The Sun.
London, England, 1838-02-09 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL COTTON MARKET, FEE. 8

American Cotton is still pressed on the market, which gives a slight
advantage to purchasers ; but, on the whole, our last quotations may be
reported as unvaried. Spinners who, on account of the late frost, had
reduced their stocks, were again buying this day, and the result was a
tolerable amount of business, and chiefly with them—theentire sales are
3,000 bales. 350 Bahia, Si ; 150 Egyptian, 9t012 ; 100 Surat, 4i
to 6 ; 2,400 American, 6} to Si, Total, 3,000.

COUNTRY CORN MARKETS DURING THE WEEK.

CHELTENHAM AND GREAT WESTERN RAILWAY BILL.
This was a Petition for a Bill to' extend the time 'for making
this railway, for two years beyond next July when the Act already
obtained expires. It was opposed on various groynds, one of them being
of very great importance, as being likely to affect many Railways, and
produce incalculable injury to many Railway Companies.
It was objected, first, that the notices in the newspapers were not
sufficient. The agents being heard on both sides, the room was cleaned,
and the Committee decided against the petitioners for the Bill.
It was then admitted that there would be a deviation of more than a
mile—another point.
The next and most important point taken was, that the new Standing
Order, No. 4, had not been complied with, inasmuch as notices had riot
been served upon the owners and occupiers of land.
On the part of the objectors it was urged that changes had taken
place in the ownership and occupancy of property, since the notices for
the existing Act had been served upon such owners and occupiers,
and they were not bound to see the notices which had been inserted in
the newspapers ; that little progress had, in fact, been made with
this Railway, and that one of the objects of the new Standing Or_
ders was to prevent speculators holding up a compulsory power for taking
lands from year to year to year, and never acting upon it.
To this reasoning it was insisted by the Agent for the Bill, that no
personal notices were necessary, as this was not a Bill to enter upon any
new heads, but only to extend the time already granted. That if it were
decided that personal notices were necessary, it would arrest the progress
of many railways and produce irreparable mischief that formerly no.per-
ional notices were necessary, and Lord Shaftesbury in the Lords had limited
the making of railways to two years, but latterly, finding that it was im-
possible to complete many of them in that limited period, his Lordship
had extended the time to three years. In this instance the notice had,
been the most full and complete that could be given, and much more
than was usual or required. A powerful appeal was madeto the Committee
not to permit the wide-spreading evil of this objection to arise from a
mere point of new practice.
The Committee cleared the room, and after a short deliberation de_
tided that personal notices were necessary, and will so report to the
Committee on Standing Orders. _

TORQUAY ROADS BILL.
(LEFT SITTING).

ROXBURGH ELECTION COMMIT-
TEE.-(THIS DAY.)

The Committee met at eleven o'clock.
The examination of John Oliver, whose evidence had not been con-
cluded when the Committee adjourned yesterday, was then proceeded
with. After detailing the particulars of the riot at the Tower Inn, the
witness stated that the Sheriff threatened to close the poll in conse-
quence of the disturbance. A person of the name of Wilson, who was
in the interest of Mr. Eliot, reasoned with him on the subject, and
asked him had he never heard before of persons' clothes being torn at
an election. A list of names was brought into the Sheriff from the
Tower Inn. He read the first name on the list.

➢lr. MESSMER— What did he say on reading the list?
Witness—He said he had got a list of the gentlemen who were in
the Tower Inn, and they would not go to the poll unless peace and
quietness were restored to the town.

Mr. Sergeant MEREWETHER objected to the answer being received.
If -what the Sheriff said had reference to the contents of the document,
the best evidence whin could be produced of those contents wa3 the
paper itself.

Mr. MESSMER said, from the terms of the answer given by the wit-
ness, it was clear that the Sheriff was not reading from the paper at the
time, and that therefore what he said was perfectly admissible.
The CHAIRMAN said, that if it were intended by the question to ob-
tain evidence of the contents of the document, the Committee could
not receive it.

