The Sun.
London, England, 1836-06-22 00:00:00

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS

Should the clergymen of the Established Church in
Ireland ultimately fail in recovering the arrears of
tithes and tithe-composition, the fault will not lie at
the door of the Irish Court of Exchequer—the righte-
ous and learned judges of which, from the sombre
Foster to the sardonic Joy, seem determined to enforce
the payment of the obnoxious impost perfrs out nefas.
A decision of that Court, to which we think public
attention ought to •be directed, will be found in
the report we have copied from the Dublin Morning
Register. From the report, it appears that Lord
Ponsonby, who is ambassador from this country to the
Porte, is landlord of a portion of the parish of Ardagh,
in the diocese of Cloyne and county of Cork, and
that the Rev. Joshua Jervis is rector. The latter
claimed tithe-composition from . the "Noble Lord's
agent, who declined compliance with the demand,
on the plea of non-liability. The arrears having ac-
crued for two years, the Rector applied, under, the
provisions of Lord Stanley's Temporalities Act,
for A receiver over so much of Lord Ponsonby's
.e.stat's as is situated within the parish in question.
This application was resisted by Lord Ponsonby's
counsel, on the ground that the Act under which the
application was made to the Court of Exchequer did
not apply in this case. The Court of Exchequer,
however, supplying the defect of the statute by that
sort of law which_ is common to Ireland, viz., judicial
a
dictum, granted conditional order ; and having done
this, we may be prepared for their making the rule
absolute ; for the same argument on which counsel,
when showing cause against the conditional rule, must
rest their case, has been already put to the Court in
the clearest light, and has failed to produce an impres-
sion upon the judges. Now see the outrageous se-
verity, the monstrous injustice—it matters not whether
accidental or wilful—of this proceeding. Lord Pon-
sonby's agent does not object to the payment of
the tithe composition on any factious plea ; he does
not say that the impost is odious, he does not rest
his refusal to pay upon the pretext that tithes
ought to be abolished in Ireland, but he denies
his employer's liability—he says he will not pay,
because Lord Ponsonby does not owe a shilling to
the Reverend claimant. Having received this reason
for the non-payment of the demand, the Rector files
his bill of discovery. So far all is right and regular.
But while the bill is before the Court of Equity, before
judgment is pronounced, and consequently before
Lord Ponsonby's liability has been either affirmed or
negatived by a decree, the Rector applies to the Court
of Exchequer for a receiver over the Noble Lord's 1

property and that Court, without knowing whether
Lord Ponsonbv is indebted in the amount of a farthing
to the reverend plantiff, and having judicial knowledge
that the noble defendant resists the claim upon the
most solid of all pleas—a plea, if founded in truth,
that cannot be shaken, over-ruled, or demurred to—.
grants a conditional order! This order will be made
absolute, if Lord Ponsonby does not show that
he is not liable. Thus a defendant will be com-
pelled by summary process to show that he does
not owe money, before the plantiff has even attempted to
prove thedebt and the most learned judges of the Court of
Exchequer, upon whom Mr. Sergeant Jackson lately
pronounced so suspicious a panegyric, will have com-
pelled Lord Ponsonby to prove a negative I And
under what authority do the judges pretend to pro-
ceed ? Under the 3d Wm. IV., which throws the
liability of tithe composition upon the possessor of the
first estate of inheritance. Now this statute authorises

