The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser. — Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-06-26 00:00:00

' ‘ ‘ .4, ‘‘ Emperial Parliament. HOUSE OF LORDS.-MONDAY. Lord Denman, who sat as Speaker, read a letter from the Earl of Devon... 'rhe letter, which was dated lune 22, 1835, set forth, in effect, that the writer (Mr. Courtenav, late Dep. Cler. Parliamentor.) took the earliest opportunity of int . ortning their lordships that the . title of Earl of Devon had devolved on him, in consequence of the decease of the late earl ; and that he had received from, his Majesty a writ of summons to attend in his 'place as a peer of parliament. He could not, however, give up the office which he had so long held in their lordships' house, without express ing the deep sense which he felt of the uniform confidence which their lordships had reposed in him, and the uniform kindness which had been extended towards him in the discharge of his various duties—a kindness and confidence which had ren dered the performance of those duties comparatively light, and which never should be obliterated from his recollection. On the motion of the Earl of Shaftesbury, the letter was or dered to be entered on the journals. Viscount MELBOURNE moved for a committee to inquire into the duties and emoluments of the office vacant by the accession of Mr. Courtenay to the peerage. IRISH CHURCH APPROPRIATION, The Bishop of EXETER presented a petition from a parish in Ireland, against the apropriztion of church property to any but ecclesiastical purposes. Th e right rev. prelate would take that opportunity to state that he had this day received a letter from a respectable clergyman in Ireland, on a subject of con siderable importance. He should read an extract from that letter, but he would not mention the name of the writer. He would, however, put the letter into the hands of the noble viscount (Duucannon), and, if the noble viscount found the facts to be misstated, be should then feel it to be his duty to name the individual who had addressed the letter to him. It would appear that the letter referred to one of the gentlemen who had been appointed -commissioners of public instruction in Ireland. The right rev. prelate then read as follows :—" The appointment of Mr. —, to act as the commissioner at,—, had a tendency to deter protestants and encourage Roman ca tholics. For this gentleman (who resides about four miles from was a well known Roman Catholic agitator, and about five years ago had been chaired through that town on a Sunday, after having delivered a most inflammatory speech in the ehapel , against tke established church, the constabulary, the schools, and in fact, every person and thing in the neighbourhood, not employed in the extension of popery. The meeting was ad journed for three weeks or a month, when I attended with se• veral persons win:oiled been represented as roman catholics to contradict the statements that had been made respecting them. One, a man named ---, who was stated by the priest, on oath, to have declared that be, his wife, and eight children, were ail Roman catholics, was anxious to go before a magistrate to swear that he never made such a declaration, and that his sons could not have been at mass the Sunday previoy. But no commissioner came—his servant adjourned it to afuture day, when we again met, and were again disappVinted, his man 'having came, after five o'clock iu the evening, to say that his master could not attend : the people's patience was thus ex hausted, and very few attended when th e comm i ss i oner came, and when, but for the accidental presence of the son of the rector, many persons, especially and his fainily, before mentioned, would have been registered as Roman catholics. 'One circumstance is worth attention—viz., that the protestants 'who died, or removed since 1831, were subtracted from the gross number, whilst the Roman catholic population was not sub meted from." Viscount DuNcasiNom said the allegations chiefly referred to circumstances that had occurred some years ago, and with which he could not possibly be acquainted. The Bishop of EXETNR said he had mentioned the subject in order that the noble viscount might inquire into it. The execution of wills bill and the executors bill, were read a second time and referred to a select committee. Adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS, MONDAY. Mr. W. F. Ponsonby, Mr. Morrison, and Mr. Wagon, took the oaths and their seats. Mr. FIELDEN moved for a new writ for the borough of Old ham, in the room of the late William Cobbett, Esq. EMIGRANT PASSENGERS' SHIPS. Mr. FERGus presented a petition from Kirkaldy, praying that the house should take measures to prevent unseaworthy vessels from carrying e m i gran t s t o America. The petitioners attributed the loss of a great many vessels with passengers lately to the fact of their being unseaworthy, an evil which arose out of the present 'system of marine insurance, and the mode of marking vessels at Lloyd's CORPORATION OP NEW•RK. Mr. W. E. GLADSTONE presented a petition from the corpo ration of Newark, complaining of the great injustice done to them,by the report of the commissioners on that borough. They stated that the commissioners carried on the inquiry at their own ,inn, instead of carrying it on in public, and under the control of public opinion. The petitioners controverted and contradic ted the statements made in the report of the commissioners. The hon. member stated, that neither he nor the petitioners wished to arrest the progress of the bill, but he must protest with them against the tone and spirit of this report. THE CATHOLIC OATHS. Sir R. INGLIS presented a petition from a very influential and numerous body of the inhabitants of Birmingham,yespect ang,a notice of a motion given by the member for Tipperary (Mr. Shell) and in reference to the oath taken by that and other catholic members on their admission to that house. Mr. 'Blselll, having objected to the notice as being incorrectly stated is the petition, Sir It. Inglis read it from' the records of the house; It was as follows :—" On the first day of going into a committee of supply, to move a resolution that no person who shall be thenceforth appointed to any ecclesiastical benefice or dignity in Ireland shall be deemed to have any such vested in terest as to entitle such person to compensation in the event of such benefice or dignity being suppressed." Sir Robert then proceeded to explain the objects of the petition. The petitioners stated that the notice (which he bad just read) was evidently conceived in a spirit of hostility to the established church of Ireland. Now certainly people should be very chary in attri buting motives to others, but, when they came to the construc tion of acts, it was a 'different thing, and he was sure that the hon. and learned member would not defend the tendency of such a motion, ii it should, when carried, place the church of Ireland in a worse position as regarded the property belonging to her • than she was in at the time when the hon. and learned member took the oath not to " disturb or weaken the protestant religion in the United Kingdom." (Hear, hear.) The petitioners went on to state that they could not conceive how such a notice of a motion could have been given by any one who had solemn ly sworn in the following words:—" I do swear that I will de fend to the utmost of my power the settlement of property within this realm, as established by the laws; and I du hereby disclaim, disavow, and solemnly abjure any intention to subvert the present church establishment as settled by law within this realm; and I do solemnly swear that I never will exercise any privilege to which I am or may become entitled to disturb or weaken the protestant religion or protestant goverliment in the united kingdom; and I do solemnly, in the presence of God, profess, testify, and declare that I do make this declaration, and every part thereof, in the plain and ordinary sense of the words of this oath, withot any evasion, equivocation, or mental reser vation whatsoever. So help me God." The petition then pro ceedett to call the attention of the house to the catholic relief bill, aryl to the circumstances under which it was 'Sassed. Now be (Sir R. Inglis) was sure that there would be found an almost unanimous concurrence both on the part of the protestant sup porters and on the part of.. the protestant opponents of the bill on this point—that that measure would not for a moment have passed that house if it had been then suspected that the power of dealing with the rights aid property of the church had been con ceded by it to the Roman catholics. (Hear, hear.) The• pe titioners, with this conviction on their minds, stated that they regarded this notice of motion as a violation of honour and of the solemn 'obligation of an oath which had been voluntarily taken by the catholic members of that house. They added that they felt it was a mockery to tell them that the protestant reli gion in Ireland would be neither "weakened" nor " disturbed" by lessening to a great extent the number of its ministers there, and by virtually turning the church establishment of Ireland over to the dominion of men who regarded its doctrin es w i t h horror. (Hear.) The petitioners, in conclusion, prayed the house to adopt such measures as should prevent this oath—the • only security that the church possessed against the attacks of its inveterate enemies—from either being treated with scorn or broken with impunity. They further prayed the house to ex clude by express enactment Roman catholic members from any share in ecclesiastical legislation. (" Hear, hear," from Mr. O'Connell and other catholic members.) He (Sir R. Inglis) did not concur in the prayer of the petition, and his reason was tbis—not that the petition prayed for too much, but that it prayed for too little. He would go much further. (Hear.) According to the view which he had uniformly entertained, he had always thought that the introduction of members of the church of Rome into that assembly had been the greatest cala mity that had ever occurred to this country. ("Hear, hear," and laughter from Mr. O'Connell and others.) lie could not indeed expect that the hon. and learned member for Dublin would concur in that opinion. .