The Express.
London, England, 1866-05-25 00:00:00

ICEPRECK FRrintr -r EVBNINCK MAW r 75J Mit

dement of the commercial pumedenca rof .Eagland: • b
Alert' to the NW he had 'Attest considered the po!ley
of reducing the national debt by means of terminable
annuities at lege, because he had deemed that to be a
flied principle of our financial system ; and what he pro-
posed was a very partial attempt to nary out that prin-
ciple. At the close of the great war, debt was being paid
off at the rate of 1900,0001. per annum, while in 1840 that
amount had been increased to over four million', which
was in 18139 about the average paid for half a
century. In 1850, by the lapse of the long an-
nuities, the charge was a little over two millions per
annum, while in last year it was about 430,000/. more. The
measure now proposed was an attempt to approxi-
mate the reducing the national debt and terminable
annuities to the point at which it stood before 1880. lie
oonteraded that the argument against paying off mosey
which was only chargeable with a low interest was falla-
cious, for 11 the money so paid off did not cease to exist,
but went etrffight into the money market, and was applied
to the extreme to commercial enterprise. He admitted
that the national dehtskat its present amount was relatively
smaller, looking to ourtidereased wealth and population, than
when it stood at three *studied millions ; but it must be
remembered that this country was only extricating itself
from the incidental difficulties arising out of the
war, which increased our national debt to eight or nine
hundred millions. Owing to our supremacy on the sea
during the revolutionary war immense openings were given
to our foreign trade, which now could not be maintained,
so that there was no parallel in the circumstances. The
bill proposed in the first place to convert twenty-four
millions of savings banks deposits into terminable an-
nuities at a charge of 1,925,0001. Any balances which
might arise would be invested in government securities
and any stock so acquired would be subject to the second
operation of the measure, which would be the conversion of
such stock into another set of annuities terminable in
1905. The maximum increase of charge on the first opera-
tion would be 420,0001., while that on the second opera-
tion would be 1,295,0001., which added to the 420,0001. on
the first operation would make a sum of 1,715,000/. But
in 1885 there would be a relief of over two millions by the
' lapse of other terminable annuities, which would be placed
against the charge of 1,715,0001. The amount of consols
cancelled in 1885 would be sixty-two million' and • half.
As regarded the principle of the plan, it was not
by any means to be taken as involving that of the
sinking fund, to which be was decidedly opposed.
There could be no obction to terminable annuities in a
I year of surplus ; but In a year of deficit, though nothing
was gained, there was less disadvantage than in the ease
of sinking funds. Under the present bill the terminable
ar.nuities could not be sold in the open market. The right
hon. gentleman then pointed out that the finance minister
being on the one hand a borrower, and on the other a
banker, only the investments of the banker balanced
the deficiencies of the borrower ; and this ope-
ration would apply to the meeting the charge
for terminable annuities in years of deficit. The success
of the proposed plan depended on • thorough understand-
ing of the position of the state as bankers and investors of
the sums taken from the savings banks ; and the bearing
of the scheme on the assets, not the liabilities, of the
state. On the whole it was proposed to adhere to the po-
licy of paying off debt by means of terminable annuities
cleared of their normal inconveniences and losses, and
avoiding the objection of being borrowers and payers of
debt in the same year.
- - -