the appointment of a receiver only in cases of acknow-
ledged or established liability. In Lord Ponsonby's
case this liability is denied by the defendant, and has
not vet been established by the plaintiff. Probably, at
all events possibly, the Noble Lord's liability cannot
be established—for if the tenants have leases, they,
and not the landlord, are by Stanley's Act liable for
the tithe composition, and the agent avers that the
tenantry on the particular estate are, by the condition
of their tenure, liable for the Parson's claim. Yet the
Court of Exchequer conceive themselves warranted
in granting a conditional order for the receiver's
being appointed under the circumstances we have
stated. We venture to assert that there is not
in Europe another court of law or equity which would
pronounce such an order. It completely upsets the
Bill that has been filed—it gives to the statute a mean-
ing and a power which even its author, with all his
love for the Church revenues, did not contemplate—it
requires of a defendant to show that he does not owe
money to a plaintiff, before the plaintiff has even at-
tempted to establish a prima facie claim—it sets all
the rules of law and reasoning at defiance, and sets up
the prejudices or passions or caprice of judges against
justice and common sense. What, let us ask, would
be thought in this country of a court of justice which,
in a case where a merchant of London claimed a debt
of 500/. from a nobleman residing in Middlesex, and
the defendant denied that he owed a farthing, would
yet, before the question of debt was decided, either by
a decree in equity, or by a verdict of a jury, appoint
a receiver over the defendant's estate„ and oust the
landlord out of his inherent right and authority ?•
We do not hesitate to say that there would be an
universal call upon the House of Commons, from one
extremity to the other of England, either to impeach,
such Judges on the ground of corruption, or to address
the Crown for their removal, on the ground of incom-
petency. In what respect such a proceeding would
differ from the proceedings that have actually taken
place in Ireland, we avow our inability to discover. It
may be said, perhaps, that the Irish Judges have
merely granted a conditional rule. What of that ?

Will they not make the rule absolute if cause be not
shown which will alter their present opinion ? .Now
the mere necessity of showing cause in this instance,
is itself an outrage upon law and reason. Why
should any man be compelled to prove his inno-
cence until a prima facie case of guilt has been estab-
lished ? or why should a man be held to prove that
he does not owe a particular sum of money to a pai,-
ticular individual, until the claimant has produced
evidence sufficient to establish at all events a prima
facie cause of action ? Let us suppose the rule made
absolute. The defendant may still answer the bill, and,
by satisfying the Equity Gina that he is not liable,
obtain a decree against the plaintiff; or, more correctly
speaking, get the bill dismissed. The receivership
would then fall to the. ground, its existence being de-
clared repugnant to justice. But Lord Ponsonby
would obtain no redress for the past wrong ; and the
. outrageous interference with his rights as a landlord
would pass away as one more item in the catalogue of
errors of judgment—those precious screens, more po-
tent than bullet-proof blinds, which ward off all the
dangerous consequences of wrong doing from my Lords
the Judges. The landlords of Ireland had better look
to it in time. They may find, ere long, to their sor-
row, that while aiding the Tory Lords and the
Oranffe parsons in thwarting the King's Ministers, and
torturing the Irish peasantry, they had been knotting
the cat-o'-nine-tails for their own backs.—Morning
Chronicle.

The speech of Mr. Goulburn on the proposed re-
duction of the Stamp Duties on Newspapers, and the
Tax on Soap, was one of the most triumphant answers
ever given to the financial statements of a Chancellor
of the Exchequer, struggling for party purposes to
make the " worse appear the. better reason." It was,
indeed, a complete demolition of the Finance Minis-
ter's whole fabric of reasoning. Though successful
on the division, Mr. Spring Rice must have been tho-
roughly conscious of defeat in argument. That he
should have committed himself as a Statesman and a
Financier on this question, we ascribe entirely to the
difficulties of his position L-difficulties which are inse-
parable from the very circumstances under which the
Cabinet, of w►rich he is, after all, one of the most
efficient Members, was constructed. A Cabinet whose
tenure of office depends on its subserviency to dema-