Mr. HALL said, that he did not think the question went to that ex-
tent It appeared to him that it merely went to prove the statement of
the Sheriff of what had been represented to him, which might or might
not have reference to the contents of the document.

The rcom was then cleared, but we understand the witness continued
still under examination. On our re-admission, the Chairman announced
that the Committee had decided that the evidence objected to was nDt
admissible.

Mr. Sergeant MERa%VETIIER then applied to the Committee to have
the evidence taken subsequently to the answer which had been objected
to, expunged from the short-hand writer's notes.

Mr. THESSIGEU urged that it was perfectly competent for any member
of the Committee to put such questions to the witness as he thought
proper, and that there was no precedent for striking the answers out.
The Committee again ordered strangers to withdraw ; and after
a few minutes' deliberation, the Chairman stated that they had
decided upon purging the evidence.

The examination of the witness was then proceeded with. He
stated that the Sheriff spoke of closing the poll both before and after he
had received the list of names. Witness then proceeded towards the
Tower Inn ; encountered the mob on his way and was struck down. On
going into the polling-booth he saw a person named Thomas Cairns. He
voted for Mr. Scott, immediately after which he attempted to leave the
booth, but was driven back by the mob, and he re-entered it cut
and bleeding. There were no constables, that he could see, to protect
him.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant AIEREWETHEL—There was one
way to the poll and another back. The way back was not inside the
railings.

Mr. Thomas Scott was the next witness produced. He stated that
he was an elector of Roxburgh, and voted for Mr. Scott. He went to
the town of Hawick on the first day of polling, accompanied by his bro_
Cher and a person named Brown, who was not an elector. On going
towards the Tower Inn, heard a boy call out " Tory, Tory, Tory."—_.
(Laughter.) Saw a crowd approaching, who appeared bent on doing
him and his brother mischief. Got, however, safely into the Tower
Inn, and succeeded in polling. On leaving the booth after polling he
was assaulted by the mob. There were no constables there to interfere
or protect him. His clothes were all torn. He was carried by
force to the Mill Wynd, where these was a sort of precipice, down which
he was pushed into the river. Received also a blow on the back of the
head. The water happened to. be shallow, and he succeeded in wad-
ing to the sand bank, on which he remained for some time until some
person came to his assistance. They took him out the same way by
which he was pushed in. The mob endeavoured to pull him away from
Mr. Purdon, one of the gentlemen who had rescued him. Remained
in Mr. Purdon's house until eleven o'clock at night. Experienced
while there the effects of the blow which he bad received on the back
of the head, and also a severe hurt on one of his legs. Was pre-
vented leaving Mr. Purdon's by the treatment he saw Mr. Turnbull
and other gentlemen get. The witness was still under examination
when our reporter left.

IPSWICH ELECTION COMMITTEE.
(THIS DAY.)

The Tories yesterday, succeeded in striking off' one vote more than
those which are mentioned in our Second Edition last evening—that of
Mr. Conder. They were, therefore, this morning in a majority of two.
The Liberals now proceeded in their objections to Mr. Kelly's votes,
on the ground of change of residence.

The first vote they objected to was that of Mr. Revell ; which the
Committee decided was bad.

They next objected to Mr. Day's vote ; which was also disallowed.
This left Mr. Tuffnell and Mr. Kelly on an equality.
-'" '

The liberal party then objected to Mr. William Howe's vote.
Mr. TALBOT submitted that as there were two William Howes on
the Registry, there ought to have been some description of their case
objected to, in the list handed in to his (Mr. Talbot's) party, by which
they would be enabled to identify him.
Mr. AUSTIN, on the other side, contended that though there were two
William Howes on the registry, :but one of them voted; and that the
Act of Parliament not requiring in the lists handed in to the opposite
party, that the parties objected to should be described further than by
name—the objection being prefixed to it—it was sufficient if, as in this
instance was the case, the parties were fully described on the regis.
rer : the poll-clerks were only obliged to take down the names
of the persons voting without any description whatever, and no more
was required, by way of notice, in the Lists handed in to the other
party.

