles was, himself, in Dublin. A provisional committe meeting was held, at which the defendant was in the chair; measures were taken for the survey to be gone on with, and Mr. Vignolles directed his people what they were to do. Of course it was not to be expected that Mr. Vignolles would s iperintend them himself during the whole operations : it was not expected by the directors that he should, for they knew he had other avocations in England; but he left a person competent to superintend them, who always received in struction, and counsel, and direction from him. Mr. Vig nolles came back to this country. On the 18th June, there was a provisional committee meeting in Palace Yard, Lon don, of which, on that occasion, Mr. Lefroy was the chair man. The project was then discussed as a very proper pro ceeding, and, Mss', they would fi n d M r . Lefroy, f rom th e first to last, an activs and influential member of the committee. In the course of the same month, more assistance was sent over to Ireland, by Mr. Vignolles. The work was a very considerable one, and when he was not there, Mr. Vignolles had always one or two persons upon whom he could more immediately rely as men of science in the operations. In July he crossed over to Ireland to examine the work which his assistants had been carrying on, in the examination of the country, meeting of surveyors, taking of levels, and all that was required to be done in forming a line upon which the railway was hereafter to lay. Sometimes there was very great difficulty in forming a line, much more than in other cases. In this particular case, there was a good deal of difficulty arising from the absence of information. The ordnance map was not out at that time ; there were no good local maps to consult, and, with the exception of one or two canals, there were no levels ascertained, so as to save the trouble of a general survey. He (Mr. Dundas) should show that Mr. Lefroy, although in England, always took a very warm interest in the concern in Ireland ; and on the 18th July, he wrote a letter to the plaintiff, who was then in Ireland, ap pointing a m ee ti ng with him in Dublin. The learned counsel read this letter, which was dated from the House of Com mons, and stated that he, (the defendant,) would arrive in Dublin on Friday morning, when he should be happy to meet the plaintiff an d the committee at any hour they would appoint, and requesting a note to be left for him at his house, in Leeson-street, app meeting. The pl a i ntiff rising him of the time and place of was engaged at the time, but he got to Dublin a few days afterwards, and the meeting was held at the office of the solicitors. The grand discussion at that wetting was where would be the proper terminus in Dublin , so as to be most convenient f or this and other lines. There was a good deal of difference in opinion, resp e cting which way the terminus should go ; at last the opinion of the engineer, Mr. Vignolles, prevailed, but others, and amongst them the defendant, entertained a different opinion to him. H e , (Mr. Dundas,) had another letter in his hand from the defendant to Mr. Vignolles, dated the 10th August, to which he called special attention, because it left him without any kind of defence upon the first issue, for it shewed him acting as a director of the company. The learned counsel then read , from Leeson street, this letter, it was dated the 10 th August Dublin ; and addressed to the plaintiff. In this letter, the defendant said that from what he had learned since his arrival in Dublin he was persuaded a terminus at Kilmain ham would not go down with the people there, and therefore he relied upon the skill and industry of the plaintiff to find a better. At all events, he said, he hoped he would be able to find a terminus somewhere more convenient for the Cus tom-house than Kilmainham and other places which were suggested. After this (the learned counsel contended) it was impossible for Mr. Lefroy to say he was not a director of the company, and dealing with Mr. Vignolles as the en gineer to the company. The survey then went on ; and he would now call attention to the work which the parties en gaged in the survey had to perform. The learned counsel then produced a map of the country,' on which he pointed out the three points of the proposed railway—Dublin, Sligo, and Galway. The jury knew very well that in exploring a new country there was much labour in vain ; that it cost just as much labour and pains to investigate the lines you desert as the lines you adopt. In the present case an exa mination of the country was made the whole length to Sligo, as well as the whole length to Galway. On the map the jury would observe three black lines commencing at Dublin, one going to Athlone, another to Kells, and a third ran up to Longford ; these were the lines which were eventually re ported upon as the right ones, and it was for making these lines that Mr. Vignolles sought compensation from the de fendant. In the making of these lines it was quite capable of proof that all the lines which were described upon the map, not continuously but dotted, were also lines which Mr. Vignolles surveyed at one time or other with the view of making the three black lines; they were surveyed and le velled with the greatest care, in order to come to the con clusion as to the best of the three lines which were eventually adopted. There was a great dispute, as he had said, about the terminus, some wishing it to go to the north, and others in a different direction, but at last the opinion of Mr. Vig nolles was received by the committee ; his report was agreed to, and his line was adopted by the committee of manage ment. Before his report was sent in, there was a meeting of the provisional committee in Dublin ; this was in August; the defendant was in the chair, and conducted the business of that meeting. New instructions were sent out, more ❑try was surveyed, and about that time, with a view to business of_ this railway company, an office was taken Mt. Vignolles in Dublin, which_ continued to . be the office of the company till the end of the year, Mr. Vignolles and his assistants transacting their business there. On the 19th September there was another meeting in Dublin, at which Mr. Vignolles' report was handed in and read. That report was adopted, and then nothing remained to be done after the lines had been agreed to, but such necessary pre parations for the clerk of the peace's office and the houses of parliament as were required by law. On the 21st Sept. another meeting of the provisional committee was held, to the proceedings of which he begged to call attention, be cause it had been suggested that from something which arose at that meeting, something like a defence to this action would arise ; but he would submit that nothing happened at that meeting which was not entirely consistent with M. Vig nolles' case. He had already mentioned that Mr. Vig nolles had several employments of his own, which he was carrying on in Etigla - nd. At that time there was a notion in Ireland of what did eventually take place, viz., that a royal commission would go to Ireland for the purpose of regulating railways in that country. Mr. Vig .. .aolfes was very anxious to beeoute the engineer to the royal commissioners, but it was conceived by him mid by some members of the provisional committee, among whom was, as he should show, Mr. Lefroy himself, that it would be very much to the advantage of the railway company if he was no lodger to appear to the world as engineer to the Central Irish Railway Coinpany, but that he should be permitted, giving the y mug gentleman, Ninuno, his assistance, to become en- gineer to the royal commissioners. Mr. Lefroy considered it might be of great advantage to their railway to have a per son at head quarters of such importance as Mr. Vignolles ; but it was expressly agreed at the same meeting that though Mr. Nimmo was to be ostensible engineer, his proceedings were still to be taken under the advice and assistance of Mr. Vignolles. Mr. Nimmo never having had any independent occupation in his life before, and too young to be entrusted with so vast a concern upon his own footing, was to look to Mr. Vignolles for advice, and receive it from him as be fore. There could pot be a doubt—not only that such was the understanding of the parties, but that such was their con duct. In point of fact Mr. Vignolles was no longer engineer to the company lay name, but he was still to give the com pany the benefit of his assistance in carrying on the work. He should shew the jury that in October:Mi . . Vignolles was consulted upon the work just as he was before ; his office in Dublin was open to Mr. Nimmo and the other parties just as it was before; in truth, except in the mere name there was no real difference in the relation of Mr. Vignolles to this rail way after the 21st of September than there was before. The report having been received, read, and adopted, the real work of the engineer was completed. All that had to be done afterwards was to go over the lines again, to