gogues and sordid traders of agitation, must shape
their measures, not according to any conscientious
opinions of their own, or in conformity with
the will of an enlightened public—no, they must,
although they loathe it, do the work of the tyrant
faction, to whom they have bound themselves in
the slavery of the " compact-alliance," and disobe-
dience to whom would be political death. One of the
main arguments of Mr. Spring Rice for reducing the
Stamp Duty on Newspapers was, that at the present
rate it is a continually decreasing duty. To prove the
facts from which he drew his conclusion the Right
Hon. Gentleman instanced the amount of the duty in
the year 1831, and in subsequent years, down to
1835 inclusive—the amount in the first of those years
being 483,0001., and in the last 455,0001. From this
he would have had the House infer that the high
stamp was the occasion of a falling off in the revenue,
and that to make the tax more productive it must be
reduced. That might be so, provided he were correct in
the data of his reasoning, and yet it might be alto-
gether fallacious that so large a reduction as from 4d.
to ld. was required by the public, or would be bene-
ficial to the revenue. But Mr. Goulburn showed that
the data which the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had adopted were wholly incorrect, aria, of course, the
inference drawn from them erroneous and deceptive.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer having with
more craftiness than candour, commenced his calcu-
lations with the year 1831, the year of the reform ex-
citement, Mr. Goulburn reminded the House that the
political. circumstances of that year naturally led to a
great increase in the circulation of Newspapers, which
increase, like every result occasioned by a violent and
short-lived stimulus, could only be temporary, and it
was so. In the year 1832 the stimulus was less than
in the former year, though the excitement was even in
that year considerable, and the amount of stamp duty
fell, but still was greater than in any year since, be-
cause the excitement has become gradually leSs and
less. In the present year, indeed, a desperate attempt
has been made to excite the public mind against the
House of Lords, but it preserves that mortifying
apathy which is not calculated either to promote the ob-
jects of the Government, or increase the circulation of
Newspapers. It is a fact, however, rather unfortunate
for Mr. Spring Rice's argument of a continually de-
clining circulation, that the amount of Newspaper
stamp duty rose last year above that ,of 1834, from
441,000/. to 455,0001. This shows, in our opinion, that
the decrease from the great reform excitement of 1831
had reached its lowest point, and that, in spite of the
connivance of the Government at the violation of the
law by the unstamped Press, an increase in the,eircula-
tion of stamped Newspapers had begun. Mr. GOOlburn,
however, adopted a fairer mode of calculating the increase
or decrease in the circulation of stamped Newspapers
than Mr. Spring Rice. He took periods of five
years, which cover a sufficiently large space of time to
prevent erroneous conclusions being drawn from the
accidental influence of temporary excitement. Now,
adopting this more reasonable basis of calculation,
which we have generally adopted in our statistical
tables relative to the operation of the criminal laws,
he showed that there has been on the whole a❑ in-
crease rather than a decrease in the amount of News-
paper stamp.duties—the average of the five years end-
ing in 1830 being 413,0001, while the average of the
five years ending in 1835 was 464,0001. Mr. Goul-
burn, to prove that the great increase in the circulation
of Newspapers in the year 1831 was owing to the extra-
dinary excitement caused by the Reform Bill, instanced
another very extraordinary rise which had taken place
in the year 1813,- when Bonaparte's Russian cam-
paign raised the pliblic curiosity-and excitement to the
highest pitch. He stated that in that year the Stamp
Duty rose to 394,0001., which was greater than it had
ever been before, and fell in the succeeding year down
to 363,000/.—a reduction nearly equivalent to that
which took place between 1831 and 1831, and greater
than that which occurred between 1831 and 1835.
These statements, to use a legal phrase, put the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer out of Court. They left him
without a leg to stand upon, as far as his proposed re-
duction of the Newspaper Stamp Duty was founded
upon an alleged continued decrease in the amount of
that branch of the revenue. There are other impor-
tant topics embraced in Mr. Goulburn's speech, which
we shall advert to on resuming this important subject
to-morrow.—Morning Herald.
The stories which have been current during the last
few days, respecting a progation and dissolution of
Parliament, are wholly without foundation. For a dis-
solution, with not only a majority in the Commons, but
an increasing majority, there is searcely the shadow of
a reason ; while, with regard to a prorogation, wha
would be the use of it ? There are many important,
questions before the House upon which the public
ought not to be left in suspense ; and though the
Session will, in all probability, be cut short of its
lately most unconscionable lengths, it would be to
too much to the discredit of the Government to dream
for a moment that it would allow the Legislature to
separate without recording its opinions upon them.
:The reduction of the Stamp Duty on Newspapers is
a settled affair ; and so, also, we believe, it the Eng-
lish Tithe Bill, as now amended. As to the Irish
Corporation and the Irish Church Bills—there is no
hope for them. The Lords, with the greatest anxiety
for the welfare of Ireland, have determined not to ap-
propriate them.—Morning Advertiser.
We trust that the debate and division of Monday
night in the House of Commons will show the pow-
erful opposition in that House how much may be
gained by active and strenuous interference upon mat-

ers of practical detail. Two or three more such victories as

that of Ministers on Monday night, and they would be
left to that leisure from official cares which we trust would