It was discovered that in fact, in this case, the name of Wm. Howe
was accompanied in the List referred to by the number in the register.
This of course did away with Mr. Talbot's objection.
After one or two witnesses had been examined, in regard to the
removal of Mr. Howe from the house which he occupied in the year
before the election,
The Committee decided that the vote had not been impugned.
Mr. POLLOCK thought that the Committee ought, before deciding
against a party to hear what they had to say in defence o Ithe vote
disputed.

The next vote objected to by Mr. Tunell's party was that of Mr.
Hyrons, who had voted for Kelly and Mason.

Mr. TALBOT wished to know upon which petition they were proceed-
ing—Mr. WAson's, or Mr. Kelly's ?

Mr. AUSTIN said; both. Undoubtedly Mr. Tuna had a right to
strike off -a vote of Mr. Kelly's, if he could.
The Committee were of opinion that the vote might be disputed 11
Mr. Tuffnell's party.
(To be concluded in a Second Edition.)

PRELIMINARY ANTI-POOR LAW

MEETING.

This day a meeting was held at the Crown and Anchor Tavern
Lord STANHOPE in the Chair, for the purpose of arranging
the
preli-
minaries of a public meeting to petition Parliament for the repeal
of
the Poor.law Amendment Act. There were about fifty gentlemen
,1,,
present, and the meeting was addressed at considerable length
by the Noble Chairman, and also by Mr. Fielden, P.,
Walter, the late Member for Berkshire, Lord Teignhamt
Murphy, and several other gentleman, who all concurred in
denouncing the new Poor-law Act, and deprecating the con'
duct and the powers of the Commissioners. After a great
deal of desultory conversation, resolutions were agreed to—first,
That in endeavouring, by :all legal and constitutional means, to
restore the rights of the labouring classes, the persons Present
would form a Metropolitan Association, to procure the repeal of
the New Poor-law." '2d. That a public meeting be convened to for-
ward this object, at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, on Monday, the
19th instant, at eleven o'clock. 3d. That the Anti Poor Law Asso-
ciation should procure the attendance of one of its members from each
county in the kingdom to give information to the said meeting;;
lastly that these resolutions be advertised in the Times, Morning Post,
Morning Herald,Standard,Weekly Dispatch, True Sun, and London
Dispatch. and

Lord STANHOPE then read the resolutions which had been agreed to at
a meeting held in Manchester on the 6th instant, and submitted that
they should be proposed at the meeting on the 19th, which was agreed
to ; and it was then resolved that petitions founded on them should
be prepared, and also an Address to the Queen.
Thanks having been voted amidst much applause, the meeting sePa
rated.

Preparations are makinp. in Clarence House, St.
James's, for the reception of the Dowager Queen Adelaide.
The illustrious and amiable lady is expected to arrive at this
residence about the Ist of March, with her suite; but licr Ma-
jesty's residence here will only he temporary—that is, until
Marlborough House is quite ready.