A discussion ensued, carried on by Mr. Hubbard ; Mr.
Laing, who criticised the plan, and intimated a preference
for a sinking fund, or at least a more experimental mode of
attacking the national debt than that proposed in the
first instance—but he should prefer increasing the income
tax to create a fund directly applicable year by year to
buying and extinguishing Consols ; Sir F. Kelly, who ob-
jected to the bill on the ground that it would for forty
years prevent any remission of taxation, and especially on
tea, sugar, coffee, and malt; Mr. Fawcett, who ob-
jected to the plan, and referring to the question of coal
supply, expressed an opinion that there was no proximate
danger,' to England's commercial supremacy, and took
occasion to draw attention to the effect of the proposed
scheme on the labouring classes, by its tendency to increase
the burden of taxation, and suggested decreased expendi-
ture as the means of decreasing the national debt ;
Mr. Childers, who explained succinctly and clearly
the purposes and results of the proposed plan ; Mr.
Henley, who could not see the difference between
' the proposal and a sinking fund, and urged that
the plan could not work except in prosperous and
undisturbed times ; Mr. Samuelson, who discussed the
subject of the coal supply, and asked for definite informa-
tion on that point ; Mr. Liddell, who was of opinion that
the time was favourable for the consideration of the Na-
t tional Debt, and ought to be availed of ; and Mr. Hussey
Vivian, who wished discussion on the coal question to be
postponed till a motion of his came on, and cordially sup-
ported the proposition of the government, and only wished
it was concurred in on a much larger scale.
The bill was then read a second time.

COMMONS (METROPOLIS) BILL.

Mr. COV7PER, in moving the second reading of this
bill, said its purpose was to meet • wish which had been
very strongly expressed by the public for some legislation
to prevent the destruction now so frequently observed of
places of beauty, health, and enjoyment around the metro-
polio. The subject was admitted to be one of considerable
difficulty and complexity, and the difficulty arose mainly
from the great alteration that had taken place since
the solutes were first established, in agriculture
and the mode of feeding cattle. The change in the
feeding of cattle had rendered obsolete the uses to which
these commons were originally put, while the growth of
this gigantic city and the progress of railways had given
them advantages and uses which they did not formerly
possess. The principal provision of the bill was that the
Inclosure Act should not apply to the suburban commons
within the metropolitan police district, which was also the
district for levying' coal dues, and which in the main
included all the perishes within a radius of 15 miles. The
other object was the establishment of a machin-
ery by which in each particular case a local
management might be set up according to the
particular circumstances of the common. It would be
obvious that the General Inclosure Act ought not to apply
to the suburban commons which were in the immediate
vicinity either of London or of other large towns. The
purpose of that act was stated to be to promote the culti-
vation of land, and to increase the profit of the employ-
ment of labour, and it was therefore intended for the
public good, and not for the public evil. The commons in
the neighbourhood of London were not generally inclosed
for the purpose of agriculture. The temptation arose to
inclose them for the purpose of building, and consequently
the good endeavoured to be obtained by the Inclosure Act
would become an evil if applied to the other purpose of
covering the common with streets, squares, and terraces.
The framers of the General Inclosure Act were fully alive
to this difference because they inserted a clause by which
all waste lands which were to be inclosed within 15 miles