(A laugh.) He would venture, however, to say this, that it was a feeling that was rapidly in creasing throughout the country—it was a feeling which pre vailed very generally sotne tone ago—he believed th a t it was now gaining strength every day throughout England, and he was sure that the events of the lust four months had tended much to increa.e such a feeling amongst the intelligent and rational part of the population of this country, (hear, hear.) For himself be (Sir It. Inglis) would say, that if he hattaaken such an oath regarding the church of Rome as the catholic members had taken respecting the established church;—if, after taking that. oath Ite — had" given notice of a motion authe one given by Mr.. Sheil, he would not complain if the catholic tnem- - hers accused hint of doing something approaching to perjury. His principel motive in calling the attenti on o f th e h ouse to this subjectlvas to give a warning to the catholic members who had taken this oath, and to show that there was one protestant member in that house who would warn them that they were in danger. The honourable member (Mr. Sheil) had, in a letter to the aforniity Chronicle, challenged him, Sir R. Inglis, to bring .forward some distinct and substantive motion on that subject. Were ke.to do so, the member for Dublin and his thirty-five toHowersfatotild negative it as they had carried the Irish church bill. The'tnember fur Tipperary was the first Roman Catholic member whohad originated a proposition in that house that tended to " weaken or disturb the protestant religion or govern ment." When aitgave his notice he rose from the very spot be now occupied on the treasury benches, where sat the membeis of a government, which he and his patty had placed in power, and without whose support that government could nut exist fur a single day,—(cheers from the opposition, )—a government, in fast, that would be floundering in the dirt, if the learned mem ber for Dublin should withdraw his support. It had been asked what was the use of catholic emancipation if catholic members Isere not at liberty to vote on church as well as on all other questions ; to this he woulil reply that it was not for him, and those who had resisted it, to tell the house what was the use of that concession ;—it was for those who had supported that mea sure to state what geed it had . produced either in Irel a nd o r England,—in his (Sir R. Ineli s s) opinion it had been produc tive of unmixed evil to the protestant church and protestant community of both countries. The honourable baronet then proceeded to speak of the catholic oath, which he read, and in the course of his comments upon it referred to Mr. Eneas M`Donnell's pa mphlet on that su bj ect. H e concluded by mov ing that the petition be laid on the table. Mr. SHELL spoke at peat length in defence of his motion upon which the petition from Birmingham bad been founded. The question between the honourable baronet and himself had risen to an importance which did belong to it,—the house and the country must decide between them. With respect to his notice of motion;—the church temporalities bill provided that in certain parts of Ireland benefits might be suppressed; when the old commissioners of bankrupts were superseded by the erection of a new court, all the commissioners appointed after a certain day received no compensation for the abolition of their offices. The motive of the hon. baronet was to offer an affront to the body to whicb he belonged ; in giving his con struction of the oath his only purpose was, to have the gratifica tion of making him (Mr. Stied) the object of contumelious in sinuation. The honourable and learned gentleman emicluded by declaring that it was not his intention to subvert or weaken' the protestant church. Mr. O'CONNELL followed at great length; at the conclusion .of his speech the debate, on the motion of Lord John Russell, 'was adjourned. r; • • - • 4 - ~' ~~ CONFINEMENT OF SOLDIERS IN COUNTY GAOLS. Sir E. KNATCHBULL, after observing that great inconve nience had arisen tram confining soldiers in county gaols, asked Lord Howick whether it was the intention of government to bring forward any measure to correct that grievance? Lord Howie!: had pleasure iu informing the right hon. Bart. that arrangements for remedying the ev►l so justly complained of were far advanced in preparation, and would be immediately completed. ►I UN IC IPA L REFORM BILL. Several petitions were presented in favour of this bill. `. Mr. PRAED said that he was not about to attack the principle of the bill; but, while acting consistently with the objects they had in view, good municipal government, he thought they ought to come to a resolution that they would not take from any man, however poor, his preiterty or his privileges. He would, there fore, move, that " It is the opinion of this house that all free men of existing corporations, and all those in the course of acquiring their freedom, and their descendants, ought to be maintained in the e njoy men t o f auv r i g h ts, privileges, and pro-. perty which they possess or might acquire by virtue of any charters now in force, in so far as the continuance of such rights, privileges, and property may not be found inconsistent with the institutiou of good municipal government and the popular control of corporate funds." (Hear, hear, and laugh ter.) He was prepared for the titter from the treasury benches; but he could only say that it was most absurd to state that it was necessary, in order to pursue certain objects, that they should inflict an injustice which had nothing to do with them. The report of the commissioners iecutnmeuded nothing inconsistent with his motion. To show how the contemplated measure would bear upon the poorer freemen be would cite a few cases in illus tration. First he would refer to the privileges now enjoyewl by the freemen of Newcastle-iipon-Tyne Under the provisions of a recent act of parliament the resident burgesses and. their widows are entitled to a common of paSture each for two cows, being their own prOperty, upon a tract of land belonging to the corporation, containing about 1,100 Limes, called the tow ti4noor.,l The value of this privilege is estimated at about £lO a year. About 300 freemen enjoy this right. Under the same act of parliament a portion of this moor is enclosed and let by public auction. It produces a rent of £2OO. This is divided amongst such of the poor freemen and their widows who do not enjoy the right of pasturage. There are several charitable institutions in the town, the benefits of w hi c h are en j oye d exc l us i ve l y b y freemen and their families." Now this bill, if it passed into a law, would have the effect of depriving all these who had coin plied with' the conditions, and were disposed to take out their freedom, of the reversion of this £lO a year. He next begged to read an extract respecting Newcastle-under-Lyme :—" The burgesses are entitled to stalls in the market free of toll, and this privilege extends to the widows of ,burgesses. They are likewise entitled to .pasturage on land round the town extend ing,ever 205 acres. Ills land was allotted in lieu of a right of common under an enclosure 'act of the 56th George III." The case ,ot.lieveiley was still stronger:—" The burgesses residing within the town lave the privilege of depasturing cattle, being their own property, on lauds belonging to the corporation, con taining about 4,217 acres. They,are allowed to depasture three cows in Westwood pasture, one horse in Hurn pasture, three beasts in Figham pasture, and six beasts in , Swinemoor pas ture from the 14th of May to the 14th of February. This privi lege, if enjoyed to its utmost extent, would be worth £25 a year." Under these circumstances he felt that, before they proceeded with the bill, he was entitled to call on the house to come to a vote, and declare whether they were, in the case of poor persons, prepared to confiscate so large and so valuable a property ? (Hear, hear.) There was only one other right now enjoyed by freemen to which he proposed to advert. They were about to take away by.this bill front the children of freemen the right of voting at elections for members of parlia ment. Was it not extraordinary that the noble lord and his party should, after so recent a discussion, and so recent a deci sion of this question, which was determined in favour of these individuals, now attempt to destroy the right in a bill which had uo immediate reference to it whatsoever ? The noble lord, after the first reform bill had been thrown out by the House of Lords, had introduced as an amendment this continuance of the right of voting to the children of freemen now existing, and he men tioned it ai one of the improvements on the former measure. He insisted that it was not desirable by this bill to strike off so many of our poorer fellow countrymen. If there were indeed any charge against them, let the house hear it. (Hear, hear.) Let the noble lord bring in a bill, saying that whereas freemen in such or such instances miscondueted themselves, it is expe dient that they should be deprived of the right of voting. (Hear, hear.) If freemen now existing had abused the trust confided to them, why should it not be taken away