ascertain them accurately, to prepare plans and sections, and books of reference for , the houses of parliament and clerks of the peace. They would find that Mr. Vignolles went to Ireland after this, that h e did b us i ness w ith Mr. Nimmo, who applied to him for counsel and advice, and he should be able to show by a very exten s i ve corres pondence which subsisted between Nimmoand Vignolles, that Nimmo did from the first to the last communicate upon the subject of this railway with Vig nolles. It was a great misfortune for his client (Mr. Vig nolles) that Mr. Nimmo died in the early part of the year 1839. If Mr. Nimmo had been now alive, the jury would have had an opportunity of knowing from him whether there was anything in the suggestion that he (Nimmo) was acting substantially for himself, and not as an inferior officer for Mr. Vignolles. The line being thus re ported on, the work was completed about the end of the year; no fault was found with it, anti the only remaining question was, whether the work should be paid for. The question was, whether or not the plaintiff could establish to the satisfaction of the jury that Mr. Lefroy was one of the directors who were bound to make good the claims made upon him by the engineer. It became necessary after the work was completed to make the lodgments with the clerk of the peace, and with the houses of parliament. All that was duly done. The maps, sections, and books of reference gtve a great deal of trouble to the engineer; they were all duly lodged, and every thing was done proper for the car rying through of a bill in. parliament. There was a charge by Mr. Vignolles of some money for copies of the books and sections for the royal commission ; that he (Mr. Dundas) was in a condition to prove was done at the express desire of the committee, with a view to make the royal corn missiouers acquainted with this railway, in order that the line might have a good chance of being adopted by them. There was afterwards also, with a view to introduce a fresh bill into the Commons, another lodgment with the houses of parliament, of plans, with a view to the session of 1837-8, which was done at the expense of Mr. Vignolles. He had now, he believed, stated, very much in outline, but he hoped simply and clearly enough, the general features of this case. It would be necessary for him to show, by evidence, the de tails of the business he performed ; to prove that this was well performed and reasonably charged for. The question, after all, would turn upon this, whether or no these works were in fact done by Mr. Vignolles, and whether the price he put upon them was sufficient. With regard to that he should call before the jury an engineer or two of acknowledged talent, who would tell them that the charge of £4O per mile upon 1261 miles (for such was the length of the three lines marked black in the map) was a reasonable charge to be made for such business. Altogether the amount came to about £5060, and they would find by the evidence that this was a reasonable charge. The distance was 1261 miles, which was a longer line than any we had in England. The distance from London to Birmingham was 112 or 114 miles, and he was not aware of any longer line ; and this was a line of 1261 miles, which was all that had been reported upon. He had called the at tention of the jury a little while ago to the fact that not only when you made 1261 miles were you entitled to charge, but you were also for the work and labour done upon the other lines. He understood that 380 miles were actually surveyed; but it was for only 1262 miles that his client sought to charge. There was a plea of payment upon the record, but he was at a loss to understand what Mr. Lefroy meant by a plea of payment. The only money ever actually paid to Mr. Vig nolles was the sum of £5OO, which was put to his credit when first he went to Dublin in June, 1836, to commence operations. No other money was paid to him, certainly not before the month of September, when the transactions with regard to Mr. Nimmo took place. If Mr. Nimmo had re ceived any money, as the agent of Mr. Vignolles, as well for that as for the £5OO, would Mr. Vignolles give the de fendant credit, for he did not want sixpence more than ex penses out of pocket, and what he was entitled to as any other man of science, to have payment made to him of his just debt; therefore when he saw what case was made out upon the other side, he would tell the jury how much Mr. Vignolles allowed on account of payment, besides the £5OO wherewith he first went to Dublin. He begged the jury to keep their attention upon these two points—whether, in the first place, a case was made out against Mr. Lefroy, as the contractor with the plaintiff, because if he did go he should be entitled to their verdict upon the first issue. They must keep in mind also this, whether they, on the other hand, proved payment to Mr. Vignolles with regard to time and labour, surveys and expenses ; for if they made their case good upon that, they would be entitled to a verdict ; but as he was instructed, they could not make good this part of their case—that Mr. Vignolles had a claim upon the company of much more amount than that which had been paid. It was that claim which he should call witnesses to prove, and if lie did so to the satisfaction of the jury, he should claim their verdict upon the part of his client, Mr. Vignolles. Witnesses were then called, whose testimony extended to very considerable length, in support of the statement made by the learned counsel. They consisted of Mr. Lea, the London partner iu the house of Young, Murdoch and Le a ; Mr. Lea's brother : a number of engineers, pupils and as sistants to the plaintiff, who proved the surveys made ; Mr. Francis Giles (assistant to Mr. Rennie), and Mr. Brunel (engineer to the Great Western Railway), who proved that the charges of the plaintiff, £4O a mile, including all charges. were at that time perfectly reasonable, and that the witnesses who had been examined were competent to execute the work undertaken by the plaintiff. Mr. DUNDAS then proposed to put in the letters which had passed between Mr. Nimmo and the plaintiff upon the subject of this railway, upon the principle that the corres pondence was part of the facts of the case. Mr. CRESSWELL objected; and the JUDGE said he should reject the letters, but take a note of their having been ten dered. Mr. DUNDAS said this was the plaintiff's case. Mr. CRESSWELL then submitted that there was no evi dence of any contract having been entered into by the defen dant with the plaintiff. It appeared that this was an inchoate speculation only, and that when the prospectus was put forth, no shares were allotted, and no company existing. Mr. Lefroy, therefore, was not at that time a partner in any co-partnership, for none at that time existed. Any engage ment made by any person at that time was clearly with a view to some prospective arrangement with regard to the consti tution of a company, but when it was constituted by allot ment of shares, Mr. Lefroy did not take any. All these facts distinctly appeared ; and according to the decision of the Court of Common Pleas in the case of Fox v. Clifton, and of the Queen's Bench, in the case of Brown v. Freath, the fact of Mr. Lefroy having allowed his name to appear as a provisional director did not affect him so as to render him liable. It was held in those cases, that where a party actually signed the prospectus with his own hands, yet, as he took no shares, he was not liable. He apprehended, therefore, that this case fell short of what in the cases cited was held requi site to make a party liable, and that there was no evidence of any contract by Mr. Lefroy, or of any person having con tracted for him. Mr. DuNDAS contended that there was evidence sufficient for the case to go before the jury. The JUDGE decided that there was a case to go before the jury, but added that he would take a note of the objection. Mr. CRESSWELL then addressed the jury on the part of the defendant. After the long and tedious inquiry as to dates and figures in which they had been involved, he could hardly expect to receive a very lively degree of attention ; but he was sure, in behalf of Mr. Lefroy, he should not ap peal in vain to gentlemen to give him their most anxious attention whilst he pointed out the perilous position in which he and others would be placed if such a claim as the pre sent could be enforced. He trusted he should be able to show that Mr. Vignolles neither in law nor justice, neither morally nor equitably, had any claim whatever upon Mr. Lefroy. What would be the position of every person in the situation of Mr. Lefrov, if he, in 1841, was to have enforced against him a demand of £5OOO on a supposed contract made by him in 1836? What would be the position of every mem of parliament whose constituents, neighbours or friends, taking an interest in any public question prevailed upon him to give them assistance in promoting the origin of a scheme, if he was to be rendered liable by such assistance, to the