of the metropolis, and within four, three, or two miles of
other towns, were not to be enclosed under the provisions
of the act without the special authority of parliament. It
was fair, and in accordance with past legislation, that they
should no longer give the benefit of the Inclosure Act for
the purpose of the commons round London being built
upon. This bill did not deprive the owner of any rights
of common or any authority or right that he now possessed.
Every lord of the manor or commoner was left in possession
of all the privilege, and rights he now held independently
of the Inclosure Act. There was nothing to prevent
inclosure by agreement between the lord and com-
moners, and nothing to prevent inclosure by the
statute of Merton. l'he statute of Merton, however,
had very little effect with regard to the commons
with which the bill dealt, as it only applied where there
were rights of pasture. Of course the lord of the manor
or the commoners would still have the ordinary power of
introducing a private bill. There were some commons,
like Hampstead-heath and perhaps Peckham-rye, which
ought to be made the subject of compulsory purchase by
the Metropolitan Board of Works, being in close prox-
imity to populous districts, and being places of great
resort they ought to be treated like parks, and
secured for the benefit of the public for ever.
The Board of Works had recently purchased ground to
make two parks, north-east and south-east of London,one
Finsbury-park and the other Southwark-park, and he hoped
they would introduce a bill to enable them to purchase
Hampstead-heath and the adjacent parts ; but that of
coarse would only be done by a private bill. The commons
chiefly to be dealt with by this bill were those beyond the
jurisdiction of the metropolitan board, and were commons
which neither the lord of the manor nor the commoner
desired to enclose for building purposes. The
intention was to enable action to be taken
by those who had rights on the commons, as-
!fisted by the funds of the parish or the public at large
and the cases were very numerous where the enjoyment
of commons was entirely spoilt from the want of proper
regulations. He might instance the ease of Wandsworth-
common, where holes had been dug to such a depth that
unfortunately men had been drowned there. Other owe-
mots were frequented by persons who were • nuisance
to all respectable people, and prevented any satisfactory
enjoyment of them. With regard to some of the commons
an arrangement had been made between the inhabitants
and the lord of the manor that an annual sum
of money should be subscribed, and proper provision
made for keeping the commons in order, but in those
instances it had been found there was a want of power to
enforce any regulations which might be made. The object
of the bill was to enable a local management to be set up
in the seas of such commons where such local manage-
ment was required. The question was how local provision
was to be made. The customs of each manor varied, and
it therefore seemed reasonable that a provisional scheme
should be made in each instance, and that that
should be confirmed by an act of parliament. It
would be necessary to establish a new body
of commissioners who would make the inquiry
ueoessery in each particular ease in order to prepare the
different schemes. That body would be selected in •
manner to secure full responsibility. There would be flee
commissioners—three being official persons, end two se-
lected from their knowledge of the ',abject, and having
Leisure to attend to its details. The official commissioners
would be—the Pint Commissioner of Works, the Inclo-
sure Commissioner and the Chairman of the Metropolitan
Board of Works, all of whom would be as responsible as any
persons that could be selected. He believed this scheme
would be found to work well. It went on the principle
of local management with central organisation ;
but if the Metropolitan Beard had bees re-

