The Sun.
London, England, 1852-06-25 00:00:00

ourtb laVition

SUN OFFICE, Seven o' Clock.

tiVIPERIAL PA RLIAMEN

(THIS DAY.)

ROUSE OF LORDS;
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool
sack at Five o'clock.

LEGAL EDUCATION.
Lord LYNDLIURST asked the Chief Justice whether
he was satisfied with the present state of legal education?
Lord CAMPBELL said he thought the state of legal
educaion had hitherto been very disgracrful, but re-
cently steps had been taken to place this in a much
better condition, and he hoped that these improvements
would be carried much further.
Lord BROUGHAM said that, as a bencher of Lin-
coln's Inn, he wished to say that he thought it was the
desire of his brother benchers to carry tne improvements
lately adopted much further. For his own part, he
thought the degrees sought to be conferred ought to be
the result of compulsory examination.
Earl GRANVILLE brought up the report of the
Select Committee on the mode of Printing the Papers
and Proceedings of the House, and made several sug-
gestions, the nature of which did not reach the gallery.
A short conversation ensued, in which Lord Redes-
dale, Lord Brougham, Lord Monteagle, the Earl of
Derby, and Lord Grey took pare.
(LEFT SITTING.)

TIOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Two o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Lords' amendments to the following Bills were
considered and agreed to:—
Landon Necropolis and National Mausoleum.
Lancashire and Yorkshire Rsiiway.
Humber Conservancy and Kingston-upon-Hull Docks.
Oxiurd, Worcester, and Wolverht►mpt,.n Railway (Nu. 1).
The Birkenhead D Trust, a, Jarvis's Cnarity Es-
tate, and Thornhill's Estate Bills were read a third time
and passed.
ABERDEEN BOYS' AND GIRLS' HOSPITALS
BILL.
On the motion that the Lords' amendments be consi-
dered and agreed to,
Mr. GLADSTONE moved that the word " Right" be
ins,.rted b•fore rend Prelate, " Right Reverend"
being the legal title of a Bishop.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the motion ~. ... ••• 64
Against it 15
jority —49
Mr. GLADSTONE objected to the description of
Bishop Skinner as " Episcopal Bishop" of Aberdeen,
and he therefore proposed to strike out the word '• Epis-
copal," and insert in its stead, " Primate of the Episcopal
Church in Scotland."
This motion was also agreed to, but without a division.
PE LITIONS.
Mr. MASTERMAN presented a petition from the
City against betting offices.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE presented a petition from an in-
dividual proposing a new plan for improving the sewer-
age of the metropolis and the water of the Thames, and
praying the Howse to inquire into it.
BISHOPS IN AUSTRALIA.
Sir R. H. INGLIS wished to put a question to the
Secretary of Sate for the Colonial Department, on the
subject involved in the Lord Bishop of Sydney's remon-
strance, dated May 22, 1850. He wanted to know
whether the Roman Catholic Primate in Australia was
to be permitted to take precedence of the Bishop of the
Established Church.
Sir JOHN PAKINGTON was not aware until be

entered the. House of what woull be the:exact shape of
his Hon. Friend's question, but he was nevertheless pre-
pared to give it a detailed answer. The House must
permit him to refer to the dispatches to which his Hon.
Friend's question had reference. The first dispatch was
a circular dispatch of Lord Grey, dated the 20th Nov.,
1847, and in that dispatch these words occur:—" As
Parliament by a recent Act, viz., the Charitable Trusts
Act, recognised the titles of Roman Catholic prelates,
and virtually directed that the Roman Catholic Arch-
bishop shall take rank with the Protestant Archbishop,
the Governor is instructed hereafter to address the