whole expense of following it out, although when it came to the point of parties embarking in it he neither became an actual partner, nor could even make one farthing of profit by it ? Because at the instance of those lie represented he had taken some part in originating the scheme, and plying it before the eyes of the public, was he to be held liable as a partner? It was distinctly in evidence that as soon as the shares were allotted, and they were allotted be fore any expenses were incurred, it became manifest that Mr. Lefroy was not about to embark in the scheme as a share holder, that he took no interest in it as a partner. A partner- ship was constituted but he took no part in it. His learned friend said that in as much 9s he assisted with his advice and counsel the constitution of the company he was a partner. What was it, now, that Mr. Lefroy had done ? There were some preliminary discussions as to forming a line of rail way from Dublin to the western side of Ireland, and a certain number of gentlemen in Ireland consented to give, some their names and some their services, to assist in bring ing the scheme before public attention. Accordingly, there was a prospectus put out, and his learned friend deduced from that prospectus this monstrous consequence that every gen gentleman who allowed his name to zo before the public as a party favouring the scheme was to be responsible for the ex penses incurred in the prosecution of it, not for one session of parliament only, but for many, not for the first set of plans deposited in 1836 and in 1837, but for those deposited in 1838 ! and if this was to be the case, why not for 1839 and 1840 ? That was what his learned friend propounded as the ground why Mr. Lefroy should be bound to pay £5,000. It would, he thought, require but little argument to satisfy the jury that in point of fact there was no contract between Mr. Lefroy and the plaintiff; but before he proceeded to discuss that part of the case he would point out the simple rules of law by which the liability of one party to another was go verned and ascertained in questions of this sort. The learned counsel then gave his view of the law of contracts, and con tended that according to its doctrines there was no partner ship in the present case, and that the mere fact of allowing their names to appear in the newspapers as provisionalidirec tors did not give the authority to act for another. So strong was this• principle laid down in law, that even with regard to the committee of a club it was decided that one mem ber of the committee of a club could not bind another by an order given in his absence, because they were not part ners. He mentioned this, because in a particular case which he could name, a jury twice gave a verdict, finding for the plaintiff, against the committee of a club. The court, how ever, said distinctly there was no original authority, and twice did they send the case back because the jury had not found according to law. What evidence was there to show that Mr. Lefroy ever contracted with the plaintiff? Simply that upon several occasions Mr. Lefroy attended meetings of the provisional committee, and assisted them with his know ledge and advice. His learned friend tried to make these attendances a proof that he was contracting, and that he had embarked in the scheme, but what proof was there of that Why, this single proof, that on the 18th of June. when the shares were allotted, Mr. Lefroy came to assist them, but that he did not take any. The facts of his being there when the shares were allotted, and declining to become a share holder, completely annulled all the effect that might other wise be attributed to his" subsequent attendances. The learned counsel then proceeded to comment upon the two letters from the defendant to the plaintiff, contending that from the first to the last they proved that the defendant was never a shareholder or a participator in the profit and - • - loss of the scheme, anti that 111 x. Vignolles knew that it was so. He next proceeded to read and comment upon various points in the prospectus, urging that the general foundation on which the speculation rested, was a desire on the part of the solicitors to obtain the law clerkship to the company ; and on the part of the plaintiff to obtain the en gineership, and that they embarked in it on the faith of their obtaining the required deposit of £1 per share, whichin 40,000 shares would produce £40,000. The prospectus, the learned counsel observed, stated that no shareholder should be liable for more than the amount of his shares. Suppose Mr. Lefroy had taken fifty shares. That would have rendered him liable to .1;500 and no more ; but having taken no shares at all, he was said to be liable to £5,000! - He appealed to the jury whether that was consistent with justice. He now came to another part of the case, of much importance to Mr. Lefroy, because his learned friend had attributed that to Mr. Lefroy which he thought would he most discreditable to him if his learned friend was right. His learned friend had suggested that the royal commission having issued to inves tigate the subject of railways in Ireland, Mr. Vignolles made a sham resignation of his office of engineer to this specula tion, for the purpose of being employed by the government commissioners ; that Mr. Lefroy connived at that sham re signation, in order that the company might continue to have the benefit of Mr. Vignolle's services, when he was serving the royal commissioners, who would be seduced into sup posing that they had an independent man, whereas they had only the friend and employe of this provisional committee. He (Mr. Cresswell) was shocked at hearing such a thing against Mr. Lefroy—a gentleman who stood in the highest station in which any gentleman could stand at the Irish bar. The evidence, however, did not bring it home to Mr. Lefroy that he was engaged in any such dishonourable transaction ; bnt he (Mr. Cresswell) might say:that Mr. Vignolles, as to every thing that passed after the 26th of September, had put himself out of court, because he herd the office of engineer to the royal commissioners, who would not have had him had they known it was otherwise. He had had the benefit of that appointment under the royal commissioners, and now he claimed to be paid as the engineer of this company for the whole period! Mr. Vignolles could not make out his con tract with Mr. Lefroy, but supposing that he could, the fact of his having at the same time entered into an engagement with the royal commissioners would at once give judgment against him. He (the learned counsel) had before him the accounts of the royal commissioners, by which it appeared that for being employed by them Mr. Vignolles received no less a sum than £6,400, yet now he claimed from Mr. Lefroy the price of his iniquity. He could not do that by law. The whole of this might be imputed to Mr. Vignolles, but he (Mr. Cresswell) would prove that not one syllable of it could be imputed to Mr. Lefroy. The learned counsel then proceeded to state that the plaintiff having been appointed one of the engineers to the Railway Commissioners, re signed his situation as engineer to the Great Central Rail way Company, who, on his strong recommendations, ap pointed Mr. Nimino to succeed him. From this period all the cheques, and documents, reports, and even the . . )arliamentry plans were signed by Mr. Nimmo. In 1838, qr. Vignolles asked permission from the royal commissioners ;0 accept the office of engineer to the company, and they ;ranted it, because his services were ended. This was a dis- Einct recognition that he was not the engineer to the company. As a matter of law, if Mr..Vignolles undertook to the govern ment commissioners to resign his office of engineer of the railway, yet held it in the name of Mr. Nimino, he could not recover for the work so performed. The learned counsel assuring that a contract was made with Mr. Lefroy, and that the plaintiff's engagement with the royal commissioners did not prohibit him from engaging with the company, then pro ceeded to shew from the plaintiff's own admission, and from cheques signed by Nimmo, that only £3400 remains due to him . ; and whilst he had charged at the rate of £4O a mile to the railway company, he had charged the royal commissioners only £l6 a mile. The learned gentleman, after a recapitula tion of the various points upon which he rested his case, called upon the jury to protect his client against what he could not avoid considering a very unjust demand. Sir James Murray, M.D., Mr. Healey, Lieut. Colonel H. D. Jones, of the Engine ers , th en g ave evidence in confirma tion of the defendants case. The receipts of Nimmo for monies paied to him were also put in and read. The de fendants case here closed. Mr. DUNDAS replied in a very powerful address. He said he came before the jury with unabated confidence to claim a verdict for Mr. Vignolles, for he was satisfied that the cause of justice and morality would be just as well served by finding their verdict for him; as by finding it for