lected the traanaoement would have been central,
and be thought that action might prove kajurious
leilanse they could not expert a body of • 46 pews sitting
at Spring-gardens would give the same attention to eiga-
mons fie the inhabitants who were resident near the spot.
In conclusion, the right boa. gentleman moved the mond
reading of the bill:
Mr. AYRTON moved the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. COWPER thought the °purse adopted by the hon.
member somewhat unusual, and trusted he would not
persevere in it. The govarnment would listen with great
pleasure to anything he might wish to say on the subject
Wetted by the bill.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE also blurted the hon. gentleman
would allow the discussion to proceed.
The motion was then withdrawn.
Mr. AYRTON said he was glad to have an sasurancs that the
governmentwere disposed to go on with this subject to the
end. With regard to the preservation of open for the
recreation of the people this was more y desirable
in the case of the . metropolis, where the inhabitants had
frequently to walk a considerable distant* to escape from
the- thick and sooty atmosphere of the more
crowded parts of the town. He thought, how-
ever, that in dealing with this question they should
hesitate to set up what had been so generally con-
sidered for many years past a dilettante irresponsible
commisaion, to do the work which required the careful
attention of responsible persona. The question he desired
to raise was whether it wee expedient to set up such a
commission as that which would be composed under this
bill, or whether they ahould proceed in accordance with
the spirit of modern legislation, and establish some recog-
nised authority for the purpose of carrying out the
object of the bill. He believed that the object they
had in view was more likely to be frustrated than pro-
moted by the bill. Practically, little would be done by
the commission when it was established. It did not appear
by whom the preliminary expenses were to be paid, unless
it was by the memorialists, and if this were so, he doubted
whether they wonld get any one to interfere in the matter.
Again, although the proceedings under the bill might have
nothing to do with the metropolis, and might relate
to places fifteen miles away, one-half of the ex-
penses of the inquiries and investigation would
be charged on the ratepayers of the metropolis.
Before embarking on this new scheme they were bound to
satisfy themselves that it was absolutely necessary,
and having already an expensive establishment,
the question they had to ask themselves was whether
the existing body was not the best they could
find for discharging the duties that might be imposed
upon it by parliament in reference to the commons.
The question was, whether it was desirable to set up a new
and costly commission, or whether they should not rather
allow the Enclosure Commissioners, who were kept up at
an expense of 20,000/. • year, to deal with the matter. His
object was not unfriendly to the bill, but he desired to
make it really efficient for the purposes for which it was
designed. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would ac-
cept his proposal, for the measure as it now stood was
calculated, not to conciliate the local authorities, but to
offend them. The Metropolitan Board of Works had
already provided two parka for the people of London,
and it was not likely that they would be pleased at being
deprived of a power which they already possessed. The
best course would be to send the bill before a select com-
mittee with instructions large enough to permit a
thorough inquiry. into the whole subject. He begged to
move that it is inexpedient to transfer the duty with
which the Metropolitan Board is by law invested to an
irresponsible board, having power to incur expenditure
and to charge the same on the ratepayers of the metro-
polis ; but it is desirable to amend the Inclosure Acts so
as to enable the Metropolitan Board and local authorities
in towns, with the aid of the Enclosure Commissioners, to
acquire, by purchase or gift, rights in commons, in order
that the same may be kept open for the recreation of the
inhabitants of the metropolis and such towns.
Sir W. JOLLIFFE did not wish to oppose the bill, but
he wished to call the attention of the right hon. gentle-
man to the fact that it did not carry out the suggestions of
the committee. That committee, for example, did not re-
commend a commission.—{Mr. COWPER: Yes, it did.] He
did not see why the Enclosure Commissioners should not
be considered perfectly able to protect the commons of the
metropolis. The great complaint was as to the negligence
of the Woods and Forests. The department bad actually
for the sake of a few pounds a year deprived the public of
a portion of Blackheath—(cheers)--and he should like to
keow what would become of the enjoyment of
the metropolis if the hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for West Surrey were to treat Epsom Downs
as the government had treated Blackheath ? (Hear, hear.)
The commission which it was proposed to establish by this
bill was not only unnecessary, but absurd ; and its
creation would impose considerable expense upon the
country. He should certainly vote in favour of the
amendment.
Mr. J. LOCKE said that be had in the committee
objected, and still objected, to place the control of the
commons in the hands of the Metropolitan Board of Works.
He should be sorry if there were any difference of opinion
amongst hon. members, for their only object was to keep
the commons around the metropolis m their present state
as to extent, for the benefit of the people who resided
in it. _ _