Roman Catholic archbishop or bishop by the title of
Your Grace' or 'Your Lordship,' as the case may be."
Some misapprehension arose in the colony as to the
construction to be planed upon this passage, as the pre-
mises did not justity the conclusion. It was thought
that, according to this passage, Archbishop Cole had
precedence over the Bishop of New Zealand, and a
dispatch was forwarded from the colony to that effect.
On the 9th November, 1849, Lord Grey sent another
dispatch on the subject, in which he stated that he looked
upon the Bishop of Sydney as a metropolitan, and there-
fore he considered that the Right Rev. Prelate took pre-
ctdence of the Roman Catholic Archbishop. Then tol-
.
bowed the remonstrance of the Bishop of Sydney re-
terre.
Al to bv his lion. Friend, which was received at the
C •
,c.b°l,l?nnia_l•office on. the
.4th of January, 1851, and which
wetr
entitled the bishops of the Established Church
catZ by law to take precedence of all the Roman
rewttC.purelates and primates. That remonstrance still
Ws atttngtion_aeswered;
.but he intended shortly to give
intheenctutloo,4l:oto the subj-ct, and to send a dispatch to
oitittounicattng the views which the Govern-
p do
oc
Anr.c.
or 0 I
lime
ho
rocSo.fnih)t
tt.ohi I:itleae ,
aida
iwteihd:ah.
ittt
id hiss precedence
..
li IRLwi gihshi, te
h II
tohne.
RForimenand
C a
rSr
el: r fit)
tbi al
er I
recd
eei
to
i ta.c4L
ail
waS able now to
i.atate that Government was not pre-
._Nit_could give no further answer
tha6eirtij)a. %PwAhßicitli he
a fl already communicated to the
Ileuse.
Sir FL INGLIS said that.„..t he should bring the subject
use, should he get a seat in
C 0 NSTIT-0,,,,,
tuhned er
nest
Mr,:
vg
al )0. f: ji
W:i 10,i
riot:
1- r °t:Eosmt,
slidt l why
ißi :ihhgredee . :Pha rg::::ignivvi* -_:: idek.
.t? ask the First Corn-
shg
rd
eqdr
at
loos
swwo s
nun.
thatywfsatsrmi wdtphii:eit
ICl:nro(ilsmnBfit(itntbTueetr.iponuble ?
h cause he h
nn
e i r
.) withdrawn,Ne
peesr'‘wist.—:atvrdidbL:
lion had been Pur,, -e , ~ %kJ, a vet
ascended the throne
en withdrawn
to give to it.
1:,..t.0n,f
rated it was not •
to the public'
norpriv
privilege
et
oinn
nteencdteedd
With
they iitched
petition from Canter-
tw'rhoilnl e
it p3ncbalri
thee sin cstablee he
4.3141,::j.F.,;T0ap5z
ed
l'or :he i..arposes of the Exh.
tended to withdraw That privlieg"—"-lettr, htar.) In.
NEW ZEALAND.
Canter-
burg oAloDnyD,EitlßNLeEwYzu2arelaienecit,
,the conduct
of the Governor in Wisrepresentitig tn . Principles
ou
and pr: 1113 g the Bosse
which the colony was t'.undecl.
- went of their e
Ider:plaiwngsu of
to consider them a constitutional
_Pa. ha r Own. , :

CHICORY.
Sir PAGE WOOD said considerable apprehension
was felt among parties interested in the growth of chi-
cory, in consequence of a statement which had been
made in another place, and on behalf of a number of
gentlemen who had invested considerable capital in the
manufacture of chicory on the faith of a Treasnryminute
issued August, 1840, he wished to ask whether It WA3

the intention of the Government to :nuke any alteration
and wilether it was intended that such
4should take immediate effPc, ?—( sear.)
ini'Tetrhh:etti°mrin tl;
CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Treasury minute respecting chicory had not been altered,
and when it was altered it would be done in such a way
as not to injure the fair trade of the country.—(Hear.)
THE CAPE.
Mr, ADDERLEY wished to ask the Secretary of
State for the C lorries it recent information from the
Cape of Good Hope represented General Cathcart's
policy to be that of driving the Gaikas over the Kei upon
the tribes beyond, and occupying their vacated territory;
and if so, what prospects there may seem to be of any
remote termination of the war?
Sir J. PAKINGTON said that he had to state that
the last dispatch received from General Cathcart, which
was the first the General had forwarded since his arrival
at the seat of war, did announce to the Government
that he had made public in the colony his intention to
drive the Gaikas across the Kei, but the Government
did not regard that announcement as one which was in-
tended to be put in force. It was looked upon
as a threat which General Cathcart had thought
necessary for the purpose of bringing the war to
a speedy termination. In answer to the latter
part of his Hon. Friend's question, as to whether there
was any prospect of a termination of the war, ho had
only to state that General Cathcart'e dispatch did give
hopes of such a result.
METROPOLITAN BURIALS BILL.
The House astir into Committee on this Bill.
In reply to Lord EBRING CON,
Lord J. MANNERS said it was the intention of the
Government to oppose any proviso to prevent closed
private burial-grounds being used for building purposes.
On clause 2,
Lord EBRINGTON moved the addition of a proviso
to the eff-ct that no dwelling-houses, shops, or ware-
houses should be erected on burial-grounds in the
metropolis in which burials were discontinued by order
or the Treason.
Lard R. GROSVENOR should be sorry to see closed
burial-grounds built on, but thought if the proviso
were agreed to the proprietors of the grounds ought to
receive compensation.
Lord DUi)LEY STUART did not see how it was
proviso to pass the proviso without giving compensation.
Sir B HALL took the same view of the question.
Sir W. CLAY was glad the Noble Lord had done him
the honour of taking up the proviso which he had origi-
nally proposed. He, however, admitted that the proviso
without a compensating clause would be a great hard
ship to parties, and for that reason he would sugges
that the Noble Lord should withdraw it.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH opposed, and Mr. B. COCH.
RANE supported the proviso.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the proviso ...
Against it