his more wealthy and more distinguished antagonist. The line of de fence which lie had taken was as unworthy Mr. Lefroy as the instructions he had given to his counsel (for it was only upon his instructions that Mr. Cresswell had acted), to charge upon the plaintiff and upon the solicitors to his un dertaking, no less ari offence than that of having been guilty of a foul collusion, in getting up the whole of this business. Very handsome conduct this in a man of Mr. Lefroy's station and character. The Learned JUDGE then asked the jury (it being half past seven) whether they we re w illi ng t o procee d w ith t h e c ase this evening, as it was not improbable that with his sum ming up and the consideration of their verdict it would last till a late Inpr? , The jury intimated that th ey wou ld pre f er an a dj ournment till nine o'clock in the morning. The JUDGE immediately acquiesces'_, and the case was ac cordingly adjourned. There remain only two other cases to be disposed of, both of which, it is expected, will be disposed of before evening. THE FINE ARTS THREE PAINTINGS BY MR. MARTIN, UNION-ROOMS. Three paintings by M r. J. Martin are now exhibiting at the Union rooms, Slater -street. The subjects are, " Pan demonium," " The Bowers of Bliss," and " The Deluge." Like all Mr. Martin's works, they exhibit a vigour of ima gination, a brilliancy of fancy and wildness, freedom and thought, that at once stamp them with the true impress of genius. No common painter is Mr. Martin ; he is the artist of an age—a Milton on canvas ; and we have al wa y s thought, on looking at his works, th a t a century hence th e possessors of any of them will be co ns id ere d to h o ld rare productions, and worth their weight in gold. The awful subject of the deluge has been frequently made available by the painter, b o th i n o ld en an d modern times. Mr. Martin has painted it three times. One picture was called " The Eve of the Deluge"—the second, " The Sub siding of the Deluge"—and the third is that we have now the pleasure and gratification to inspect. In it the painter has endeavoured—and we consider he has succeeded in so doing—to convey to the eye and mind of the spectator the progress of the mighty deluge. He has shown us the tor rents pouring from the murky and storm-driven clouds— meeting, as it were, the currents welling up from the bosom of the disordered earth. To the left is a fall of waters, a perfect Niagara, which appears to sweep myriads of people into the yawning gulph. To the right is the lightning rend ing a rock, the fragments falling in immense masses. In the distance, which is admirably arranged, the flood is seen pre vailing in all directions ; in the foreground, upon a rock, are seen, seated or lying prostrate, in all the various phases of despair, the wretched families of the earth, whose impendi ng fate no power can avert. Remorse, terror, and horror ap pear to reign in the various countenances, presenting a ter rific and awful spectacle. In a deep cavern the eyes of mon strous antediluvian creatures appear crouching in the extre mity of their fear. In the midst of the crowds of people may be seen mammoth and behemoth,_ addi ng t o t h e aw f u l scene by their piercing cries. The idea of placing the ark on a rock, midway between the flood and the top of the pic ture, where Ararat is seen through the bright clouds, is ex tremely fine and poetical, as it shows at once the height the waters must rise before it can rest on that high mountain. The details of this great picture are wonderfully painted. The sun, moon, and comet are extraordinary portions of the work. the sun especially. On examination it appears like a blazing opaque and luminous body. The lurid glare it throws around is awfully sublime. The whole picture is painted with great care. There is a brilliant and mellow tone of colour about th e g rou p s i n the middle ground, that is very striking. The light through out i s f i nely distr ib uted —the shadows deep and most effective. In fine, this is a wonderful picture, and might alone r en d er the artist immor tal. w e shall notice, in strong conrast to The next painting picture called the " Bowers of t Bliss." this, is a fairy-land In the foreground a most exquisite un d u l at i ng country i s seen, composed of fores t and glade, w i t h a most pure an d sunshiny light thrown li en it. Here are sea t e d groups o f happy spirits, two of which, with gorgeous wings, appear on their way to meet another bright creature, which we may suppose to have flown from the aerial cities we see shadowing in the atmospheric distance. The background is occupied by a most pellucid and snakelike river—a noble cliff, covered on the top with herbage, overhanging it a t i ts em b ouc h ure; while far away to the lef t the beautiful landscape extends. This most enchanting i picture s just suc h an one as we might see in our dreams, and which Leigh Hunt's sweet pen only could describe, to convey an idea of it to a distant reader. It is the most vivid embodiment of an imaginative scene we ever beheld. The colours are of a sweet tone, and of the most harmonious tints. Shadows there are none, to be called so; they are such clear obscures, that they seem but faint shades of shadows. The third picture is an awful subject, taken from Milton, representing Satan mustering his armies before the walls of Pandemonium. This picture must be seen—we will not de scribe it now, but conclude with recommending all lovers of art to see Mr. Martin's pictures. If they are not pleased, they will be fastidious indeed. SANDWICH.—Sir T. Troubridge, a Whig, is about to vacate his seat for this borough. A staunch conservative will be brought, and it is not expected the radicals will offer any opposition. PROTESTANT ASSOCIATION A meeting of the Christ Church Branch of the Liverpool Operative Protestant Association was held last Wednesday evening, in the Music Hall, Bold-street, the Rev. George Mansfield, curate of Christ Church, in the chair. Having opened the meeting with prayer, the reverend chair- to account for his bei❑ announced to preside on the occa sion by the - absence of their much-beloved friend, the Rev. Fielding Ould, who would otherwise have readily occupied the position which he (Mr. M.) then filled. (Cheers.) He would here, he observed, take the opportunity of vindicating Mr. Ould from some imputations which had been cast upon him recently by a journal of this town. It was known that Mr. Ouid was now at Coleraine, in Ireland, of which place he was a native, and had made a speech at a dinner given to celebrate the return of the member for Coleraine, in which he was reported to have said, that Lord Brougham was once returned for Liverpool, and much censure had been unjustly cast upon him for having so spoken. Now, he held in his hand a titivate letter from Mr. Ould, in which he thus wrote respecting the observations contained in the paper alluded to : " I have seen the Mercury. * * * * The newspaper report of my speech is full of mistakes—con taining many things I never said, and omitting much that I did say. The whole account of the dinner, and speeches, and all was extremely defective, as might be expected, from the reporter being seated in a crowded and noisy room. The cheering was tremendous while I was speaking, that it was quite impossible for the reporter to hear. I never said that Lord Brougham was returned for Liverpool. I was merely alluding to the radical feeling of the constituency during the great contests between Brougham and Canning, and Ewart and Denison, and contrasting this with the present conserva tive spirit, which made Sandon and Cresswell, in 1837, and still more in, 1841, " the popular candidates," which was never the case before ; and this I ascribed to the legitimate influence of the clergy," &c. He would not then at greater length trespass upon their time, but would call at once upon Mr. Lord to address them. (Cheers.) Mr. LORD said, the reverend chairman had well observed that their objects were not of a party nature. It was with principles, and not with men, they had to deal. It was to maintain, unimpaired, the Protestant institutions of this country in church and state, for which they were now con tending. (Cheers.) And was not this, he would ask, an object worth contending for? Were no attacks made ,upon our institutions? Did we not see ourselves to be encom passed with dangers? and was it not their duty to defend themselves from those attacks—to ward off those dangers— and to show their readiness and determination to support, and to uphold those institutions which they valued dearer than their lives? (Hear, hear, and great cheering.) It was our privilege to be a Christian people—to enjoy those blessings which a pure and reformed faith had given us. The Bible was a part of the law of the land. It was the basis upon which rested heretofore the enactments of our legisla ture. Contrary to its precepts no law should be enacted, least of all should any provisions be made that could tend to compromise or to violate that law. (Cheers.) In private