After a few words from Mr. C. BrITON,
Mr. COWPER agreed to the bill being referred to a se-
lect committee, with instructions that they should apply
it to other places beyond the area of the metropolis.
Mr. SANDFORD objected to exceptional legislation,
and wished that enclosures should take place under certain
circumstances.
Alderman LAWRENCE regretted that the bill was to
be referred to a select committee.
Mr. AYRTON offered to withdraw his amendment, and
the bill was read a second time, and it was ordered to be
referred to a select committee.
The Local Government Supplemental (No. 2) Bill passed
through committee.
The Nuisances Removal Bill was read a second time.
The Solicitor to the Treasury Bill was read a third time
and passed, as was also the Companies Act (1862) Amend-
ment BilL
The report on the Fishery Piers and Harbours (Trga.n.:3l,l
I Bill was read and agreed to, and the bill afterwards
through committee.
The Railways Companies Securities Bill was read a
second time, and was ordered to be referred to a select
committee.
The Elections (Returning Officers) Bill was read a second
time.
The other business was disposed of, and the house
adjourned at half-past one o'clock.

THE BOARD OF TRADE AND THE PROPOSED MEA-
srREMENT or STEAMSHIPS. —A report from Mr. Miller, the
Customs' chief surveyor for tonnage, was read at the
meeting of the Mersey Dock Board yesterday, and was to
the effect that the allowance proposed to be made to ,
paddle steamers would be even greater than under the
act of 1854. The Dock Board Committee felt that this
could never have been intended by the Board of Trade, as
it had always been felt that the allowance under the act of
1854 was unjust, and that any modification should be in
the way of reducing it, not of increasing it. It was ulti-
mately resolved that, before the new allowance was en-
forced, the views of the committee should be submitted to
the Board of Trade.
ALEXANDRA ORPHANAGE /OR I NPANTS. —The
annual meeting of this institution was held yesterday,
when a report, which was adopted, stated that in the
short specs of sixteen months, the sum of 2,785!. 15s. Bd.
hes been received; twenty-four infants have been admitted,
and the committee will be prepared to receive twenty-four
more during the present year. The necessity for larger
premises is already manifest, for when whooping cough
prevailed there was not sufficient room properly to separate
the infants. The committee have for some time been
making inquiries for freehold land, upon which to
erect convenient premises for the infant family, but
hitherto they have found it difficult to obtain
any suitable even at a very high price, and they
think it undesirable, if it can be avoided, to remove the
infants to a distance from London. If suitable land can
be obtained, the committee desire that the new buildings
should be on the north or west of London, easily accessible
by some cheap conveyance. The committee are very de-
cided in opinion that it is undesirable to build a mansion
for the reception of infant orphan children. They would
rather see the home principle carried out in all its arrange-
ments. A plan has been suggested for building separate
house, for twenty-five or thirty infants, each of which, it
L considered, can be managed by two nurses. The erection
of these houses need not coat more than 5001. each. This
would doubtless be met to a large extent by individuals or
by committee; which might be formed. Upon the plan
being mentioned to a friend of the orphanage, he at once
agreed to undertake the erection of one of them, and will
endeavour to form a committee of ladies to provide the
cost of a second. Another friend who has promised a
donation of 5001., will devote that sum to the same pur-
pose. If the work an be done in this simple manner, the
business of the committee will be to find the land and to
erect the school, the dining-room, and the domestic offices,
with the hope that other kind friends besides those referred
to will provide the homes.
THE DISTRESS IN THE MANIIPACTURING DIS-
TRIMS. —The Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Trea-
sury have, on the recommendation of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, and at the request of the President of the
Poor-law Board, awarded to Mr. Farnall, C. 8., the sum of
1,0001. for the extra services which he rendered as special
commissioner of poor laws during the period of distress in
the manufacturing districts of Lancashire occasioned by
the scarcity of cotton. Their lordships have also granted
gratuities, varying from 1501. to 101., to some of the clerks
who hays been employed on this ranch of the public
service.
The North German Lloyd's and the Hamburg
and American Steam-packet Companies will, it is expected,
convey to New York nearly 200,000 German emigrants.
The approaching war is hurrying the Germans to leave
their Fatherland for a home in the far West.
HEALTH AND STRENGTH RESTORED ET DTIBARET'II
DIIMMOI Enemata ARAIICA TOOL which cures WitkOld me-
dicine or iseimvenienc• dyspepsia dadisestiesd, meet, asthma,
consuaptioa, debility, constipation, diarrheas, palpitation, nee-
man bilious, liver, and stomach complaints. It saves Shy times
tic met In other remedies, and is the blest toed for infants

67.406 eII2M 1111111aiii=ffuASTTi if,ittiest-atTee7t.
London, W. In Idaa, at la 1.4.; 114, to 94.; 1211 a, 22a. ;
1141bn, 40a. ; &Imo at 111, Oraeochnrchalroot ; 4, aloolnalls; 43.1141.
and R Ozionloinod ; and at an aroma —P.dwelloosiost

IlLalu'lntiffisentr.