... 80

... -59

Majority ...
Clause 2 was then agreed to.
The other clauses were then agreed to, the House re
turned, and the Bill was read a third time.
GENERAL BOARD OF HEALTH (NO. 2) BILL.
The Bill was read a third time and passed.
CORRUPT PRACTICES AT ELECTIONS BILL.
On the motion of Lord John Russell the Lords'
amendments to this Bill were read.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he could not say that the Bill
had been at all improved in its passage through the
other House. The first amendment was that an address
for inquiry should be agreed to by both Houses, instead
of proceeding from the House of Commons alone.
The effect of that amendment would be to
render two preliminary inquiries necessary be-
fore the effectual and real inquiry could be
reached.—(Hear, hear.) This he thought would be
an obstacle in the way of inquiry. Lord Lansdowne had
told him that he was taken by surprise when the amend-
' ments were proposed in the House of Lords, but that
he did express his disapproval of them, considering, as he
(Lord John Russell) did, that they would diminish the
efficiency of the Bill. The other amendments ,were not
of so much importance. It was true the Lords had de-
cided that it should not be in the powor of the Commis-
sioners to make a retrospective inquriry in the
event of its not being proved that corrupt practices
existed at the election with respect to which the inquiry
was to be made. It would appear, at first sight, that if
an election took place by compromise all the corrupt
practices that had existed for a series of years
in the borough would pass without inquiry,
but that was not the effect of the Bill as
amended. At a general election, for instance, every per-
son in a borough might be bribed, but if another hap-
pened in a few weeks afterwards, at which none
were bribed, that would not prevent the House inquir-
ing into the corrupt practices at the general election.
He therefore did not think that amendment would be so
injurious. The next amendment was the omission of
the word " treating" as one of the offences to be in-
quired into. It should be recollected that this Bill was
intended to deal with bribery and corruption, and not treat-
ing; but still if there was;tl gross case'of treating sufficient
to affect an election, the House had the power of proceed.
ing by way of a special Bill, as well as by an address.
He did not think it unreasonable that the House
should retain the power of proceeding by Bill
in special cases, for there could bo no doubt that treating
in some instances might be as corrupt as bribery. On
the whole he considered that this Bill, even as amended,
would be a considerable advantage in regard to
dealing with corrupt practices and bribery in boroughs.
Though lamenting the changes in the Bill, ho should
propose to agree to them, believing that it was impro-
bable, if they rejected the amendments, they would be
enabled to restore the Bill to its original state.
Sir A. COCKBURN intended to take the same course
as the Noble Lord, though he could not help thinking
that the amendments were most material ones, and
would seriously affect the operation of the Bill. He
was astonished at the introduction of thee amendments,
inasmuch as the Government in that House had
given their cordial co-operation in passing the Bill in its
original state. This was another instance of what
he might term the duality of the Government, having
one leader in the House of Commons, and another
in the House of Lord. The Bill passed this House
without any important alteration, but when it got to the
Lords it was dealt with by the Government in a different
spirit, and great alterations introduced. He complained
of the second alteration, preventing retrospective inquiry
into corrupt practices at elections, observing that inn!) in-
stance had Parliament disfranchised a borough for proceed-
ings which had taken place at one single election. It was
only when they were convinced of the long existence of an
inveterate system of corruption that they disfranchised.
He therefore thought that this amendment would frus-
trate the intentions of the Bill. He thought the altera-
tions most mischievous—that they entirely mutilseed
and spoiled the Bill. The Bill as amended might be
some use, but it was very much limited. He thought that
in making these alterations in a valuable and effective
measure' tor preventing corruption, the Government
incurred serious responsibility both in regard to the
House and public.
Mr. WALPOLE was astonished at the last observation
of the Hon. and Learned Member. He attacked the
Government fur making alterations in the Bill
which emanated from them neither in that or in
the other House of Parliament. He also at-
tacked the Government for having supported
one Bill in the House of Commons, and
another in the House of Lords. Was it his doctrine of