from them? If they had not abused it, upon what p r in c iple of re a s on or justice coula it be taken away from th e i r succ essors? (Hear, hear.) Cer tainly nothing could be more inconsistent than the conduct of the noble lord. (Hear, bear.) It was only in reference to those two rights of freemen that he proposed to trouble the house. In conclusion, he declared that by whomeve r b e m i g h t or m i ght not be supported, by whomever or in whatever way he might be opposed, it was his conviction that the operation of the bill would be rendered more beneficial by removing from it even the suspicion of enactments which must appear to be unjust as well as unnecessary. For his own part, in bringing the motion for ward he had been guided by a strong sense of its justice and es: 7 pediency, and he must add, that he had done so in obedience to the wishes of the great majority of his constituents. Sir M. W. RIDLEy seconded the motion. He observed, that it had been for some time past the practice to raise a sneer in that house whenev,r the name of freemen was mentioned. He protested against this; and maintained, that generally speaking there were no body of electors, rate-payers, or others, less ob noxious to the charges those sneers conveyed than the body of freemen at large. He contended that it would be extremely unjust to deprive individuals who had an inchoate right to their freedom of the advantages which they should enjoy. Lord J. RUSSELL opposed the motion, which was subsequently withdrawn. COMMITTEE ON THE BILL. The house then went into committee. The Ist, 2d, and 3d clauses were read, and with some verbal amendments.—Agreed to. On the question that clause 4, the boundary clause, be agreed to, Sir JAMES GRAHAM objected against the grant of such a power to the crown. Even the reform bill had refused to vest such a power, and parliament took upon itself the task of fixing the limits of boroughs. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL wished hon. members to recollect that, from time immemorial the crown had possessed the privi lege of fixing the limits of corporations. Sir R. PEEL expressed his surprise at the arguments which had been employed by the learned Attorney-General. (Cheers.) Here was a bill which superseded altogether the prerogative of the crown, which set aside all the charters granted by the crown, and when a question arose as to whether the parliament should have au opportunity of determining the boundaries to be esta blished under the new system, the hon. and learned gentleman turned round and said, " Pray respect the prerogatives of the crown." (Cheers and laughter.) In conformity with the principle of the reform bill, the boundaries of the corporations ought to be determined by parliament. (Hear.) He appre hended that previously to the passing of the reform act the metes and boundaries of boroughs were determined by the crown, but when parliament made a total alteration in the elective system, it was felt that it would be improper to continue that power in the crown. So in the prevent case, when parlia ment was called upon to supersede the ancient charters of cor porations, it was right that it should reserve to itself the power of fixing the metes and boundaries of corporations. It was his deliberate opinion, that in conformity with the principle of the reform act, not only the metes and boundaries, but the allocation of wards, and the allotment of the number of representatives, should be reserved for parliament. The only argument which be could imagine could be urged against the adoption of that principle was, the existing corporations might, in the exercise of their lawful power, alienate the whole of their property. That objection he would meet by consenting at once to the introduction of a clause to prevent that abuse. (Hear, hear.) He, therefore, would give notice of h is i n t ent i on to move au amendment, the object of which would be to impose upon par liament the duty of establishing the boundaries of corporations. (Hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL said the question was one of expediency. He could not imagine that any inconvenience could arise from the King in council fixing the limits of boroughs , _ and he be lieved that the inhabitant s o f t owns, could they be asked the question, would declare in favour of that proceeding rather than run the risk of having the bill delayed. Lord D. STUART moved an amendment, to the effect that the boundaries of cities and boroughs should b e sett l e d b y parlia me On this amendment the house divided— Noes Ayes 279 192 Majority against the amen d ment.. 85 The sth clause w as read and agreed to. Lord J. IttssELL submitted an amended clause instead of the 6th, as it stood in the bill. It was as follows :—" Aud be it enacted, that after the passing of this act, every male person of full age who, on the last day of August. in any year, shall have occupied any house, warehouse, counting-house, or shop, within any borough during that year, and the whole of the two pre , ceding years, and who, during the whole of such occupation, shall have been an inhabitant householder within such borough, or within seven miles thereof, shall, if duly enrolled according to the provisions hereinafter contained, be a burgess of such boroixh and member of the body corporate of the mayor and burylsses of such borough; provided that no person shall be so enrolled in any year, unless be shall have been rated in respect of premises occupied by him to all rates fur the relief of the poor of some parish wholly or in part within such borough dur ing the time of his occupation aforesaid, and unless he shall have paid during the time of his said occupation all such rates, except such as shall have been made and become due within six calendar months next before the last day of August in each year: pro vided also that the premises in respect of the occupation of which any person suall be so rated need not be the same pre mises, or in the same parish, but may be different premises in the same parish, or in different parishes, and provided that no person shall be so enrolled in any year, who within twelve calendar months next before the last day of August, shall have received parochial relief ur other alms, or any pension or cha ritable allowance." Mr. DivETT moved as an amendment that one instead of three years occupancy should give the right of voting. This amendment w as nega ti ve d b y a majority of 224. A long and desultory conversation ensued - on this clause, which ended by the chairman reporting progress. The house adjourned at half-past two o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS.—TvEsosY. The only business brought before the house was the presenta ion of a few• petitions. HOUSE OF COMMONS.—TCESDAT. A committee to try the merits of the Drogheda election peti tion was balloted for. Mr. G. F. Youao presented a petition from Tynemouth praying that no alteration oug h t to be made in the duties on colonial timber. IRISH CHURCH. Lot d MORPETH said that with reference to the question which had been put to him, relative to the course he intended to pur sue on Friday next, on the subject of the Irish church, he had to state that it was then his intention to move fur leave to bring in a bill; but in the first instance he should move that the order of the day of the 23d of March, for leave to bring in a bill to abolish composition for tithe in Ir e l an d, b e rea d , i n order to be discharged, presuming that it was not the intention of the right hon. gentleman to introduce any measure upon that subject. He should then move that the resolution of the 7th of April, re lating to the application of the surplus revenues of the Irish church, which was also agreed to by the house in committee, 'should be read, and he should then move f or l eave to b r i ng in a bill for the better regulation of ecclesiastical revenues in Ire land, and for the promotion of moral and religious instruction there. DUTY ON COFFEE. Mr. P. STAWAIIT said, that in consequence of what had fallen 'from his right lion' friend the other evening, respecting his in tention to equalize the duty on coffee, he was instructed to put three ,questions to his right hon. friend. The first was, when was it, roposed that the new scale of duty should take place? The seoond was to ask whether the stock of foreign coffee, which was very large, belonging to the East India Company (as we understood) wad to participate in the benefits of the reduction ti , ~~ proposed ? And the third was this—in what manner did his right hon. friend propose to guard against the produce of our possessions in the East and West Indies serving as a cover for the introduction of foreign coffee ? - - Mr. S. Rick, who spoke with his back to the gallery, and was consequently very imperfectly heard, said that though he could not aiaswer his hon. friend's questions in the regular or der in w : hieh they had been proposed, he hoped he should be able to give him a satisfactory reply. Ile had stated in the course of the debate on this question, that care would be taken that the relief given by the equalization of the duty on coffee did not extend beyond coffee which was the growth of our own territories. Perhaps he ought to apologise for giving more than au answer to the question which had been proposed, but it would be necessary to say wore, in order to make what he bad said intelligible. it was intended that evidence should be given that the coffee was the bond fide produce of those of our pOssessions to whidi the act was intended to aeply, and in order to,obtain an exemption,from the duty a certificate to that effect would be required. As to the third question, the proper time fur the consideration of it would be when be brought iu a bill to propose the equalization of the duty, when he should state the means by which he intended to prevent any abuse of the pri vileges. MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS.—COMMITTEE. A long conversation arose as to the•qualification of voters on municipal elections. Sir ROBERT PEEL intimated his intention of proposing some substantive clause on this subject in a future stage of the bill. • The 7th and Bth clauses were agreed to. On the 9th clause being proposed Mr. Tehvoe moved that this clause be omitted. He defended the character of freemen, and adverted to the cases of hardship adduced by the member for Yarmouth on the preceding day. Mr. Fielder supported the motion. Sir WILLIAM FOLLETT addressed the committee at consider able length, and commenced by saying that he was not hostile to the reform of municipal corporations, and that he had not and would not do anything to oppose the object they all had in view—the improvement of municipal government. The ninth clause professed to have two objects in view. He was not sure that it might nut also have a third, which was not uclore them. (" Hear, hear," and laughter.) He apprehended that it would not be denied by the noble lord and his friends, that as the clause' stood, it was intended to destroy the inchoate rights and privileges of a certain class of individuals in voting for members of parliament. (Hear, hear.) Another effect of the clause undoubtedly would be, to take from those having such inchoate righti of freedom both property and privileges. (Hear, hear.) And he was not sure that the clause would not also hale the effect of preventing the existing class of freemen .from•voting at the electioo qf, inernbers.of parliament. (Hear, hear:) 'He aikhd, 'if this were noi' the Lase, why .was, it that some provision had not been introduced in the bill, declaring that the rights of existing freemen were to be preserved? (" Hear," and Oh, oh !" He looked to the clause now with regard to the rights of voting, for members of parliament; and his reason of so doing was a doubt as to the purport and the effect of that clause. Of course, if it was the intention to deprive freemen of this right, as his hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General and the noble lord the Secretary for the Home Department intimated—if they denied it—there was an end of the matter—he had not a word more to say on the subject• But let him just look fora moment to the wording of the clause: And be it enacted, that after the passing of this act no per ion shall be elected, admitted, or enrolled a citizen, freeman, liveryman, or burgess of any borough, or by any name a mem ber of any body corporate in respect to any right or title other than by occupancy and payment of rates within such boro_tigh, according to the meaning and provisions of this act." WoW the government had a new corporate body, id which it would appear no freeman could be enrolled, except, as an occupant and rate-payer, according to the provisions of this act, and so enti tled as it would seem to vote. But if this were not the fact—if the act really admitted that any body not qualified according to the words of the clause Should be enrolled, he would say no more. His hon. and learned friend the Attorney-General satis fied him there was no doubt, and so there was an end to the subject. He now carne to what was admitted on all hands. It was admitted that those who had an inchoate right to their free dam were to be deprived of all those rights, privileges, and property which they had reason to expect they should enjoy. It was admitted further, that every person now possessing an inchoate right to his freedom was to be deprived of the right of voting for members of parliament. (Hear, hear.) It was true these two rights were of a different description; he admitted this, but hb denied that they stood on difkrent grounds. (Hear, hear.) He would first call the attention of the house to the rights of property. A question bad been put yesterday by the right honourable baronet the member for leaft;rd to the noble lord (J. Russell) respecting the intention of government as to corporation property left in trust for specific purposes. The noble lord replied, that it was not the intention of government to interfere with that species orproperty, but that it was pro posed it should be held by the new corporate body or by trustees for the same purposes. This was sufficiently explicit; but the noble lord afterwards qualified this answer in replying to his right hon. friend the member for Tarnworth by saying. such pro perty as was in trust for charitable uses. It was this answer, which was assented to by his honourable and learned friend the Attorney-General, that made slim think the bill had been in troduced without due inquiry or examination—(loud cheers) due inquiry, or examination as to the nature of property held by corporations. (Cheers.) He said so because he was satis filed, from the answer of the noble lord,•that the bill would not carry its objects into effect. (Hear, hear.) Now, as to inchoate rights, there were persons who had a right to be admitted as freemen ; they had legal vested interests in all the privileges and property to which they would be se verally entitled on attaining the age of 21. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord bad spoken of charitable trusts. Was be indeed acquainted with the nature of those trusts in the majority of towns ? He (Sir W. Follett) had an account of the property in one town with which he was not at all connected. It related to the town of Coventry, and he believed it would furnish a fair sample of the property in the different corporate towns. Cer tainly, there is, first, a species of property provided for by the bill, and therefore he could not say that it hail escaped the noble lord and his friends. Every freeman was entitled to turn out three head of cattle on certain commons, called the Lammas Lands; and every man who had served his apprenticeship had a right to become a freeman at the age of 21. Next, there were certain estates left by Sir T. White under this charity — namely, that every freeman should be entitled, on entering business, to a sum of £5O, which he might hold for nine years, and every needy freeman was entitled to a sum of £74. More over, there was an endowed grammar-school with an income of near £9OO, and every freeman might send his son to that school free of expense. Estates, too, had been left upon the terms that the trustees were to bind out the children of freemen in certain places. Now, let the house consider what it was they were taking from those who had the inchoate right to their freedom. The apprentice who had completed his servitude was entitled to all the rights, privileges, and property he had mentioned ; was it the intention to take from them these rights, privileges, and prorrty ? (Hear, hear.) He would not at that moment stop to discuss the question of rights generally; but let him ask the noble lord what under the provisions of the bill he meant to do with that charity? (Hear, hear.) To what •purpose did he propose to apply it? (Hear, hear.) Theie was no provision in the bill for the case. Their answer did not apply to it. (Hear, hear.) They meant to destroy the freemen. They had chari ties which by the will of the donor were specifically given to freemen in some towns, to the wives, children, or widows of freemen in other towns. What then, he asked, were they to do with these charities ? (Hear, hear.) They had no provision whatsoever respecting them in the noble lord's bill—(cheers) . -- and this it was that induced him to say that the bill had been introduced without due inquiry and examination. (Loud cheers.) Was it intended to make these charities revert to the donor,or to apply them to the general purposes of the corporation ? Had they a right to say to the freemen of Coventry, " You shall not have the £5O on enterin g b us i ness ? You shall not send your son to the grammar-school free of expense; you shall not have him bound an apprentice; you freemen shall not enjoy any of those advantage s w hi c h to a man in your situation of life are as valuable to you as the estate of an hon. gentleman here is to him ?" (Hear, hear.) Let them try it by that test. If a bill were brought in to affect the vested interests of any gentle man in his estate, would the house listen to it. (Hear, hear.) And yet now they determined on depriving men who were serving their apprenticeship, and entitled at its conclusion to their freedom, of all their inchoate rights. Nay more, they even said to the existing generation of freemen that they should no longer enjoy their rights. (Hear, hear.) He submitted, then, that this clause ought not to stand any part of the bill. It had nothing to do with the municipal regulations of the town. He did not propose to thwart the noble lord in his plan of reform. He did not propose that in the noble lord's new corporate body any person should be admitted who was not qualified by the bill. His object was that those freemen now existing and those having iuchoite rights of freedom should continue to hold their property, and that it should be distinctly understood their right of voting was to be maintained as secured to them by the reform bill. lie did not desire at all to interfere with the municipal government of towns, but he anxiously wished that for all other purposes the rights, privileges, and property of freemen might be preserved. The amendment which be was about to move would not impede the improvement of municipal corporations. It went only to preserve those rights of the freemen which had been left to them by the agreement understood on the passing of the reform bill. He did earnestly hope that the noble lord would net persevere in thi