THE SKINNERS COMPANY tf. THE [RISE! SOCIETY.
This important cause, which has frequently been before the Court
upon interlocutory applications and motions, came on this morning for
hearing before the Master of the Rolls.
The bill was filed by the Master and Wardens of the Skinners
Company of the City of London, against the Corporation of the Irish
Society, eleven great Companies of the City, and certain minor Compa-
nies who had a joint interest with them in the subject matter of • the
suit. The City of London was also made a defendant, because in the
City was now vested the interest which was originally in two of the
other Companies. The Attorney-General was also made a defendant by a
supplemental bill. The principal defendants, however, were the Corpo-
ration of the Irish Society. The subject matter of the suit related to
certain property, called " Town Lands," in the city of Londonderry and
town of Coleraino, and the profits of certain ferries and fisheries in the
County of Londonderry, which property remained in the Irish Society at
the time the rest of the property in the county of Londonderry, which
was granted to twelve Companies of the city of London and minor Corn_
panies, was divided among those Companies, and the principal object of
the bill was to ascertain, in respect of that property, the position
in which the Irish Society stood towards those Companies. The prayer
of the bill was that it might be declared the plaintiffs and the other Cont.
panics who contributed to the expenses of the plantation at Ulster were
beneficially entitled to the rents and profits of the fisheries and town
lands subject to payments to the Governor of Culmore Castle, and the
charges, if any, the same were subject to, and that an account might be
taken of the fisheries, ferries, and town lands that have been received
by the defendants, the Irish Society, or any person on their behalf, or
which without their neglect might have been so received. On the part of
the plaintiffs, the Skinners' Company; it was contended that the Irish
Society held these lands as trustees for the other Companies, that they
were justified out of the income of that property to pay the specific
charges upon it, which specific charges consisted of an annual
sum to the Bishop of Derry, a sum which might be requisite for
maintaining and supporting the fort of Culmore) the expenses, if
any, which might be incidental to a superintending power which
the Irish Society had over the bye-laws of the Corporation of Lon-
donderry, and any expenses they might be at in the discharge
of their trust. The sum payable to the Bishop of Derry was 2501., and
the sum for maintaining the fort of Culmore, 2001., but after those
charges had been met, the plaintiffs contended there was no discretionary
power whatever in the Corporation of the Irish Society, to apply any
portion of the income of this property for public purposes or charitable
purposes, or any purpose whatever; and that the Irish Society were
bound to divide the surplus of the income which they received from this
property among the Companies of the City of London for whom they
were trustees, to account to them, and to exercise no controul over the
expenditure of any part of the fund. On the part of the Irish Society
it was contended, that as regarded the declaration of right sought to be
claimed by the bill, the defendants had not contested the right of the
Company to the surplus rents and profits of the hereditaments vested in
the Society, subject to the charges to, which the same were expressly
subjected by two charters of King James the First, and King Charles,
and to the discretionary power vested in the defendants for the due exe-
cution of the charitable and public purposes provided for by those char-
ters, and the original articles and proposals on which such charters
were founded ; but the defendants denied that, save as regarded
such surplus only, they were trustees for the Companies or every one of
them ; but they said they were in the first place trustees for the general
public purposes provided by the charters and proposals. The effect of
the rebellion which took place in the north of Ireland during the latter
part of the reign of Elizabeth, generally known by the name of O'Neil's
Rebeliion, was that the greater part of the lands in six of the counties
of the north of Ireland became vested in the Crown by forfeiture. In
thla
rneeodteiserassirtsolahyn parttcsvested
fi
for the
eest
hraleezmi
purpose
Crown o
sbfuKt
sifshnhgfouuJll
colonizing,
co'
osi
n;
grlbai iote gterrdaw:',t,atposel
granted
punbrtgoi
"planting,"
proposed a thatacnsdr
oc: the
partP
ce
Ireland,oa ul lnedotif,e
ttshh;wee
eilltrraoe,tndhsovi of Ireland with Protestants. That proposal was n°cwtactart::
ried into effect in the early part of the reign of King James I. Certain
propositions were made by the King for the granting of lands in those
succeededftd
enadve very
wholer yg considerableraonfsl
osfromseic.xogtuenjnat tirn,e
counties
the
eTe
hng: rrletaahnt
de. greater
I.
were granted in the counties of Armagh, Tyrone, Coleraine, Donegal,
Fermanagh, and Cavan. Five of those counties were planted by pri-
vate settlers and private undertakers, as they were called. The county
in which the property is situate is now called the county of London-
derry, at that time the county of Coleraine. The object of the King in
proposing the articles was to get English, and Scotch, or Irish of a par-
ticular description, to settle in those counties; they were to take the
lands and to plant and settle themselvas there without being subject to
any particular trust.

Sir Wm. FOLLETT, who appeared for the plaintiff's, was proceeding
with his opening when we left.

Mr. KINDERSLEY appeared for the Irish Society.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL and the RECORDER of LONDON for the City.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL on behalf of the Crown.
Mr. PEMBERTON for five Companies of the City.
Several gentlemen behind the bar appeared for the other Companies.