be as beneficial to their health as we are sure it would
- • - -

be to the health of the State. They were conspicuously
beaten in a plain practical argument, wherein they
were supporters of a reduction of the duty on News-
papers, while their opponents contended in preference
for a reduction of the duty on soap. In such a ques-
tion the political prejudices of the people out of deOrs
are less apt to lead them astray than upon
some other questions which have been made
the subject of trials of strength in the House
of Commons. We therefore expect a more impartial
judgment than usual upon the debate of Monday night,
and a consequent conviction that in the argument
the Ministers had by much the worst of it. As to
the division, they who are most familiar with Par-
liamentary matters can best tell how very like a dffeat
a majority of only thirty-three must be considered upon
a question of this sort, and in a House of 450 Mem-
bers present. We are very well satisfied that Minis-
ters contemplated the division with equal surprise and
mortification. We have no doubt that when Mr. S.
Rice observed the number of the minority, he changed
the tone of his former exclamation, and with do-
lorous expiration, repeated to himself, " So much
for soap ! The Right Honourable Gentleman
evidently exerted himself to make a good speech uoim
the occasion, and to tell the honest truth, he did not
make a bad one. It was a subject level to his capa-
city, and though we are not quite sure that, as far as
soap was concerned, he took a very lively personal
interest in thAnatter, yet, as an eager and not unintel-
ligent promoter of the " diffusion of knowledge" cant,
he probably felt himself upon his mettle, and exerted
himself to the utmost. But how short-lived was his.
triumph, and how shabby the means of obtaining it !
Mr. Goulburn's reply showed up such a tissue of dis-
ingenuousness as even an opponent cannot, without
some degree of shame, remember to have been dis-
played by a man in the high office of Chancellor of the
Exchequer. One by one were the Right Honourable
Gentleman's statements examined, and overthrown, by
showing that he had either suppressed something of
which he could not but have been aware, or added
something not fairly connected with the matter in
hand, which made his representation the opposite of

' • which should be relied upon. He had made it
appear that his case rested upon a variety of separate
arguments, and then he had taken up a triumphant
tone, expressing his joy that he had an opportunity of
showirg how well-rounded was his proposition, and
how ill-founded the opposition to it. He had talked
himself into a strange elevation of confidence,
" Composed of many ingredient valours.
Just like the manhood of nine tailors."
But we may well judge how it oozed away, as Mr.
Goulburn plucked the feathers from his oration, and
exhibited it in all the ugly bareness of mere misrepre-
sentation. Why did not Mr. Rice say that his theory
respecting the ill effects, or the absence of good effect,
to be expected from the reduction of tl uty on Soap
was directly at variance with the opinion o the Com-
missioners of Revenue Inquiry ? Why did he plead
the temptation to breach of the law occasioned by the
high duty on Newspapers, and wholly omit to notice
the palpable operation of that very principle exhibited
in the non-diminished illicit manufacture of Soap ?
Why did he not notice that where the falling off in
the consumption of Soap appeared to have taken
place it was particularly evident that it could not
have really taken place, and that the smuggler must
have been increasing his supply, in consequence of the
still-existing temptation to illicit manufacture ? Why
did he not allow that though a slight increase upon
the consumption of legally-manufactured soap had
taken place, yet that in those localities where the
smuggler was most likely to be at work, namely, in the
large towns, it had (apparently, and so far as the re-
venue or consumption was concerned) decreased ?
Well might Mr. Goulburn use the expression " un-
fairness" with reference to the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer's assertion that the duty on Newspapers
was a decreasing one—a statement upon which he
principally founded the argument for its reduction.
It had manifestly, he said, gone beyond the legi-
timate amount, for its produce was decreasing ; and
the way he took to prove this was by going back
to -1831, a time, as everybody may remember, of
extraordinary excitement ; when political aitation,
by the press or by public speaking, was the only
thing which flourished and did well—he goes back to
that year for a standard of comparison, wholly omitting
to say that upon the average the duty was increasing,
and that last year the duty was considerably better than
the year before. Mr. Goulburn showed that by going
back fifteen years from the present time, and taking
the average of three periods of five years each, there
had been in each period a progressive and considerable
increase. Such criticism as this might be extended
much further ; but we have said enough to show that
the argument against preferring a reduction of the duty
on Soap, in which Mr. S. Rice seems to have
thought himself so very successful, was wholly
fallacious, and that not from any mistake in the
reasoning, bu: from a mis-statement of the facts upon
which the argument wasbuilt—a mis-statement which