and in public life this principle should he respected, and it became all, whether in the more humble or the more exalted walks of life, to testify their regard-and obedience to this law. (Cheers.) It was by acting upon these principles that our nation had been so signally blessed, and had risen to that high and palmy state she had so long enjoyed among the na tions of the world ; and the more fully and entirely a like course was adhered to, the greater reason was there to ex pect an enlarged and an increased blessing descending upon us and our proceedings. It was with pain, therefore, he had read in one of the leading journals of the day, that those who are regarded as the leaders of the conservative party, and are looking forward to be the confidential advisers of the crown, had made use of Sunday* as the only, or best, or most conve nient day, on which to arrange the course of their future po licy, and the line to be adopted with reference to proposing amendments to the address in reply to her most gracious Majesty's speech. This, he repeated, he was grieved to see. How, he would ask, could earthly legislators expect that their laws should be obeyed, when they set the example of impugning and disobeying the Divine laws. (Hear, hear.) If those laws, which had a higher sanction than any of mere human enactment, were to be set aside at the mere conveni ence of parties, it could not well be otherwise than that mere human laws and institutions would be held light by others. Any attempt, therefore, by a professedly Christian nation to legislate in defiance or forgetfulness of Him " by whom alone Kings reign, and Princes decree justice," would bring a blight upon the policy of that nation, and tend to alienate from it the favour and protection of Him without whose blessing all their laws, however good they might appear, and all their policy, however expedient it might be deemed, would be found absolutely inefficient to attain those great and good ends they might have in view. (Great cheering.) Mr. Lord then passed on to other points, and adverted to the ill-timed, and injudicious he might say unprincipled liberality with which those who called themselves protestants were to be found voluntarily giving their subscriptions and donations to support and disseminate the errors of Po pery. He asked, did they who so acted, expect a like return ? Was it to be imagined that when the Roman Catholics should have acquired that power after which they are now seeking—if, by our own culpable neglect, our apa thy, and our indifference, they ever should acquire it—was it then to be supposed that they would extend to us the same liberality which we had conceded to them ? (Cries of " No, no.") They had rightly answered, no ; but he believed there were many who would have given a very different re ply. It was for this very reason they had found their exer tions so much required. It was because they believed, and knew, that there were erroneous opinions entertained re specting the real principles, the tendency, and the objects of Popery, that the Protestant Association had felt itself com pelled to make those exertions which it had.made. They happily, the men of Liverpool, did not so much require in formation upon these subjects. Thanks to the exertions of the clergy of this town, and their own conduct under their rev. president, Mr. M`Neile. (Vehement cheering.) They had shown that they were at once alive to the dangerous tendency of Popery, as affecting their rights as freemen and as Christians, and resolved to exert themselves to the ut most, to dissipate the ignorance which yet prevailed among many of their own class, and to protect their native land from the evils but too justly to be apprehended, should Po pery ever gain that ascendancy after which she is struggling. (Cheers.) But it might be asked, what good are these asso ciations doing, and how are they effecting it ? To this he would briefly reply by reading a statement whicit had been put into his hand a short time before his coming to this as sembly, from which It would he perceived, that it was not by meetings and lectures alone that they were working. These were excellent modes of occasionally advocating the cause but they had a machinery that worked more silently, thouih not less efficiently, aiding them in their endeavours to elicit and to keep alive an interest and a right feeling upon these important subjects. They had their magazines, their pamphlets, their petitions from time to time, and thus a practical result from their labours. But more than this, they had at the present time, in Liverpool alone, between 30 and 40 tract distributors, to whose constant, zealous, and self-denying exertions they were indebted for much of the good which had already been affected, and to which they looked forward for a yet greater degree of success. (Cheers.) Fourteen hundred families had been visited, and supplied with tracts weekly. They had 4,000 readers of tracts weekly ; and 70,000 tracts, by the instrumentality of these men, changed hands yearly. This, he thought, was doing great things. They were men, he said, not ashamed of their honest vocations—happy in the position of life in which Providence had placed them—content in the sweat of their brow to earn their daily bread, and that their own hands should minister to their necessities. But they were not satisfied with this alone. (Hear, hear.) They knew, as Christian men, that there was something far more worth caring for, and a meat to be laboured after which " endureth to everlasting life." (Vehement cheering.) Yes, they knew tt,—he was glad to see they felt it, and were led to seek for that happiness which pure religion only can bestow, which spreads its benign influence over the daily walks of life, and shall endure when the fleeting shadows of time shall be no more. (Vehement cheering.) They could not, therefore, he was well aware, betray this religion themselves, nor see it betrayed by others. They could not see it endangered, with out rushing forward to its de,ence, and had, therefore, formed themselves into these societies, had held meetings, lectures, and distributed pamphlets, tracts, &c., &c. But all this entailed upon them a greater expenditure of time and money, than it was in the power of every one to bestow. Each one could do something. Of those he was then addressing many could, many had assisted with their time and labour, many had assisted, and he trusted more would yet assist with their contributions. If those who had leisure gave time, and those who had wealth gave money, matters would proceed with a yet greater degree of success. It was with pain he had witnessed application made to the committee only the other day for more tracts, at a time when they had it not in their power to make any adequate grant for the purpose, and he trusted that, while many of the operatives classes Were found thus ready to deny them selves for the sake of benefitting others, those whom Providence had blessed with a greater degree of wealth, would sympathise with them in their exertions for the common good, and so far assist them with funds as to enable them to carry out their operations. (Hear, hear, hear, and loud cheers.) After reading a few extracts from Popish periodicals. shewing the tendency of Popish principles, he proceeded to detail at great length the nature and objects of the Riband conspiracy —a conspiracy in which men were bound together, by secret and illegal oaths, for the purpose of intimidating juries —preventing the due execution of the laws —rooting out Protestantism and Protestants from the country—preventing the exercise of the rights of property, and seeking the dismemberment of the empire. (Hear, hear.) He believed that never before, in any age or country, had there existed a conspiracy such as this, so extensively ramified, under so complete, yet myste rious an organization and controul. Some idea might be formed of it from the fact that all Protestants were carefully excluded—as men who were associated for such lawless pur poses could entrust their dreadful secrets to none but those of the Romish faith—lest anything being prematurely di vulged, their plots might be marred—their plans discomfited —and timely precautions taken, by Protestants, to prevent the enactment of those cruelties which these conspirators against the laws of the land—the peace of society—the inte grity of the empire —and the Protestant institutions of our country—were prepared to perpetrate. When a system such as this—a conspiracy formed for purposes so frightful was known to exist—when, moreover, members of the same body were in England—he asked, did it not become Protestants to be upon their guard ? Were we to imagine that the possession of liberty and pure religion was a guarantee for its continuance ? Did they not know the principles of Popery to be unchanged—that the same com plicated treachery, perfidy, and cruelty were still her's ? the same desire of aggrandizement? the same thirst for power ? the same determination to attain supremacy? And should we vainly seek to conciliate by concessions? Should we fondly hope to disarm her of the hostility she always bore to Protestantism, by giving her the power of destroying it ? (Cries of " No, no.") He believed that it was only need ful to inform the Protestant portion of the community of the unchanged nature of Popery, and its present machinations against us, in order to lead them to imitate the conduct of their forefathers in resisting all further concessions, however loudly they might be clamoured for, and however some might deem it expedient that they should be made. (Hear and cheers.) After going into this subject at greater length than our columns enable us to report, Mr. Lord concluded his address amid loud and continued cheering. A vote of thanks having been moved, and put by the chair, the meeting con cluded by singing the doxology. * This has been since contradicted. No such meeting took place on Sunday. ST. HELENS.