s c l ause; but if he did, he (Sir W. Follett) must take the sence of the house on his amendment. He did, however, hope, that in a bill, by which it was intended to win the affections of the people, the noble lord would not press a clause which would certainly appear to a majority of them to have the effect of violating a contract. The honourable and learned gentleman then moved his amendment, which was that all the words-after the words shall - be," in theseeond line of the ninth clause, should he omitted, and that there should be substituted words to this effect—" that without interfering with the municipal government of corporate boroughs, all the rights, privileges, and properties of freemen for other purposes should be preserved." On time amendment being put, The ATTORNEY-GENERAL opposed the amendment. He con tended that the existence of freemen in corporations, distinct from residence or occupation, was an usurpation, which the sooner it was got rid of the better. He would repeat as a law yer and as an antiquary, who had paid considerable attention to the subject, that where freemen existed unconnected with pro perty or with residence in a borough, their existence was an usurpation of the rights of others. The reform bill left the question of freemen open, and in continuing to freemen the right of voting for members of parliament, it only said that as long as freemen were allowed to continue, they should have cer tain rights. At present freemen might pass the greater part of the year in gaol, and then come out and give their vote for a member of parliament. The consequence was, that in this de graded state they were open to all sorts of corruption. It had been said that other classes of electors in boroughs were also open to corruption. If it were so, it was because this leaven of the freemen had leavened the whole mass, and until this plague spot was got rid of the whole corporate body would never he sound. (Hear, hear.) For these reasons it was impossible that he could assent to the amendment of his learned and hon. friend. As far as respected the rights of property, he was willing that where the bond fide right to property existed, it should be respected; but he must say that there was no general public measure which, as it affected the interests of some individuals, might not be considered a hardship. There was scarcely a high way bill which passed of which some publicans or others had not reason to complain; but those individual cases of hardship could not be urged as against the general merits of the mea sure. It was so in the, present bill. Some individuals might find it a hardship, but on the whole he was sure it would be a great benefit to the community. Mr. D. W. HARVEY protested against the language of the Attorney-General, who classed all freemen of boroughs as if none of them were to be met with but in the inside of a gaol. He had the honour of being returned for the borough of Col chester by the freemen of that place for fifteen years, and h e would tell the king's atto r n e y- genera l that the poorer he found them the more honest did he find them. There was one point which had not been dwelt upon by the hon. and learned member for Exeter, and which, for those who were for enlarging rather than narrowing the constituency, was most important. It was, that the bill as it now st oo d wou ld i n a s h ort t i me go to destroy harf the constituencies of boroughs. In the borough ofColches ter, for instance, where there were at present 1,250 electors, in the course of no very distant time, if this class of men who had drawn the ire of the king's attorney-general should lie cut up, the constituency would in a short time be reduced to 500, and NIL* THE LEVEOOOI, STANDARD. in other boroughs in the country the numbers would be reduced to 300 or 400, and thus, in the course of no very long period, we should have rotten boroughs enough in the country. The SoLiciToe-GENERAL supported the clause as it now stood ; without it, he said, no cure in the corporate system could be effected. Mr. C. BARCLAY denied the assertion that freemen were more easily bribed than other classes. He believed the Solicitor- General knew something of a borough in the West of England (alluding to Falmouth) whose purity had not been amended .even by the passing of the reform bill, a measure which had failed to make that borough immaculate. (Hear, and a loud Th ere corrupt i on was not con fi ned to freemen, and yet was so great that a relative of his (Mr. Barclay) had refused to take any part in the two elections preceding the last. (Hear, hear.) Mr. W. WILLIAMS, the member for Coventry, supported the amendment of the learned member for Exeter. The effect of this clause would be to reduce the class of his constituents, de nOminated freemen, from about 2,50() to 1,509. This he took to be a serious attack upon the provisions of the reform bill, and a very great and extensive infringement upon the elective franchise. Sir JAMES GRAHAM would not follow the example of the Attorney-General in vilifying the characterof freemen generally nor join the Solicitor-General in annihilating a whole class of electors. The hon. and learned member for Exeter had con tend:A, and contended rightly, that under the 9th and 10th clauses two rights were provided for,—first, the rights already held by persons now admitted freemen; and, secondly, those possessing at present but inchoate rights. He thought that the question would be much simplified by postponing the considera tion of the second point until the 10th clause came under con sideration. If the hon. and learned gentle Man would take the sense of the house on that point, he would find m an y mem b ers ready to support hi m . With regard to the second point, he trusted that the hon. and learned gentleman would not contend that the inchoate right to property should extend further than to freemen already born or already apprenticed. Lord Joust RUSSELL said that the provision in this (the 9th clause) was a necessary consequence of our adopting this new municipal franchise, and if so, ministers were not proposing it for the sake of altering the reform bill, but for the sake of amending the municipal corporations: The alteration, he did not deny, was a great alteration in the franchise under the re form bill, but it was a consequence which it was difficult if not impossible to avoid when they came to define the new munici pal franchise. The hon. and learned gentleman (Sir W. Fol lett) had said—" If you think these freemen worthy of punish ment, if you consider them unworthy the elective franchise, de prive them of it at once; if you do not deprive theta of it, then a preserve to them th e i r p resen t privileg es. That wa s the di lemma is whi c h th e huh: an d learned gentleman had placed the ministers; but in reply to th a t dil emma h e w ou ld put a no th e r: - "If these freemen are worthy to be burgesses of bOdies corpo rate, keep them as bodies corporate (hear, hear) ; if they are fit to exercise the elective franchise for members of parliament, why do you agree to that part of the dense which deprives them of the right of voting for the election of the mayor and coun cil? (Hear, hear.) Why, lie would . ask further, did the hon. and learned gentleman - deprive them of privileges which they had etijoed for hundreds of years, and give a corporation - 16 - the towns over which those freemen were to have no control? (Hear, hear.) Nay, more, if those freemen were not a proper body, and if by the sixth clause of the bill we have formed a better constituency for governing the council of th e mun i c i pa l boroughs, for wh a t en d was it that you preserved a body of men who existed only by corporate rights, and yet were to exist for the future for purposes totally separate from corporate rights? (Hear, hear.) Keeping these considerations in view, let the committee look a little more carefully at the amendment of the hon. and learned gentleman. It provided that nothing in the act should extend to prevent the admission to freedom of all persons who by law were entitled to it either by birth or servi tude : and it then proceeded to protect every species of property to which they were at present entitled. Now there were two separate objects for which it was proposed that this right to the admission to freedom should be maintained, and neither of these objects ought, in his opinion, to be regarded. (Cheers from the ministerial benches.) First of all it was contended, that out of the freedom arose the right long enjoyed by the freemen of choosing their representatives in parliament. He was far from saying that you ought to introduce a special act for the disfran chisement of freemen; but if, on the other hand, you preserve those freemen for the purpose of electing . members of parlia ment, you do that which is likely to prove injurious to the par liamentary right, and also to the municipal corporation. (Hear, hear.) the preserving these freemen for the mere purpose or exercising this parli amentary r i ght must of necessity preveut the good government of the towns to which they belonged. (Hear, hear.) Mr. V. Ssirrx thought the clause the most valuable in tie bill. , Lord SANDON defended the existing Tights of freemen, and contended that the Attorney-General was not justified in vilify ing them as a poor, wretched, degraded, and demoralized set of men, whose tights were an usurpation, and those of the general population of the towns. If it were an usurpation, was it not an usurpation of which no lawyer could trace the origin in remote antiquity ? Was it not long anterior in date to the existence of the property which the Attorney -General accused them of ap propriating to themselves? He observed with regret the hard line which hon. members opposite