it requires a very redundant charity to believe could
have been either the result of misinformation or mis-

understanding. As to the argument founded on the
impos,sibility of preventing the manufacture and sale
of illicit Newspapers, as the law stands, it is difficult
for any observation to answer it better than the. ar-

gument answers itself. It is admitted that the manu-
factuiers and vendors of that contraband trash—
which is not less pernicious in itself than daringly
unlawful in its defiance of the Stamp-Office, are by
no means disposed to submit to the reduced duty.
Now every word which Mr. Rice said, in urging the
impossibility of checking the illicit trade, as the law
stands, will with equal force apply when the law
is changed, provided these daring delinquents, whom,
it seems, the Government of Great Britain is unable

to conquer, continue to prefer a contraband to a lawful
trade. They say, or at least Live every reason to be-
lieve (and we have no fear of their falling in this
respect), that they will equally defy a penny duty, as
they have hitherto defied the present duty. If the
whole of. Mr. Rice's statement, then, about the impos-
sibility of putting them down be not a delusion—a
picture coloured up for the occasion—the new law will
not abate one atom of the nuisance complained of
under the present law. So much for the Chancellor
of the Exchequer's argumentation.—Morning Post.

LEAD.—A few weeks ago, this staple commodity of
the Peak of Derbyshire suffered a declension of price of about
21. per ton. It is now realizing its former figure, with quite a
steady demand. It is above twenty years ago that lead was at
its present price.—Sheffield Mercury.
On Monday morning an immense halibut (frequently
called turbot) was caught by some fishermen belonging to the
Greens, and brought to our market, where it was exposed for
sale. When measured it was found to be six feet four inches
long, and the fishermen that carried it estimated its weight at
16 storm—Berwick Advertiser.

BANFF.—We understand that the Incorportions of
Banff arc breaking up. On Tuesday last, the Tailor Incor-
poration of that place divided 10.90/. sterling among eleven
men and six women, giving each man double the share of a
woman. The members have also reserved the sum of
33/. 2s. Bd. to commence a new fund for a Friendly Society.
The other Incorporations are following the example of the
tailors, and the coopers and weavers are to divide their funds
about the end of this month, and the wrights so soon as they
get their property sold.—Edinburgh Advertiser.
CONSERVATIVE DINNER.—On Saturday evening
the annual Conservative Dinner on the anniversary of the-
Battle of Waterloo was held in the Hopetoun Rooms, Edin-
burgh. There were about 300 gentlemen present. Professor
Wilson was in the chair. After several speeches and toasts,
" The Land of Cakes" was finally given from the chair. The
meeting then, at about 11 o'clock, broke up. The speeches,
dinner, and wines, gave great satisfaction to the company
assembled on the occasion.

A detachment of the London swell mob attended
the Commemoration at Oxford last week ; their depredations
at the concert on Wednesday in the Town-ball were pretty
considerable.

A correspondent of the Cork Herald (himself pro-
bably an Irishman) describes " the London tradesmen, and
individuals who call themselves merchants, as a rery low-lived
rate of people ; men who would ask you to dine with them at
one o'clock, and give you gin to drink after."