—A lecture was delivered in the Town-hall last Tuesday evening, by James Lord, Esq., one of the secretaries to the Parent Association, on the nature of the education given at Maynooth College, and its effects on Ireland. The lecture was numerously and respectably at tended, and those present seemed to take a deep and lively interest in the proceedings. It happening to be St. Bartho lomew's day, Mr. Lord was led to enter at great length into the intolerant and persecuting nature of Popish principles, and distributed several impressions of a medal, which had been struck in the mint at Rome by order of the Pope, to commemorate that atrocious and unparalleled butchery. BURNING OF THE SHIP DUKE OF REICHSTADT, AND Loss OF LlFE.—Accounts have been received in London of the total destruction, by fire, of the ship Duke of Reichstadt, a tine vessel, 400 tons burden, belonging to Alexandria, Master Captain Marteo, with the loss of one of her crew, on the night of Sunday fortnight, near the Mount of Christ, an island in the Adriatic, while On her voyage with a rich cargo and several passengers to Venice, and thence to England. The loss is supposed to be £6OOO. THE QUEEN versus QUAILE Much misapprehension appears to exist as to the facts of this case, and as it seems the radicals are desirous of throw ing every sort of calumny on the proceedings which it has Conservatives to ho professional gentleman employed by Mr Shand, a succinct narrative of the facts from the day of the election to the period when judgment of "ous ter" was pronounced by the Court of Queen's Bench. We agree with a contemporary, that the public ought to be made acquainted with the circumstances of this affair, but it was doubtless considered inexpedient, for obvious reasons, to publish them before the trial. The subjoined detail of facts, which would have been clearly proved at the trial, will enable the public to judge for themselves whether the pro ceedings ware vindictive and harsh, and whether Mr. Quayle was or was not justified in defending them so long, when he must have been aware during almost the whole period, that there was not the slightest ground for doing so. His defence rested entirely on technicalities and on the chance of difficul ties in proof of qualifications, to be on the roll already revised and considered to be final and unimpeachable. We happen to know that Mr. Shand's legal adviser has had many and almost insuperable difficulties to contend with, in the performance of his arduous and protracted duties, and he deserves the warmest thanks from the electors of Everton Ward in particular, and from the body of Conservatives in general, for having so efficiently and successfully disharged the services required of him, more especially as the result will have a most important influ ence in increasing the Conservative majority in the Council in November next. We now proceed to make public the following : SHORT SUMMARY OF FACTS Ist November, 1839.—Election of a Councillor for Ever ton and Kirkdale Ward; Francis Shand and George Quayle, Esqrs., candidates. State of the Poll at Four o'clock. Quayle Shand Majority for Quayle 2d and 4th November.—lnquiry before Aldermen and Assessors at the Town-hall. Two voting papers, signed " John Davies," examined. Two persons of this name ap peared ; the one admitted, that not being on the roll he had voted for Mr. Quayle under the name o f John Davies ; the other stated that he had tendered his voting paper afterwards for Mr. Shand. Poll was accordingly altered. Quayle Deduct John Davies .. 1 Add John Davies...... 1 John Ashton, whose name was on Mr. Shand's poll, ap peared, and stated that he had been personated, and had not voted. The poll was altered again. Shand.. Deduct J. Ashton , 1 I 303 I Quayle Evan Jones, a burgess, appeared and stated, that he had tendered his voting paper for Shand, and that the vote had been recorded ' • alleged contra, that the third question pre scribed by the 34th section of the municipal act, viz., " Have you already voted at the present election 7" had been put to him at the time of voting, and that lie had answered yes! The vote had been recorded in the poll book thus :—Shand 339, Evan Jones 1, and had been afterwards struck out with a pen. The evidence as to the time when the question was put, and by whom, was conflicting. Evan Jones had not in fact voted before at this election ; he admitted that the question, " have you voted before?" had been put to him, and that he had answered " yes," supposing that it referred to former elections.—Vote disallowed. The following is the 34th section : And be it enacted, that no inquiry shall be permitted at any election, as to the right of auy person to vote as a bur gess in any borough, except only as follows—(that is to say,) that the Mayor or other presiding officer shall, if required by any two burgesses entitled to vote in the same borough, put to any voter at the time of his delivering iu his voting paper, and not afterwards the following questions, &c. (The first and second have reference to identity of person and qualification.) 3rd.—Have you already voted at the present election Some of the cases of errors, misdescriptions, &c., in voting papers, of persons who had voted for Mr. Shand, mentioned below, in stating the proceedings in the Queen's Bench, were then adduced on behalf of Mr. Quayle, but were not al lowed. Alderman Hornby, and Mr. Nicholson, assessor, under a power in the municipal act, (Mr. Roskell, the other assessor, not concurring,) then named Mr. Quayle to be councillor, as there appeared an equality of votes. Mr. Quayle was declared councillor accordingly by the Mayor. PROCEEDINGS IN THE COURT OF QUEENS' BENCH, JANU- ARY L 1840.-QUO WARRANT° APPLIED FOR. Substance of Affidavits in Substance of Affidavits in support of the application.* reply. _ _ _ 11 In - support of Evan That the quesiions had been Jones' vote for Shand—that . put by Mr. Ledger (another he had tendered his voting burgess also concurring) at paper, which had been re- the time of voting, with the ceived, and that the question " consent and approval " of had not been put to him till the alderman, and impugning afterwards, and then not by Mr. Shand's right to be on the alderman, but by a Mr. the roll. Wilson Ledger. 2. Against Daniel Fox's None in reply, vote for Quayle by two de ponents—that they saw this person in Moy, in Tyrone, on Ist November. „. 3. Against John Furness' None in reply vote for Quayle, by himself — that he was in Birmingham on Ist November. 4. Against John Agitt's vote for Quayle that this person ought not to have been on roll. None in reply CLAIM TO HAVE POLL ALTERED THUS Shand ...... 303 Quayle Add Jones Furness . 1 Agitt.... 1 304 300 APRIL, 1840.—AFFIDAVITS FILED BY MR. QUAYLE IN SUPPORT OF A COUNTER CASE. Substance of Affidavits in Substance of Affidavits in support of Mr. Quayle's reply. but which theforms case, and against following of court would not allow votes for Shand. to be read. [This evidence would have been given at the trial.] 1. John Dixon—that he By John Dixon shewing ought not to have been on his right to be on the roll. the roll, not having been on certain parliamentary lists of voters during the period of qualification. _ _ No affidavit in reply, it being a question of law whe ther, being on the roll, he had not a right to vote. The act does not make removal a dis qualification. 3 John Formby, By the parties that they 4 C. S. Nliddleton, were on the roll for Nor- 2 William Maynard,—that he had removed previous to voting. 5 R. Y. Buddicom, thumberland-terrace, and (by 6 T. B. llorsfall,—that themselves and others) that these persons, described in Lodge-lane had been only re voting papers as of Lodge- cently called by the former lane, were not on roll. name, and that Northumber land-terrace and Lodge-lane were identical, 7 William Jones Peachey, By voter that lie was the —that there was no residence person on the roll, and had after his name in voting paper. voted for Shand, and not ob- jected to at the time. 8 James Carpenter Halsall, By the voter that his name —that there was no such per- was Halsall, and that lie had son on roll. voted for Shand, and that " Halsall" on the roll was a mistake 9 Wm. Foulds, Great Mer- That Foulds on the revised sey-street,—that there was list was put down for Lower no such person on roll. Castle -street, and that Great Mersey-street had been tran scribed by mistake from a preceding line in writing out the roll. 10 Thomas Ciesar, Col- That he was on the roll for lingwood-street, Everton, not Collingwood-street, Liver on roll. pool, that part of Liverpool being in Everton Ward. . . . 