the Constitution that an independent Member in the
other House of Parliament had not the power of pro-
posing an amendment which he thought just, and
that the Government had not the power of
agreeing to it if they thought it right? That was
Pitactly whit hall taken place in the House of Lords.
The first amendment was suggested by a Noble Lord,
not a member of the Government, and had been
adopted by the Government because they thought it just
and ressonable—(Hear.) The constitutional doctrine
stated by the Learned Gentleman was quite novel.
He (Hr. Walpole) would even go a step further, and
say that even the constitutional doctrine stated by the
Noble Lord was not what he should have expected

from so high an authority, who was always ad-
vocating the rights of the House and the people
questions of this kind, in order that no
undue influence should be exercised. The amendments
as proposed would in reality take away from the
Government an enormous power, which they
might have used for disfranchising boroughs
which were opposed to them. The majority
in that House generally supported the Government,
and if the Bill had remained as it was, it would have
been in the power of the Government to appoint com-
missions independently of the House of Lords, in order
to institute inquiries with respect to any particular bo-
rough. It such a proposal had emanated from a Tory in-
stead of aW big Government, the Opposition would be the
first to say that a power of this kind, which might be
exercised in an arbitrary manner, ought not to be given,
unless the matter was thoroughly investigated by both
Houses. Ho therefore begged to demur to the consti-
tutional doctrine both of the greatest constitutinal
authority in that House, and also of his legal adviser.
With regard to the first amendment, it was nothing but
right that the House of Lords should have, as well as
the House of Commons, a voice in the question of ap-
pointing a commission to disfranchise a borough. In
the cases of Sudburyland St. Albans the Legislature
proceeded by Bill, and the House of Lords was called upon
to confirm or reject the disfranchisement, and why
should they make an exception here, simply because
it was ;proposed to proceed by address? It was neither
unjust nor unconstitutional, and he therefore called upon
the House to agree to every one of the Lords' amend-
ments.—(Hear.)
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE said the Prime Minister moved
the amendment as to the joint address, and yet it was
now stated that it proceeded from an independent Peer.
Mr, WALPOLE—Yes, Lord Redesdale proposed it.
Mr T. DUNCOMBE—But the Prime Minister moved
it. When he c,me into offica the Premier stated

that he approved of this Bill which did
not then cuatain this amendment.—(Hear, beer.)
He was very much afraid the amendment had been in-

troduced to defeat the;ohject of the Bill, and to secure
the rotten boroughs of the Tories.—(Elear, bear.) The
other amendment, that the Bill in a certain case should
not be retrosprctive, he was et:pally opposed to, for he
could not assume that all the constituencies of this
country were devoid of corruption, and he therefore re-
gretted to find that the Noble Lodi the Member for
the City of London was prepared to accept the
amendnientr.—(Cries of " Hear, hear.") The leading
principle of the Government was concession and
compromise, and he wanted to know why there could
not be some little concession and compromise here,

for the sake of securing as much purity at the next
el.ction?—( hear, hear.) Ha would take that oppor-
tunity of pointing out an anomaly that existed
in their recent proceedings in reference to Si. Albans.
St. Albans had been disfranchised, and yet there was an
lion. Member occupying a seat in the House as the late
representative of St. Albans, but now representing no
constituency at and a laugh.) Now, wby