_ - --- -
A shocking accident happened at Ore, near Hast-
ings, on Friday last. As a man with his son was going to
Battle, in a cart, the boy fell out, and the father, endeavour-
ing to save him, also fell, and the cart passing over both,
killed the youth, and severely injured the father.
THE MEMBER'S SNUFF-BOX. —A case was de-
cided in the Sheriff Small Debt Court, Paisley, on Thursday.
hich may prove of some use to snuff-box presentationists.
The case is this :—ln January last a very handsome snuff-box
of cooper work, composed of 326 pieces of variegated orna-
mental wood, was presented to our late Member, by Mr. John
'relfer, a handy and ingenious cooper in town. In presenting
it he was accompanied by a gentleman of liberal principles,
who had suggested the presentation. The unexpected results
of the presentation were " No returns," two very annoying
words to manufacturers of any description of articles. The
gentleman applied to two of the leading men of his party
to head a remunerating subscription, but the Member
had somehow or other lost favour with them, and the
consequence was a direct rebuff. The workman said,
" Pay me for my box; " the suggestor of the presenta-
tion said "No ;" and an appeal to the Sheriff Court
followed. The object of the pursuer was to show, by affidavit
and evidence, that he had all along been given to expect pay-
ment by subscription or otherwise: while the defender, on his
part, declared that his only object in recommending the pre-
sentation was to benefit the maker, by assisting to bring his
ingenuity into public notice. When the maker of the box de-
murred to the incurring of the expense of an inscription, he
said that sooner than see the box want one, Le would see that
expense paid, but more than that he had never promised. The
case was before the Court on Thursday week, and adjourned
until Thursday last, when the Sheriff, after weighing the es i-
dence adduced, and taking the oath of the pursuer, as to his
expectations, decerned the defender to pay 21. as the price of
the box, with expenses. The defender immediately paid the
money in Court.—Paisley Advertiser.
WRECK OF THE HIVE FROM DUBLIN. —The
Hive, Captain Luscombe, with male convicts from Ireland for
Sydney, has b
p a
rti
c uleaer
sn
from
the
Australian JervisJervis Bay.and Sydney\ Ve take the
cColonist
nst fol-
lowing "
The Hive left Dublin with 250 male prisoners, and 40,0001.
in gold and silver for the Commissariat Department of this
colony, on the 24th of August last, with Lieutenant Lugard,
21st Regiment, H. Lugard, Esq., engineer, Ensign Kelly,
ancodn29Trial
unrks
daayndwefielke olafsttheth2eBitliii,:: wv,iciams eonff.
ain7dthllllecgliiimlderennt,.
the coast, blowing fresh and a thick fog ; by some mistake or
other she ran on shore near the Pigeon-house, ten miles from
Cape George; the passengers and prisoners, soon after
she struck, managed to get safely on
rrt
eeed.
Ihadtstee.uhr
droioTGsnoufr
cutter
Tefehroedit
evthnhxhebegonspery:.
those
b%eettpc.omo.
eihctrirsueeiieo3esidtaednodch
~,ersabeubeisegsrreosbsouteaeeiifaamrmnerrdo:adii
hawser, without any accident except the loss of one of the
l
boats; some of the party made their way to the neighbouring
y
sobatmTf
that.
em-
bedded hrerd d.
emdbedddi
oleasia,aoidttyoreco.
adf:sl
nlioxtdl.fl Ihedtlotbeirhrihsrrs.ceizi
Tamer
nLasepenoatvabzrcilmnevmiri ,brodnrfadneaewneerl
dstaistboiats.siorinnneaadtavrElTtitdeshietxoonhiec:utedeeseilraresi
assistanceecapeen muznnvadetdte.atecyneibhnur
thata
may yet be got off. The greater part of the stores ill s
saved. It is providential that she went on shore on that par-
ticular spot—if at almost any other neighbouring point she
she
would probably have gone to pieces, with the loss of every
life."

PRL'ES OF STOCKS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
Bank Stock. - 1 India Stock .
2 per Ccnt Red. ..... .., 91% I [)itto Bonds '2 dis. jar
3 per Cent. Cons. -- I Swith .ea Stock —
3% per Cent 99% % ,Old Annuities -
Dit to Red. 987/8 %T. New Ditto -
New :3% per Cent — 3 per Cent. Annuities, 1751.. —.—
Now 3 per Cent - Exch. Bills, .£l,OO ... 13 11 13 pm.
Bank LongAnnuitiestoexpire Ditto 500 13 11 13 pm.
Jan 5, ISOO 15% 13-18 Ditto Small
Oct 10, 1850'
Jan. 5, 1501' - Ditto Advertised plra.
Jan. 5, 1500.... -
April 5, MO — 'lndia Stack for Account...—.
Jan. 5, 1870 — 'Consols for Account
Omnium pm