11 That Francis Shand, the A - very full affidavit by his candidate, ought not to have brother, Aleaauder Shand, been on the roll. sliming that Francis Shand bad possessed all the qualifi cations for seveal years. IN QUEEN'S BENCH. November, IS 10.—Case argued. Attorney-General (for Mr. Quayle) admitted that Fox and Furness bad been per sonated, and that be must abandon these votes. Claimed to go into counter case. Court refused, as they could not hear the other side. Would not decide there whether the Roll could be opened. Made the rule for quo warrant° absolute. January, IS4l.—lnformation filed and the pleadings duly carried on till the question of Mr. Quayle's election was ready for trial. Ist July, IS-11.—Application to a Judge to have cause tried at Liverpool. Opposed by Mr. Quayle. Order granted. Isth July.—Otler to resign by Mr. Quayle, each party to pay their own expenses. 20th.—Refused. 27th.—Resigna tion. 11th August (Ist day of Assizes.)—Mr. Quayle con sented to judgment. * Certain of the affidavits relating to points not now in dispute—such as the fact of Mr. Quayle acting as councillor. proceedings at the Town Hall, &c., are not stated, as they are now immaterial. MR. QUAYLE'S TESTIMONIAL TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD. Satire 's my weapon— * I only wear it in a land of Hectors, Rogues, sharpers, and directors. Stu.,-After reading the " Council Proceedings" on Wed nesday last respecting Mr. Quayle's resignation, &c., tke., I was not much surprised in noticing the second somewhat POMPOUS letter in Friday's Mercury, addressed to " John Holmes, Esq.," concerning the very important " testimo nial" about to be " got up" doubtless by some disinterested friends, to salve the " feelings" of the late member for Ever ton, who, according to his friend Mr. Holmes, " was not to blame," and also the liberal " alderman," who gave the " casting vote," a d m i tte d that he acted by t h e " a dvice" of the worthy " town-clerk." It is true, however, that the " case" is decided, and whoever was the " late member's" adviser, the " quarrel" is a " pretty one" for the " rebrm- • ers" to di ges t, as well as the " disgusted conservative" to crow about; but the "cat may mew, yet the dog will have his day." Nevertheless, after the present opportunity, I shall not attempt to gratify the "mercurial" writer's vanity in further piffing this somewhat "untoward affair," being satisfied that the respectable persons who constitute the " committee"—and particularly the cunning " gentlemen," who induced Mr. Quayle to become a " candidate," and advised the defence to the "action," if not the " resigna tion" of the seat his friend had undoubtedly usurped too long —should HONESTLY "pay the piper" themselves, and not allow the " spirited" and " ind ependent" gent.'s " cause" to go a BEGGING however, notwithstanding the paltry vituperation of the amiable yet sensitive conservative. I beg to call his attention to 'kir. Carson's manly and straight forward expose'e of " facts," as stated in Friday's Standard, respecting this truly " odious =MANX "affair,"—to say nothing of , " undefended case"—intended ex penses—ignorant " plot," &c. &c. I n conclusion, I opine the affair is altogether NOT so " disgraceful" to the " conservative party;" and although gentle du peas' ever loves a joke," methinks it is by tar more, nay, much more, " disgraceful" to the whig-radical individual who directed and sanctioned such " malicious PROCEEDINGS"—to the great loss and, doubtless, considera ble MORTIFICATION, if not pain, to the "spirited," yet disappointed, Mr. Geo. Quayle, as well as every modest " reformer" who " joined" in the truly " odious affair ;" finally in hopes that the " iihig" or " radic a l" would-be " councillors" will, for the future, take a lesson out of friend " Harvey's" note-book, now that the reformers" are becoming " small by degrees, and beautifully less," I beg to subscribe myself, Sir, a lover of fair play, as well as an ENEMY TO CANT AND HUMBUG. Shaw-street, Saturday Evening, 28th August, 1841. P.S.—I had nearly forgotten to state, that the Quailinc Al ' Committee" ought to be grateful to me, notwithstanding " impertinent" letter—it having produced an additional ' ten guineas" from the FLIMSY gent., alias the "Disgusted Conservative," who, indeed, may be one of those sort of conservatives who generally admire and vote for radical "conservatives." By the bye, the said gent.'s £5, promised " in a few days," might also have been noticed elsewhere. However, as many more of the same sort of " folk" might be inclined to " PITY the " fallen foe." I recommend (having a " relative" of my own, not on the " special jury sum moned," but in the " Kirkdale Ward," who has been ap plied to for his mite) that a list of the names and the " subscription" already received towards defraying the " EXPENSES" or " testimonial"' to Mr. Quayle be publicly acknowledged, in order to prevent any unfair or unfriendly suspicions. TO THE HON AND REV. BAPTIST NOEI Live?pool, 2611 e August, 1841. SIR,—It cannot he from the convincing tendency of your pamphlet on the corn- l aws , or f rom it s stringent argument, that it has not yet received a reply, for never did I peruse thirty-five pages containing less convincing. matter or more loose argument, if viewed in a proper light, and if the statements therein contained are reduced to facts. I will not for a moment impute a desire to misstate or an intention in any way to deceive; for, however I may differ from you in the views you have adopted, I am still convinced that they have been adopted sincerely, and from a pure desire to benfit the parties for whom they are written ; but that you have been too ready to rely upon the statements of others, with out searching into their correctness, and then founding your arguments upon them, I shall be able readily to prove. The distress, both in the agricultural as well as the manufacturing districts, cannot be denied ; but there may be a wide differ ence in the opinion of parties as to the cause of it, and also the remedy. I cannot admit of your proofs of distress, or that in many cases they are of recent origin. Ireland, for instance. When, sir, do you ever remember the lower classes in the poor and Popish districts of Ireland aught but a miserable and poverty -stricken population ; and if you never have known such classes in a better state, and during the same time you have seen the working population of Pro testant Ireland in a better condition, surely it is but fair to infer, that Popery has been the blight of the land, and not fair to attribute the whole of the evil to the corn-laws, as you are inclined to do. In page 5 you say, " Every year these evils appear likely to augment. Nearly all the lands of England which would repay cultivation are already cultivated." Now, what says Mr. M'Culloch on this subject? Giviving the total number of acres in the United Kingdom as 77,394,433, he states that there are 46,922,970 cultivated acres, 14,600,000 uncultivated wastes capable of improvement, and 15,871,463 acres of barren and unprofitable land. Therefore we see that there are yet 14,600,000 acres of waste land, and which only require capital, labour, and encouragement to bring them into profitable and useful cultivation. Nearly a fifth portion of the land of the United Kingdom, capable of improvement, is still in an uncultivated state, and yet it is said the land is over-populated, emigration is necessary ; and the corn-laws must be abolished, in order that we may procure corn from other countries. You also speak, at page 5, of " this hungry multitude, already goaded by want into rick burning and trades' unions —into chartism, and every other expression of impatience at unendurable calamity." Now, sir, I must ask, did Cobbett or Hunt ever give vent to expressions more danger ous than these which have escaped—the lips, I was goinz to say, but no, 'tis worse, have been deliberately penned by a minister of the Gospel, and one whose character and standing, and, I will say, whose Christian amiability will give them additional weight? are these criins to be extenuated under any circumstances ? If so, let us at once preach to the starving man, that he had better steal bread—to the ragged man, that he should take his neighbour's coat. And who is to judge, sir, when calamity has arisen to this unen durable pitch, that the population may be excused for rick burning, chartism, &c. &c. ? and by whom have these mis zuided multitudes been goaded on ? I will fearlessly say, that it has been by expressions similar to those now used by yourself, but hitherto made use of only by political dema gogues at radical meetings. In my next I will show further glaring errors in your statements, and the utter fallacy of your arguments ; in the mean while, I beg to remain, reverend sir, your very obedient servant, J. C. THEATRE ROYAL.