could not some clause be introduced into this or the
Controverted Elections Act to remedy that strange state
of things?--(Hear,)
Col SIBTHORP considered himself as good a man in
had 01-jscted to this Bill all
thetthu
ra through
u gHousen ht
ene
poi
es, c
ea,
—n y(
Hee'
ahre
,r, hae nu
rd h e . )
He l beggedooked tou p stateo n
it
as a gross attack upon the liberties of the people, and as
nothing else but a cloak to hide the meanness of others
at the expense of the: liberal and charitat le; it
had in fact emanated from the. Whig-Radical
sections of the House who were continually going about
the country, like quack doctors, spreading poison in the
minds of the people, and attempting to make them dis-
satisfied with their state and condition.—(Hear, hear.)
He not only highly approved of the amendments, but
sincerely regretted that the other House, who had so
often stepped in to rescue the Crown and the laws from
utnssritable measure.—(Hear.)destruction, had not thrown the Bill out altogether.
—(Hear, hear.) He could not atop the Bill, but he
could protest
aL io a
passing, as an unjust, uncon-
stitutional, gNtional, mean, aßinaYnst its passing,
uncharitable
not resist the adoption of
tuG
the Lords' amendments, but nevertheless he must
be allowed to express his opinion that they would
render the Bill entirely inoperative.—(Bear, hear.)
The amendments, in fact, were a grievous encroach
moot upon the rights and powers of the House of
iha Clausestrongly relating to treating, and
called upon the House to restore it.—(Bear, hear.)
Mr. MIME concurred with all that had fallen from
the Hononrable Memb,r who last addressed them. It
looked as if the Noble Lord the Member tor the city of
London and the Government were not sincere in pro-
posing to redress the wrongs of the people. The time,
however, had setee when they must be frightened
at the word democrat, which meant nothing
more than Government by the people, and he objected
to Honourable Gentlemen who we re the mere nomi-
nees of Peers talking so slightly of the Liberal
parry. The Peers were always found g
sup-
portin
• abuses, and looking at the objectionable
amendments that they had introduced into this Bill, it
would have been much better had the Noble Lord the
Member for the city of London abandoned the Bill, rather
than succumb to the desire of the Peers to secure their
oligarchal system,—(Hear.
Mr. HUDSON could not) help expressing his satisfac-
tion at the improvements which the Lords had intro-
duced into the Bill. The Lords ought to have a
voice in this matter, for the sake of se-
curing the privilege of the Bill, and ho for one
agreed with that eminent personage, who once said,
e rhank God, we have a House of Lords."—(Hear,
hear.) Either let this House of Lords be an active and
efficient part of the Legislature, or do away with it, and
as he, for ono, entertains d the former and not the latter,
he was not sorry that these amendments had been intro-
duced into this highly y objectionable Bill.—(dear.)
Mr. BELL could appreciate the merits of the Bill,
having had some experience in corrupt practices. Too
much importance seemed to be attributed to the
amendments introduced by the Lords, for he was
convinced that only simple and whirformed parties who
fell into the hands of designing electioneering agents
would come under its operation.—(A laugh.) This
Bils Bill would, however,
never put an end to bri-
bery, for within the last few days he had several
boroughs offered him at from 5001. to 3,060/,
and he was satisfied Ant the House was not going the
right way to
Put an end to these corrupt practices.
parties who were convicted of bribery ought to be dis-
graced, while every facility ought to be afforded for the de-
tection of the corrupters. The electors receiving the bribe
should be fined and disfranchised, and the party admi-
nistering or sanctioning the bribe disgraced iu some man-
ner by the lave__(flear hear.)
Mr. STANP
-ORI) still believed this was a weak mea-
sore with all its amendments, and had little hesitation in
declarina his conviction that it would be found inopera-
tive.—(Hear,
mhear.)
Mr. °S" ALI) said the amendments ought properly
to be considered in Committee, where they could be
discussed in detail. He objected to handing over the
privilege to the tender mercies of the House of Lords, and
charged the Government with having allowed the Bill
to he burked in the House of Lords for the sake of
securing the Votes of those of their supporters who owed
their return to Parliament entirely to bribery and cor-
ruption.—(Hear, hear.) He should, therefore, take the
liberty of moving that the House do negative the Lords'
amendments,_-(Hear, hear.)
Sir DE LACY EVANS said the Bill had been so
disfigured that he was at a loss to recognize it as the
same Bill which went up from this House some short
time ago. Re considered the amendments were unjust
and uncalled fur, so much so indeed that the Bill was
now little better than a sham.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BRIGHT thought the observations which had
been made would satisfy the House and the country
that the opposition did not approve of the motion for
the adoption :of the Lords' amendments. There were
innumerable boroughs notoriously in a state of corrup-
tion, but the next election might be com-
promised 'so as to aviod a contact, and
then should any future case arise Parliament
would be precluded from inquiring into all the former
corruption.—(Hear, hear.) No good Bill ever had a
chance of passing the Lords unless there was some se-
vere pressure from without, and the amendments which
had been introduced into this Bill we, e simply for the put,
pose of throwing obstacles in the way of a searching is
quiry into the corrupt practice at elections. The elections