PRICES OF FOREIGN FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK
Austrian Bonds ........... ..... ... !Peruvian Bonds —
Belgian Bonds 111c21,4 I Ditto Account —
Ditto Account.
Brazilian Bonds
Ditto Account —l Ditto New Bonds —
Buenos Ayres Bonds I Ditto Account —
Ditto Account I Ditto, 3 per cent —
Ciillian Bonds —
Prussian Bonds —
Ditto Account — Russian Bonds, 1822 —
Columbian Bonds — Ditto Account ... ..... —........
Ditto Account — Ditto Metallic.... ...............
Columbian Bonds, :82.1 3! % , Spanish Bonds .....................
Ditto Account —l Ditto Account ..................
Dan'sh Bonds
s Ditto Bonds, Mt... ......... 427,iN 3
Ditto Account
—; Ditto Account.— ........... 43 24 3
Greek Bonds . French, 5 per cent.-- ..... —L —c.
Ditto Bonds, 1-;,25 -- 4 per cent. —r. —c
Ditto Account —l-- 3 per cent. Bof. 40c.
Mexican Bonds, 5 per cent-- —l---- Exchange 2sr. 60.;
Ditto Account — t Dutch, :14 per cent.
Ditto, 6 per cent.
Ditto Account -
! Ditto, 5 per cent 11;2
eapolitan — I Ditto Account —

PRICES OF SHARES THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
Paid. Per Share.

Bolanos Mining Company...
Rhymney Iron Mining Company
Brighton Railway Company 5
London and Croydon Railway Company 5
London Grand Junction Railway
Manchester South Union Railway Company 2.
Northern and Eastern Railway Company 3
N rth Midland Railway Company 5

COURSE OF EXCH.
Amsterdam C.F. 12 04
Ditto. at sight
Rotttniain 2U. 12 ,

Antwerp l'2 5
Hamburg 11.13 l3 14
Alt ena l3 14
__ __

•
Paris, 3 days' s:ght 25 CO
Ditto ....... .............. 2 25 90
Marseilles.

Frankfort of Maine, Ex. M. 134
Petersluigh, ruble 3 Us. 10 0
Berlin
Vienna, effective fl 2M.10 12
Trieste ditto lO 13
Madrid 37
Cadiz.. 37
Bile a .....—...... ....... •... `.16Y4
B .rcelona 'l6,i
Fwvilie `':fi y 6

14234
9
17%
SIA
336
3%
12

G e!raltar

LNGE YESTERDAY.
'Leghorn
18
Genoa 25 85
411

Milan...

Venice 47
Naples 404
Palermo per oz. IV.
Lisbon 56%
Oporto 56 l 4
Rio Janeiro 36;4
Bahia
Buenos Ayres
Dublin, '2l days' sight 1!.4
Cork l%

PRICE OF BULLION, PER OZ.
Portugal Gold, coin £0 0 0
Foreign Gold, in bars 3 17 9
New Doubloons • 0 0 0
New Dollars _ 0 4 104

.........
Silver, Mrs, standard 0 5

Arrived. Due
0
0 traz:l it
U BtIeTIOS Ayres 0
0 Carthagett
1 Dublin...
0 Pt:milers

MAILS.
IA rrived. Due Arrived. Due
1 France 0 0 Lisbon 0
0 Oucru. & Jersey 0 0 Malta
0 f!amburg 0 0 Mexico
0
10
Holland 0 0 Ostend
0 Jamaica 0 0 Sweden 0
0 Leeward Islands 0 1 Waterford 0

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORROW.
M0rning.........18 minutes after 8. Evening 488 minutes after 8.

HAMBURG, JUNE 10, 1836.
‘..1
N approach of WEDNESDAY the 22d instant,
the First Day of Drawing of the 68th HAMBURGH
GREAT LOTTERY,
HEINE BROTHERS, the CONTRACTORS,
request those, desirous to purchase at the first Price of 81. to
LOSE NO TIME
in ordering by one of the Mails reaching this before the 20th instant.
To those, whose remittances of £lO, E*2o, or £3O, reach them
before the 20th instant, HEINE BROTHERS will on executing the
order (and sending a Scheme with full particulars) return £2, £4,
or £6, (viz. Two Pounds on each Ten Pound Note) by return
of Post. Orders for more than Two Tickets must be declined,
there not being Tickets enough remaining unsold to allow them
to attend to orders of greater extent. Orders for less than a whole
Ticket will also not be attended to.
DIRECT to HEINE BROTHERS in HAMBURG.
P. S. Order arriving after 20th instant cannot be executed below
10'. per Ticket. Tickets warranted undrawn will sell from 0.2'2d inst.
till the establishment of a higher rate at Ten Pounds sterling. A
higher rate will follow this first rise in price very soon.