•
EQUITY COURTS.—SLY
(Before the Mater of the RAO
11112 LONDON AND BANDUNG OONTINNISTAL ICCOSIANOM
00NPANT.-87AYTORD AND NANNY.* OANE.
In this case, Ward being on the register as member in
respect of 30 shares sought to have the name of Stafford
or of Henry sub,tituted for his own in the
list of ceatribu • upon which be was *pod
by reason of his being on the register of members.
Tbe facts were that Ward had sold, through
Henry as .his broker, the shares in question to Stafford,
and executed a transfer to him, and subsequently in settle-
ment of general accounts between Henry and Stafford, it
was arranged that Henry should take to the shares, but
Stafford refusing or neglecting to get himself pissed on the
register, and to transfer to Henry, he ilienry) procured to
himself a transfer from Ward, but on application to the
company to register' the transfer Stafford interposed to
prevent it, and at the time of the petition to wind up a
suit had berm instituted by Henry against Stafford 'to
obtain a blinder of the shares.
The Master of the Roil, held that as Ward was always
ready and willing to complete his sale, either Stafford or
Henry must be put on the list in his place, and that Henry
was the true owner of the shares in equity, and must be
put on the list of oontributories accordingly.

IMMEIWON'ES CARL
The question here aroee thus. On the 11th 1865,
Enunerson purchased on the Stook Exchange from Mr.
Ward twenty shares in the company, and a bought and sold
note was delivered on the occasion. Neither party was then
aware that a petition for the winding_ up of the company
had that very day been presented. The sale war perfectly
bona. fide, and took place after the presentation. indeed
of the petition, but before the usual advertisement had ap-

- .
peered.
His Lordship said be had hitherto held that the
first appearance of advertisements fixed the status of
the parties in these cases, inasmuch as it was the duty of
sellers of shares in companies to aecertsin whether or no •
petition had been presented for winding up the company
at the time of the sale. This applied to both buyer and
seller, but chiefly to the latter, who must best know the
facts of his position. Till the advertisement appeared, of
course parties to such transactions might deal (aasuming
bona fides) as though there were no proceedings to wind
up if, however, there were fraud on either side the con-
tract would would be vitiated, and no shareholder could escape
the consequences in such a case of his position as such.
The Companies Act (1862) provided that the winding up
of a company by the court should be deemed to
commence when the petition was presented, and that any
each petition was a hs pendens provided it was duly regis-
tered as required by the Lia Pendens Act (the 2nd and 3rd
Vict. c. 11) concerning suits in equity, from which it I
would appear that the petition, in order to its being a lis
pendens, must be registered. The act (1862) further pro-
vided (sec. 153) that when any company was being wound
up by the court all dispositions of the property, &c., of the
company, and every transfer of shares or alteration in the
status of the members of the company made between the
commencement of the winding-up and the order for wind-
ing-up should, unless the court otherwise ordered, be
void. Under these words his lordship thought the
court had • discretionary power, and that if it
were held that all transactions occurring after,
the filing of the petition were void grave injustice
might be done. A petition might be filed and not advertised
for months or a year, and then a winding-up order made at
that distance of time, during which bona fide transactions
might have taken place, would, unless the court exercised
this power, invalidate all that had been done. His lord-
ship thought the discretion given to the court enabled it
to validate such bona fide transactions, and in this view his
lordship thought the sale by Ward to Emmerson was good,
and the name of the latter must be placed on the list.
In the case of the purchase of another 20 shares from
Colonel Toombs, the same considerations arose, and his
lordship held that Emmerson was a contributory.
Mr. Selwyn, Q.C., and Mr. Roxburgh were for the liqui-
dater ; Mr. Baggally, Q.C., Mr. Jewell, Mr. Swanston,and
Mr. Kerslake were in the case.
After giving judgment in this case this morning, his lord-
ship said he wished to add a few words with reference to
what had recently taken place in his chambers, on the part
of certain joint stock companies, with • view of
stopping all such proceedings in future. He would
not mention the names of any companies, but what
had happened was this : Banking company A held
shares in company B. Company A was solvent,
but had reason to believe that company B, though
not then actually insolvent, might, and would probably
be, soon ordered to be wound up. Company A, knowing
that, managed to transfer their shares in Company B to •
purchaser, and then applied in chambers to have the pur-
chaser put on the list of shareholders in B Company, offer-
ing to guarantee him against the consequences of such an
arrangement. Now, the object of Company A was trans-
parent ; it was to conceal from their own customers what
they had done. In his lordship's opinion the 153rd sec-
tion of the Companies Act, 1862, applied to such a case,
and gave the court a discretion to deal with it as it thought
fit. The foundation of all dealings and transactions
between parties in these cases was equity, and that his
lordship would sternly enforce. It was to be understood
such tnaleactlous would not be tolerated.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
MAT 24.
PAGLAB V. TONGUE.
Dr. Spinks for the plaintiff ; Dr. Tristram for the de-
fendant.
The testatrix had been living apart from her husband
for 20 years, during which time she bad supported herself
and her children. Eventually a formal deed of separation
had been executed, under which she would have had an
undoubted jus clisponendi, but the will before the court
had been made before the date of that instrument. The
defendant (the husband) resisted probate, on the ground
that his wife bad no power to make a testamentary dis-
sition of her effects; but it was contended on the other
side that by the Wills Act a will must be taken to speak
from the date, not of the execution but of the death, and
that therefore the case was exactly as if the will had been
made after the deed of separation.
Sir J. Wilde considered that he ought to grant probate,
the paper having been duly executed, and there being
priml facie evidence of the existence of a power. Whether
that power really existed, or whether it had been properly
executed, the Court of Chancery must decide.