Lit le-ast some of them—of this country would be a disgrace
to any nation, and he regretted that for the sake of mora-
lity the Lords had not allowed the Bill to pass in all its
iutegrity.— ( El ear, hear.)
Sir JAMES GRAHAM allowed that his Noble
Friend, the Member for the city of Landon, had been
most successful ire his exertions to checkcorrupt practices
atelections. Ills most brilliant successes were achieved
in opposition, and he hoped this Bill would be no excep-
tion to the rule. Still be admitted that the Bill had
been sadly mutilated, but the amendments were not of
to entirely destroy the Bill.
that character as They
decidedly impaired it, but far from destroyed it, and
therefore he urged the House to suffer it to be passed
Hear, hear.) He believed that,
into a
practically, law.—(it an address were agreed to on a
prima facie cage by this House, the House of
Lords would concur in the address. He felt that the
Bill would be extremely valuable in checking corrupt
practices at the elections for the future Parliament, and
if a division took place, he would vote in favour of the
amendments.
Mr. BitorfIERTON concurred in the observation
madeeas u by s
by thmebßerignhott Hon.tn know
that it was better to accept
Baronet. He had been too
long a M
instalments from the House of Lords. If
m
they went for everything at
once they would not have
the remotest chance of attaining
what they desired. He
Member
re
thougt that several of the Hon. Members of the House
had dealt somewhat unfairly with the Noble Lord (Lord
J. Rwsell).
The amendment of the Lords was then agreed to.
SESSIONAL AND STANDING ORDERS.
On the motion for considering the report of the Ses-
sional and Standing Orders Revision Committee,
Mr. W. PAT FEN entered into an explanation of the
alierations proposed by the
Oommittee. He also al-
the country was under the
private business, observing that
greatest obliga,tions to the
lmuadneyd
Ht o
utnh.e
Mc oenmdbuecrts ovrfho
considerable sacrifices had, during the session, made
attending upon Committee
with the great labour which these
Both the House and theta Public were wholly unacquainted
g-t that nothing
gentlemen hnd under-
gone. The Committee
Metropolis had sat no less than 49 days.
Mr. HUME thou h
on the Supply of Water to the
tent to the regular proceedings of the House than the
Mended.
simplification of these
Hon. Member (Mr. Ve Patten orders. He cownsaisdemreodrethimatptohre-
- • k-atten) was entitled to the
After a few words from Mr.
vltatendkstOoft the se Houseubjee t for the great attention be had de-
WALPOLE and Mr. AG.
LIONBY the report was agreed to, and the sessional
orders passed as recommended.

CASE OF
MR. BURNS.
On the motion of Mr. fleadlam a return was agreed to
/or further papers relative to the case of Mr. Burns,
namely, a letter from Mr. Nichol. of Singapore; a letter
Borneo to Sir James Brooke, and
mfrionmutethseoSE ualtea: of
nvenation held with Pangeran Makota,
made by Mr. Low, G
overniog Secretary in Labuan.
TRANSMISSION op
PARLIAMENTARY RE•

PORTS TO LITERARY SOCIETIES.
The MASTER
the Government to
the ( xpedieney of distributing gratis,
of the ROLLS called the attention o;
under certain
.regelatioD,
a selection from the reports
and returns pri.nted by order of the House of Commons,
.
amongst the literary
Lutes throughout the United Kingdom.
institutions and mechanics' insti-
tutes

(LEFT sirnwG.)

rHE LONDON GAZETTE.

(THIS EVENING.)

WAR-OFFICE JUNE 25, 1852.
3d Regiment of Dragoon Guards—Lieutenant Ed-
mundTurton to be Captain, by purchase, vice
W hitby, whoretires
J 25.
(R.m.) eo n r
by e
Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Turton,
; Cornet James Winterbottom
une