were disposed to draw be tween the rich and the poorer classes. It would seem that, in their opinion, the possession of property was the only requisite for the proper discharge of the duties which devolved upon men in society. The poor law amendment bill had already inflicted a severe wound upon the feelings of the poor, by depriving them of that whi c h th e y h a d for a long period' of time been taught to look upon as a right. (Hear, hear.) And now it was proposed to proceed a step further in the same career, and to deprive the poorer classes of their interest in funds left for their use, by merging them in the general borough fund for the pur pose of diminishing the burden of taxation on the wealthier classes. If the clause under consideration were carried, it would tend to convince the people that the representation was getting more and more into the .hands of the middle classes, and that the rights and feelings of the lower classes had ceased to be respected in that house as they used to be. (Hear, hear.) It should be recollected that the privileges enjoyed by freemen were objects not only of profit but of pride, and that a man was frequently induced to pursue an honest course from an anxiety not to . bring disgrace upon the body to which he belonged. The proposed attack upon the rights of freemen was not incidental to the bill before the house, and indeed that was acknowledged by ministers, for the whole.strength of their argument was, that they were about to corieet,an error which they formerly com mitted in preservingilieltichoate rights of freemen under the reform bill. (Hear.) It must be obvious to those who had watched the proceedings of that house that there was a party within its walls who since the passing of the reform bill had con stantly endeavoured to raise a sort of hue and cry against free men,as if that class of voters was the only one guilty of impro per conduct. In conclusion, the noble hird expressed a hope that the committee would not consent to sanction the first inva sion of the reform bill, proposed, too, by persons who were members of the cabinet which declared that that was a final measure. (Hear.) 'The CHAIRMAN then read the amendment, which provided that nothing, contained in the bill sh ou ld b e construed to abolish the right of voting for the electi m of members of parliament now possessed, or that might be hereafter acquired, by freemen under the provisions of the reform act. Mr. ROBINSON and Captain BERKELEY spoke in favour of the amendment. Mr. C. BULLER supported the original clause. Lord STANLEY rested his support of the amendment on the grounds—first, of the political rights of the freemen having been voluntarily guaranteed, as his noble friend had himself admitted,- for the purpose of facilitating the passing of the great measure of parliamentary reform; an'l next, because he thought if that measure of reform was sought to be rescinded, the fair and manly course was to rescind it openly, not by means of a bill professing to be for the purpose of giving or taking away municipal rights, but by a measure with an avowedly political object. The hon. and learned gentleman opposite had shown how political and municipal privileges might be reconciled, and how the freemen might be permitted to enjoy their political rights without interfering with the municipal reform which it was desired to effect. In that proposition he fully concurred. His grounds of objecting to the clause and approving of the amendment wele, because what you now proposed to do was necessary for effecting your professed object—unjust, as being in opposition to your solemn guarantee given only two years ago—and indirect, inasmuch us it did by covert means that which, if done at all, ought to be done openly by a political measure, and not by a side wind as in the present bill. (Loud cheering.) Mr. O'CoslNEr.r. thought the amendment an indirect attempt to get rid of the bill. The committee then divided, when there appeared— For the amendment Against it 278 Majority against the amendment 46 Mr. A. TREVOR consented to withdraw his amendment, giving notice at the same time, that on the bringing up of the reort he would move t h e om i ssion of the clause under con sideration. The clause was then ordered to stand part of the bill, and the chairman reported progress and obtained leave to sit again. ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS BILL, The ATTORNEY -GENERA L moved for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the Ecclesiastical Courts iu England and Wales. Colonel Startroae objected to the introduction of the bill, which had been transferred from Attorney-General to Attorney- General, hatched by one, and warmed up by another. It was injurious to the poor, and destructive of the interests of the country officers. The ATTORNEY - GeNsItAL said that the bill had been recom mended by the Archbishop of Cantertrury, and by the cede siastical commissioners, among whom were some of the judges of the courts. After a few words from Sir R. INGLIS, Mr. SCARLETT, and Mr. SHELL, leave was given. PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS. Mr. WA K LEY moved that the ballot for entering the names of members having public petitions to present do take place 20 minutes before the time appointed for the Speaker's taking the c hair.—Agreed to. On the motion of Mr. RUT/IVEN, the house adjourned at one o'clock. HOULE OF LORDS, WEDNES DAT. Several private hills were brought up from the House o, Commons. The highway bill was read a second time and referred to a select committee. The bills before the house were forwarded a stage. The annual indemnity bill went through a committee, and was reported without amendment. The Duke of RICHMON D gave notice that early next week he would bring in a bill to bring the oaths abolition bill into opera tion on the let day of August next. Lord Miii.nourtNE moved the revival of the select committee of 18.31, which sat on the offices belonging to the house, in order to consider what should now be done with regard to the situation of clerk assistant at the table.—Ordered. The noble viscount then moved the thanks of the house to the Earl of Devon, for his valuable services while serving at the table of the house. After a few words of eulogium from the Duke of Wellington, Lord Lyndhurst, and through him from the Earl of Eldon, from Lord Brougham, the Earl of Shaftesbury, Lord Denman, and the Earl of Abingdon, who said he had sat one day in appeals with him—(Laghter)—the motion passed nem. con. The Duke of RICHMOND thanked his noble friend (Lord Melbourne) for the prompt manner in which he had acted upon the report from the gaol committee—he had no doubt but it would do much good fur the country. T he house then adjourned • HOUSE OF COMMONS. —WEDNESDAY. The Speaker took the chair at three o'clock. Mr. GUEST brought up the report of the committee upon the Merthyr Tydvil market bill. Mr. St:mm..l , lEl.o presented a petition from Birmingham in favour of municipal reform, the appropriation clause in the Irish tithe bill, and praying that all parties in the liberal interest would waive all minor differences of opinion and support the present ministry. THE CHURCH, The Hon. W. Dwicohtait presented a petition from Chester, gned by the archdeacon and sixty clergymen, praying that no t.. 4h.t. - 1114 , portion of the funds of the Irish church would 14 appropriated to secular purposes, as such would be likely to endanger the stability of the established religion in that country. Mr. EDWARDS presented a petition from the hand-loom weavers of Landithrow, Montgomery, comp'aining of distress. Some other petitions were presented to the house. EDUCATION IN IRELAND. Mr. WYSE, in moving the second reading if the.bill which he had had the honour to introduce about a week since, would not, after the very lengthened exposition which he had then made, trouble the house with many observations. He should reserve until the - bill was in committee any discussion upon its several clauses. But the preamble of the bill set forth its essential character, which was, that all national education should repose upon the moral and religious instruction of the people. That principle had been recognised in every civilised state of Europe, and its recognition in Ireland would, he hoped, put an end to the various dissensions which had so long existed in that coun try. The preamble set forth that whenever education was to be extended and secured to a country, that object could only be obtained by the joint co- o p era ti on o f t h e government and the people, and it was not more essential that the government should control the system of education, than that the people should co operate in every particular with the government. That princi ple he (Mr. W.) had endeavoured to carry into operation throughout his bill. He trusted that the principles of the pre amble of the bill would be carried out, and that the local ener gies of the country would be controlled by public opinion. He knew that there were many schools already in existence, but of 1610 schools MX) were confined t o Ul s t er a l one, and 600 were scattered over other provinces.. As he had so recently troubled the house with lengthened details on this subject, he should not trespass further upon them at present. Read a second time and ordered to be committed on Wednes day fortnight. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT BILL. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL postponed the further considera tion of the report of the committee on this bill, to facilitate the progress of the corporation bill. MANURE TOLL EXEMPTION BILL. Mr. BYNG moved that the report of the committee upon this bill be received. The report was read. EXCHEQUER BILLS. Col. PERCE.VAL wished to put a question to the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, of which he had given notice yesterday, with reference to the unusual length of time the ex chequer bills had been kept in the Exchequer Office. It ap peared from the statements he had had forwarded to him that exchequer bills received at that office on the 11th of June had not been delivered till yesterday, the 23d, a circumstance he believed most unusual. If such a circumstance had taken place ten days previous to the 11th of June,, the most disastrous con gequatices -might have, ensued, as many tradesmen depended upon the issuing of thOse bills, to raise money for carrying on their trades. (Hear.) He trusted that government would ac count for the unusual length these bills h ad been kept ba'cir,v and that they w ou ld or d er t h e i ssue of that property in as short, a time as possible. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that in conse quence of the communication that had been made to him by the gallant and Annourable Member, he had directed 'a reference to be made to the whole'proceedings in the Exchequer office in order, first, to ascertain the actual state of the fact, the next, what particular circumstances had taken place that would Account for the length of time the bills had been retained. He held in his hand an account which had been prepared in conse quence, and he there found that the parties who had made the communication to his hon. friend had misrepresented many im portant particulars. On various previous. ocrasions the delay had equalled that to which the hon. and gallant member re ferred. In 1829, the time they had been detained was 12 days. In 1831, it had be en 11 d ays ; in August, 1830, it had b een El days; in August, 1833, it had been 11 days; and in May, 1834, 11 days. The cause of the delay was, that the time was propor tioned to the quantity of work to be done—the number of bills to be exchanged. In 1829, when a delay of 12 days bad oc curred, the number of Excheqher Bills to be exchanged was 14,500.—(Left speaking.) LONDON POLICE REPORT. MANSION-HOUSE, MONDAY. THE NEW ACT RESPECTING VOLUNTARY OATHS.—Alder man Thomas Wood sat for the Lord Mayor. Mr. Hibbard, a merchant of the city of London, applied to ' - the alderman to receive a voluntary oath to the correctness of some documents to be submitted to the American authorities. Alderman Thomas Wood said that he felt himself to be in a very serious difficulty, inasmach as if he allowed the oath to be taken before him be should subject himself to an indictment, and if he refused to allow it to be sworn he should occasion much commercial inconvenience. He was disposed to run the hazard of personal injury to himself in order to prevent such an embarrassment as the refusal might give rise to, and he be lieved that a section of the act would bear him out in the con struction which be should give to it relative to cases of the kind submitted to him. The 12th section ran thus :—" And whereas a practice wholly contrary to the policy of the law has been per mitted to prevail of administering and receiving oaths and affidavits taken and made in matters not the subject of judicial inquiry, nor in anywise pending, or at issue before the justice of the peace or other person by whom such oaths or affidavits have been administered or received; and whereas doubts have arisen whether or not such proceedings are illegal; for the more effectual suppression of such practice and removing such doubts, be it enacted that from and a ft er th e I s t d ay of June next it shall not be lawful for any justice of the peace or other person to administer, or cause, or allow to be received, any oath, affi davit, or solemn affirmation, touching any matter or thing whereof such justice, or other person, - bath not jurisdiction or cognizance by some statute in force for the time being. Pro vided always that nothing herein contained shall be construed or extend to any oath, affidavit, or solemn affirmation before any justice, in any matter or thing touching the preservati o n o f the peace, or the pr osecu ti on, trial ,- or punishment of offences." Now the act was not known to the public until after the Ist of June, and he, therefore, considered that the section just read would not be in operation until June, 1836. Mr. Hibbard said that the practice was a most inconvenient one, and he should wish to see it done away with.: He, however, thought that act did not contemplate the case before the alderman. That case related to a judicial inquiry in the United States. Alderman T. Wood said that he, as a magistrate, had nothing to do with the United States. If the section to which be had alluded were in operation an indictment would lie against him, but be thought lie would be justified in admitting the oath, although in a subsequent section (the 15th) it was stated "that this act shall commence and take effect from and after the 15th day of June, in this present year, the year of our Lord 1835." This section included all parts of the act, in his opinion, except the 12th section. Mr. Hibbard.—What is to be done in the case of powers of attorney in the colonies ? Mr. Holder said that powers Of attorney were made evidence by act of parliament, and were not at all contemplated in the new act. Alderman T. Wood then allowed the affidavit to be made. In several cases teleting to lost pawnbrok ers ' d up li cates he afterwards substituted the declarations of the applicants in the place of their oaths. EFFECTS OF THUNDER STORM. -SCOTLAND In no quarter of the county did the thunder storm of Tuesday se'nnight burst out with grear Violence than on the farm of Buckleside, in the parish of St. Ninians, an d occupied by Mr. Hudson. It happ en ed that while the storm was at its height, the lightning struck the top of a hay -stack in the corn-yard, and, descending in a direct line to the bottom of the stack, set it on fire. Mr. Hudson was from home at th e ti me, b ut the cir cumstance being fortunately noticed by his wife, she, notwith standing that the storm was rolling in terrific grandeur at the time, had the courage and presence of mind, aided by her equally courageous daughter, to take the most act i ve measures for averting the conflagration, which a few moments' neglect must have rendered inevitable. Seeing that the fire was con fined to the centre of the stack, where the lightning had struck, they procured a ladder, and so successfully pou re d i n water t h at they soon succeeded in extinguishing the fi re . O n th e stac k being - afterwards examined, it was found th at t h e lightning had burnt a bole in it of about four inches diameter, from the top to the bottom.—Stirling Advertiser. THUNDER STORM AT Ca lErv.--00 the aft ernoon o f T ues d ay se'nnight this place was visited by a severe thunder storm ; the lightning was vivid, and the peals of thunder succeeded each other in rapid succession. A sow, belonging to Mr. James Drummond, butcher, High-street, was struck by the lightning, and killed on the spot. After the ani ma l was opened, it was found that the electric fluid had burst the heart asunder into two, pieces, and that the liver was quite soft. The storm proceeded to the northward, and was heard rolling at a distance at a late hour in the evening. THE COTTON TRADE. New YORK, MAY 30.—Since the 25th instant, the date of the receipt of the Liverpool advices of the 17th of April, we have had a spirited demand for cotton, and the same accounts, con firmed by those of the 25th, have enabled holders to obtain their previous asking prices on good fine, and an advance on middling to fair of 4 top c. The sales f or th e l ast s i x days reach 8,500 bales, (exclusive of a cargo of 1,000 bales at an average of 191 c.;) about 1,500 have been taken on speculation. The ex port from the United St a t es t o G reat B r i tain, since October Ist, 1834, falls short of last year for the same period 30,000 bales, and to France exceeds by 40,000 . Th e i ncrease in our Own consumption is estimated at 35,000 to 45,000 bales, and thoerop at 1,250,000 to 1,300,000. There are at this time loading in the United States, for Liverpool, forty vessels less than same time last year. Import from the 23d to the 30th of May : From North Carolina 1289 „ South Carolina.. — „ Georgia 163 „ Virginia.... l-130 „ A labama .. f 1 New Orleans.. Florida Total NEw ORLEANS. MA Y 1 3.--Sales yesterday were at the follow ing price :-2,200 bales Mississippi, 19. May 14.—Sales yester day were at the followin4 prices: -400 bales Tennessee, 1G ; 2(X/ Florida, 181. Ma y lb.—Arrived since the Bth instant, 7,372 bales; cleared in same time, 17,181 bales; making a reduction in stock of 9 809, and leaving on hand, inclusive of all on ship board not cleared on the 14th instant, a stock of 91,871 bales. The fair, steady demand that has so peculiarly characterised the market throughout the present season still continues, though perhaps in a lesser degree. The sales of the week are estimat ed at 10,000 bales; the operations have been chiefly in the finer qualities, on which prices are well maintained, while for the lower grades purchasers are not willing any longer to pay the rates demanded ; we, however, continue our quotations, as no transactions have taken place that would authorise a change. KEENNESS AND Sunzurry.—" Few men of genius are keen, but almost every man of genius is subtle. If you ask use the difference between keenness and subtlety, I answer, that it is the difference between a point and an edge. To split a hair is not proof of subtlety, for subtlety acts in distinguished differ ences—in showing that two things, apparently one, are in fact two; whereas to split a hair is to cause division, and not ascer tain difference.—Coleridge's Table Talk. ANCIENT LAW -SUIT BETWEEN TIIE EGYPTIANS AND TUE JEWS.