—It will be seen, by the Theatre an npuncernent, that Mademoiselle Cerrito dances to- for the last time. Last evening was for her benefit. The public 'have been greatly disappointed in not having the pleasure of seeing Mademoiselle Cerrito and Signor Guerra dance to gether for the last few nights. We understand that this has arisen from some trumpery squabble between the parties, Mademoiselle positively refusing to dance with the Signor. As several stories are afloat, none of which the public have the least interest in, we shall not detail them, but merely re mark, that these persons, overpaid and overpuffed, ought to let their animosity close at the wings of the stage, and do their utmost to amuse those who are supporting them so li berally. To allow these suqabbles to interfere with their duty is a gross insult to the audience, and a detriment to the inter ests of the theatre, as well as their own reputation. Without reference to the rights or wrongs of either party, we must candidly admit that Signor Guerra's dancing'has been the cause of Mademoiselle Cerrito's brilliant success in this town. We understand that an accident happened at the Theatre Royal, Manchester, which, fortunately, has been unattended with any serious effects. In the midst of It dance on Saturday night, a portion of the stage gave way, and Signor Guerra was precipitated to the ground.— Great confusion and alarm took place in the house, which, however, subsided on the audience learning that no mishap, except a few bruises, had occurred. We perceive that that most charming actress and amiable lady, Miss Ellen Tree, will appear on Monday, supported by Mr. Anderson. They appear in Mr. Sheridan Knowles's fine play of " Love." Last week the Bishop of St. David's administered the rite of confirmation in the Welsh language, to about 350 young persons at Carmarthen. Von Ramer, the celebrated German author, has lately written a pamphlet on the English Corn Laws, which has been translated and published in this country. The original has been largely quoted by the metropolitan press. On Sunday last, a new organ was opened in St. Bartholo mew's Church, Naylor-street, on which occasion two very excellent and interesting sermons were preached, the one in the morning, by the Rev. Augustus Campbell, M.A., rector, and that in the evening, by the Rev. Dr. Tattershall, after each of which collections were made, amounting together to £2l.—in aid of the cost of the organ. Several pieces of sacred music were executed in a superior manner, by an effective, and evidently a well conducted choir. The instru ment was built by Messrs. Bewsher and Fleetwood, of this town, and its powers were ably brought out by the talent of Mr. T. Platt, organist of St. Mary's, Kirkdale. We have to record the death of Theodore Hook, Esq., the accomplished author, who expired on Tuesday night. Mr. Hook not only achieved a high station in the lighter walks of literature, but attained considerable eminence as a political writer. The Marquis of Normanby, after the division on Wednes day morning, brought in three bills.—l. For the improve ment of certain boroughs ; 2. For regulating buildings in large towns ; 3. For the better drainage of towns and villages. They were severally read the first time, and ordered to be printed. BRADFORD ELFCTION.—Two candidates are in the field, Mr. Busfield, a whig, and Mr. Wilberforce, conservative. At the last election for this borough the former gentleman was 76 votes below Mr. Hardy, the successful conservative candidate, and four below Mr. Lister. REPRESENTATION OF BRADFORD.—Mr. Wilberforce, the heretofore chosen representative of the conservatives of Hull, has been called upon by the constitutional eloctors of Brad ford to contest the vacant seat for that borough ; and we re joice to add that that gentleman has responded to the iequest by immediately taking the held. BETTER LATE TIIAti NEVER. — According to the rumour which prevailed on Wednesday in the clubs, it is the inten tion of Lord Melbourne to reward the fidelity of his expec tant adherents, Lords Lansdowne, Anglesey, and Westmin ster, by raising those noblemen to th e ran k o f d u k es. Ill s lordship seems resolved to score the honours though he loses the trick. DisTaEssiNn OccuattENcE.—Last Sunday evening the following melancholy occurrence, resulting in the loss of three lives, occurred in Milltown Glen, in the parish of Lezavre, near Ramsey. On the morning of the above day, Catherine Kelly, wife oe William Kelly, labourer, of Baldwin. in the parish of Braddan, left her home, the weather being delightfully fine, with the intention of visiting her mother in-law, who resides in Glen ildin, and is in an infirm state of health. She was accompanied on her journey by her infant, a child of six months, and a little girl, Elizabeth Lewin, aged nine years, daughter of Mr. Charles Lewin, also of Baldwin. The body of Catherine Kelly was twin(' on the bank of the river, nearly opposite the mansion of his honour, Demister Christian, between six and seven o'clock the same evening, much bruised, and in a state of nudity, with the exception of a small part of her bonnet. The body of the girl was found, about the same hour, nearly half a mile further up the river, adjoining the flax mill, also very much bruised, and with scarcely any clothing. It is supposed, that in crossing the river, at the outer end of the glen— which they would have to do in the course of their journey— they would naturally take each others' hands, for safety, in passing over the large stones or steps, laid across for foot passengers, and that one or both must have slipped while so engaged, and thus they found a watery and premature grave, occasioned by the heavy fall of rain that took place during the forenoon and evening of the day. The body of the infant was found on Monday morning, in Ramsey rive;, near the town.-3/Umr. Liberal. MARRIAGE TEST.—In the ecclesiastical code of Ireland .....,. an article is extant which gives to the bishop, or even to the inferior clergy, the right of preventing any marriage where the female is unable to read. A DUTIFUL Sox. —" You will, of e . ourse, immediat e ly j o i n the mess, Mr. Mae—," said the adjutant to a young ensign on the day of his arrival at the regiment. " You are very kind, sir," stammered out the incipient hero, " hut the last promise that I mad_ my father was th a t I would not get into any mess whatever. ' CHARACTER OF THE QUEEN DowAGEn.—Many are the instances recorded from time to time of the royal munificence of the worthy and estimable Queen Dowager ; but never has it fallen to our lot to record a more pleasing case than the f o ll ow ing, which has lately come to our knowledge, and for the truth anti accuracy of which we can vouch :—A gentle man of the name of Blake, one of the pages to her Alajestv, was stretched upon a bed of sickness, and was found to lint approaching his end. Her Majesty, with that solicitude which she evinces for even the lowest menial in her house hold, was particular in her inquiries after hint day by day, and on learning from his medical attendant that but fai hopes were entertained of his recovery, she proceeded with outee, delay and unattended to his bed-side, and spoke 5 , , :' ,0 words of comfort to the dying man, bidding him to rel) e , the all-sufficient merits of his Saviour for acc epta w n e c re w f l- a it s t; his God, when the things of this world, whiiicilo,r tal sight. fading from him, should have closed u"ffili , is to his wife and She begged him to feel quite comfortable family, for that she would provide for them, ear. _ , . I, 1 I preparing few short hours that remained to hint ° e t :it. ' Such words of a: and to pass the to meet his God and the coming julg i properti) through eternity, aiid tlnt daysn g e r o a f ft i e n r e mercy comfort,the t m h a e y d h ep o a p r e t , e p d r , o v d d u i c ! ed tehereaso m the sorrowing widow, who was t t o o c p o ra m is fo e r h t i h s ilmtediteierliserdfyoinrgsendotnsge' moments. a A m f r e s w se decease, her Majesty sent for ._ _ e ven children, and announced to her her a pension of £lOO a year, and a so long as that continued her pro perty.. left with a family of residence intention i n B o u f s to send such of her family as were to school in the neighbourhood at her ex ' of sufficient age theygrew 11 she ' that as Bushy allowing pa rk, does not feel a real dels • in t- .114 \Vhat Englishman .. . , pe nse, a n S d h e desired her . I , -ure oecomi acquainted with such pi•incelv acts of benevolence in the wido w of ou r late beloved Sovereign, and i n k nowing that this na " placed it within her power to display, by such in stances lion h ce a s s as these, the kindness and nobleness of her queen ike nature ?—ekeltenkum Ch) . onicle. •