- -
4th Dragoon
Guards—Lieutenant Arthur Masterton
Robertson to be Captain,
by purchase, vice Williams,
who retires; Cornet Robert Gunter to be Lieutenant, by
purchase, vice Robertson; June 25.
11th Light Dragoons—Lieutenant Frederick Henry
Sykes to be Captain, by purchase, vice Sandes, who re-
tires; June 25,
10th Regiment Of Foot—Assistant Surgeon John
Andrew Wool,reyes, from Royal Canadian Rills Regi-
ment, to be Assistant Surgeon, vies
Jacob, deceased;
a
June 25.
11th Foot—
by purchase, vice r Ensign John
Lieutenant Winter Goode to be Captain,
Conran who retires;
Finch, to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Goode,
Julie 25.
25th Foot--
Ensign Francis Began Cox to be Lieute-
nant, by purchase, vice Potts, who retires, June 25.
35th Foot—
Captain Oliver Nicolls Chatterton, from
halt-Pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice Bayly, who
exchanges, June 25.
39th Foot—Lieutenant Edward Beauchamp Maunsell,
from the 87th Few, to be Lieutenant, vice Hardinge,
to an Unattached Company,
promoted
without purchase,
June 25.
40th Foot—Major Thomas James Valiant, to be
Lieutenant-Colonel, by purchase, vice Stretton, who re-
tires; Call sin
vice Valiant; Lieutenant R ,bert Hare to be Captain, by
Arthur I...she to be Major, by purchase,
purchase, vice Leslie; Ensign Charles Henry Hall to be
Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Hare, June 25.
41st Foot—Lieutenant Henry Worter Meredith to
be Captain, by purchase, vice Robert Stuart, who re-

tires; Ensign Frederick Cherburgh Bligh to ho Lieu-
tenauv, by purcha9e, vice Meredith, Junc 25.
42d Foct—Duncan Macpherson, Gent. to be Ensign,
by purchase; En,ign John Drysdale to be Atijutlut,
vier Pitcnitn, promoted, June 25.

551. Foot—Ensign William Macdonnell to be Lieu-
tenant, without purchase, vice Lloyd, deceased; Go-ntie-
men Catlet Lea Brich, from the Royal Military College,
to be Ensign, without purchase, vice Macdonnell,
June 25.

62d Foot—Eusign Charles Conch to be Lieutenant, by
purchase, vice O'Donnell, who retires, June 25. _ _

66th Foot—Ensign Edward James Storey to be Lieu-
tenant, without purchase, June 25.
72d Foot—Ensign John Campbell Stewart to be Lieu-
tenant by purchase, vice Anderson, who retires, June 25.
87th Foot—Lieutenant George Granville Gower
Munro, from half-pay Royal Canadian Rifle Regiment,
to be Lieutenant, vice Maunsell, appointed to the 39th
Foot, June 25.
93d Foot—Lieutenant Warner Westenra Carden to be
Captain, by purchase, vice Goldie, who retir a; Ensign
William Turner to be Lieutenant, by purchaze, vice
Carden, June 25.

21 West India Regiment—Ensign Lloyd Richter
Creak Drouet to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice
Simmons, whose promotion on the 17th September,
1851, hos been cancelled; April 27.
3d West India Regiment—Lieutenant Henry Jones,
from half-pay 101st Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Terry,
appointed to the 9th Foot; Lieutenant Henry Jones has
been perrnitti d to retire from the Service by the sale of
his Commission; June 25.

St. Helena Regiment—Captain Clifford Felix Henry,
from buif•pay Unattached, to be Captain, vice Storey,
who exchanges; Lieutenant Robert Alexander London
to bo Captain, by purchase, vice Henry who retires;
Ensign William Henry _Hole to be Lieutenant, by pur-
chase vice Loudon; Henry Tayler, Gent., to be Ensign,
bypurchas«, ♦ice Hole, June 25.

UNATTACHED.—Lieutenant George Horne, faom the
15th Light Dragoons, to be Captain, without purchase,
June 25.

BREVET.—The undermentioned Cadets of the East
India Company's Service to have the local and tempo-
rary rank of Ensign during the period of their being
placed under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Harry
D. Junes, of the Eoyal Engineers at Chatham, for field
instructions in the art of supping and mining:—Arthur
Moffat Lang, Gent.; Henry Francis Hancock, Gent.;
Edward Wood Humphrey, Gent.; John Rivaz Monek-
ton, Gent.; Charles Simeon Thomason, Gent.; Gran-
ville Pulteney de Pali zieux Falconet, Gent.; James
Murdock Campbell, Gent.; Julius George Thomas
Griffi h, Gent., dated June 25.
MEMORANDUM.—The Commission of Assistant Sur-
geon William George Clarke, of the 35th Foot, has
been ante-dated to 26:h March; the name of the En-
sign removed from the Canadian Rifle Regiment to the
45,h Foot, on the 11th June, is "Egan," and not Eagan.