—Tuesday was, according to the Jewish calendar, the 26th of the month Sivan, a day held in commemoration by that people as being the day on which, according to their historical traditions, the great law question raised by the Egyptians against the Jews, and carried by appeal before Alexander the Great, was finally disposed of. The Egyptian nati o n c l a i me d restitution in val ue f or t h e "j ewe l s of silver and jewels of gold and raiment" burrowed of their ancestors at the period of the memorable thrusting out of the Jews from Egypt by Pharoah. How the law proceedings were carried on in those days does not exactly appear; but it seems the lawyers of the Israelites did something akin to what modern lawyers would call "filing a cross bill," or pleading a " set-off," for they raised a claim for wages of labour performed during the 40d years of their ; compulsory residence in the land of Egypt, and thereupon the Egyptians abandoned their appeal. ~°~R~~-"w,-" JUNE £6, --1835. THEATRE-ROYAL, LIVERPOOL MASANIELLO ; OR. THE DUMB GIRL OF With all all the Oliginal Music, Dances, &c. THE CELEBRATED OVERTURE PREVIOUS TO T Masaniello Pietro Mr. Br 0 . Moreno Mr. . orncastle. Elvis Mrs. Wood. To conclude with the Musical Drama of THE BARBER OF SEVILLE. PREVIOUS TO WHICH THE ORIGINAL OVERTURE WILL 56 PERFORMED. . OPERA. 00d. Count Almaviva Mr. Wood. Figaro Mr. G. Horncastle. Basil Mr. Brough. Rosina Mrs. Wood. TO-MORROW the Tragedy of BRUTUS. Brutus, Mr. Stuart. Tullis. Mrs. Stanrey. Tarquinia, Mrs. Slaw.-10 conclude with THE BROKEN SWORD. Under the Patronage of his most G acious Majestv, H. R. 11. the Princess A ugusta, Prince George of Canibridge, and several branches of the Royal amity, and a numerous list of the most noble Families in En land. IurASTER PHILLIPPS, t h e I PANT TRUMPETER, INI. (only seven years of age) begs to an noun s f i rst ap pearance at the LYCEUM ROOMS, 80l reet, Liverpool. on MONDAY next, the 29th idstant, a during the Week. The Performances will take place eac orning and Evening. to commence at O ne o ' c l ock at n, and Eight o'clock in the evening. Master Pit ILLIPPS will Perform TWELVE of his favourite Pieces. Terms of Admission—Morning Performance, 25.; Evening Performance, 25.; Tradespeople, Is. TO CORRESPONDENTS. Nis right—we were mistaken about the day. question was taken from the London Observer. The article in 7.",bc Etherpool ,i4,tanbarlj. FRIDAY AffillNlNG, JUNE 36 , 1835. By the American packet which arrived yesterday, we ' have received New York papers to the 2d instant. They are unusually full of interesting incidents. A steam boat had burst, and forty persons, to use the diffident expres sion of our repUiliCa'4,,eonterripcirary, are missing. A fire had taken place in New York and some thirty or forty houses had been burnt. In some othe - r place an hotel had tumbled down and some sixty persons, chiefly from Kentucky, had been buried--not more than ten of whom had been.killed, or more than twenty wounded. We have only to add, ''by way of consolation to share dealers, that the steamer which s 6lew up did not belong to the "People's transportation line of packet.,." At the time when these frightful accidents had occurred, all the labourers and coalheavers on the river Schuykill, near Philadelphia, had struck work, and had refused to labour more than ten hours per day. As in all such cases, ac cording to the march of intellect; ,they had resolved to murder all persons who shoulddisobey their commands, and in consequence many horrible outrages had taken place. We regret to hear this, for in all such combina tions the working classes, and the most innocent and virtuous of the working classes, suffer severerv. On the 30th May the citizens of New York had re ceived the Paris papers containing the decision of the chamber of deputies upon their compensation claims of five millions of dollars. Small though the sum be, the favourable chance of its ultimate payment produced ex hilarating effects upon the minds of the citizens, al though not unmingled with some prudential misgivings. To see a great nation made comparatively happy at so small a cost is a spectacle worthy the study of a philoso pher. The bitter, however, must be strained from the sweet, in order to render the draught palatable. The following from the New York Daily Advertiser of the Ist June, (the present month) will explain what we mean:— "There seems to be some uneasiness in the minds of a por- tion at least of the community, lest the condition annexed to the act of the French Chamber of Deputies, ordering the money under the treaty with this country to be paid; may prove the source of further difficulty, and perhaps prevent the final adjustment of the business. All that is required on the part of the French Deputies is, that General Jackson should say, in some form or other, that he did not intend, by the language made use of in his message, to threaten or intimidate them, and in that way induce them to pay the tuoney. The language of the message, after a long account of the difficulties which ex isted, and a statement of the views which the President enter tained of the exigencies of the case, and recommending that `a law be passed, authorising reprisals upon French property, in case provision shall not be made for the payment of the debt at the approaching session of the French Chambers; ' is as follows:—' Such a measure ought not to be considered by France as a menace. Her pride and power are too well known to ex pect anything from her fears, and preclude the necessity of a declaration that nothing partaking of the chcqacter of intimida tion is intended by ur. She ought to look upon it as the evidence only of an inflexible determination on the part of the United States to insist on their. rights.' It would seem that the Depu ties were not fully satisfied with this salvo at the end of the message ; and probably they were still further excited by seeing Mr. Livingston's letter, which at first blush was calculated to convey the idea that he thought it was advisible for the head of our government to talk a little largely about the conduct of our ancient ally. The Meaning of this is seen at a glance. The French make the payment of the dollars conditional upon an abject apology on the part of Mr. ANDREW JACKSON, President of the United States. The president menaced-: them with war; he is, therefore, called upon to say that lie did not mean what he said; that he had no intention to compel France to pay the money ; that he spoke and wrote of hostilities in jest ; and that he exceedingly re grets that any thing he said or wrote should have given offence to the majesty of the French nation. Unless this is done, to the letter, unequivocally, and without reser vation of any kind, the five millions will not be paid ! Now comes the qaestion—will Mr. President JACKSON make this humiliating apology ?—will he eat his words ? he unsay what he has said ? or will he, like JosEpti HußtE, call that white which only a few moons ago he pronounced to be black ? We do not think so meanly of General JACKSON as to believe thaehe will submit to Kiss the ground before young Malcolm's feet, And to be baited by the rabble's curse. No ; General JACKSON, we feel confident; will make no apology, and of course the money will not he paid. The French Chamber of Deputies calculated upon this when they offered such humiliating terms. Lord JOHN RUSSELL is already in a dilemma about his new measure of corporation reform. The ninth clause of the bill is in these words : " And be it enacted, that after the passing of this act I I'ERSON shall be elected, admitted, or enrolled a citizen, free man, liveryman, or burgess of any borough, or by any name, a member of any body corporate in respect of any right or title other than by occupancy and payment of rates within such borough , according to the meaning and provisions of this act." Viewing this clause in connexion with the preamble of the bill, we, in common with many others, conceived that it had reference only to the right of voting for the com mon councilmen of the borough. Its language was cer tainly plain enough, but this alone was calculated to lull suspicion. We could not have believed it possible any man—that Lord J OHN RUSSELL—that Mr. DANIE L O'CoNNELL—could have conte m pl ate d an d i nten ded any other more monstrous o r i n i qu i tous proscr ipti o n. It turns out, however—indeed it i s con f esse d—that Lord JOHN RUSSELL inse r t e d thi s c l ause f or t h e ex p re ss pur pose of repealing on e o f th e mos t popu l ar an d i m portant provisions of the REFORM BILL ! that There, Englishmen ! you see what a whig lord is—you see what your patriots are ! Have you forgotten.- the cry—" The bill, the whole bill, and nothing but the bill r It is this bill which Lord JonN RUSSELL has, by an art ful contrivance, endeavoured to cut to pieces, and deprive a large portion of the working classes of their political franchise. If you forgive him—if you forget this act— you will deserve to be robbed, trampled upon, and en slaved fur ever. It will be recollected that there were two reform bilk- The first was the work of Lord JOHN RUSSELL and the Earl of DURHAM. This first bill failed, for it pleased no body ; and, as the ministers saw nu chance of carrying it, they withdrew it, and substituted another. Lord GREY framed the second reform bill, Lord JouN conducted it through the house, and, after undergoing sundry mudifi- For the BENEFIT of Mr. WOOD, and the Last Ni g ht but Four of th e engagement of Mr. and "Mrs. WOOD, of the Theatres-Reyal, Covent-garden and Drury-lane. Fifth Night of the engagement of Mr. BROUGH and Mr. G. HORNCASTLE. rrIHIS present FRIDAY, the 26th instant, will be per -1 formed A u b er ' s G rand Opera of