*parting figtelltgents.

MANCHIMT= RACES—THURSDAY.
Tex TWO-yßaii-ot.D Swats of 10 sore, each, with 50 added;
oosa, bib ; Ine ; whom a*pa. WNW.
Mr. MackeaMs nwMometer 1
Mr. ?oboist's Tlmbrel
Mr. Stevenea Premier
The following also Tea:—Rejoinder, West lencaddre, Tidy,
and Mies Alien
Betting 6 to 4 on Thennometer, 6 to 1 each apt Rejoinder
and Timbrel, 7 to 1 apt as Altos and Premier.
Tea CM RAMONA" of 60 sore, fer I.yr-olds and upwards
winners extra. Three-quarfars of a mile.
Mr. Paimer'sCaftlmses 1
Mr. Ifekrett's lfdinburgh
Mr. George's Wallet
Quest of Tramps also
Betting : Rem on Ceithbees, to 1 apt Tleen of Trumps, tto
1 asst Idiaburgh, 10 to 1 apt Wallet.
Tug Mencifwirra TRADZellatell Cur of 160 move., added to a
sweepstakes of 15 am. each ; winners extra. Two miles.
Mr. Handley's Retroaaa6 1
Mr:Topham nd The Clown
Mr. Mastermans Honesty
The following also ran :--Carperby, Helen, and Arkansas.
Betting : 6 to 4 apt Honesty, 9 to t apt The Clown, 5 to 1 apt
Arkansas, 6 to 1 apt Naturalist, and 10 to 1 apt Csrperby.
Tea 81ILLIMO LiADIDICAP of Seers. each, with 40 added. One
mile.
Mr. George's Wallet
Mr. Yobert's Vagrant
Mr. Rich's King of France
East &lei; ran.
Betting : 6 to 4on Vagrant, 3 to 1 apt King of France, 4 to 1
Met Wallet.
TM TROMSO PAIL Maass, a handicap of 7 soya. each,
with 80 added, for 3-yr-olds and upwards ; wtnwn extra. One
_ _

.. 1

.......
Lord Bateman's Queen of Trumps
Captain Grays Castanet
II r. F. Buckley, jun. M.P.. nd Wymrstay
BeMtlar : 3 to 4 oh Wrinstay, a to 4 agst, Castanet, 7 to angst
Queen of Trumps.
HER MAJESTY'S PLATS of 10guLneu for 3-yr-olds and up-
wards ; weight for age. Three miles and a distance.
Mr. Lincoln's Salim, by Iran—Light of the Harem 1
yr. Slater's art
Betting: S to 1 on Selim.