The Sun.
London, England, 1825-03-08 00:00:00

been influenced by those about him to sanction the
improvident bargains made with this man, or to
tolerate the frauds of his agents, in carrying those
bargains into execution. Ouvrard was a dashing
speculator at an early period of the Revolution:
It is related of him, that in the time of the Di-
rectory he once presented himself to the Mi-
nister of the day to make a tender for a pretty
extensive contract. The terms were approved ;
but an immediate deposit of one million two
hundred thousand francs was required as a se-
curity. Ouvrard, who had no other resource
than his own wits and a few bank-notes in his
pockets, gave without hesitation a checque for
the amount on the Bank of France ; but once
clear of the Minister's Cabinet, he addressed
himself to the Chef de Bureau, begging him to
have the trifling complaisance not to present his
checque till the following day. His reasons
were persuasive ; the request was granted, and
his pocket was lightened of its bank notes.—
He had little difficulty in proving to the sa-
satisfaction of a monied friend, that his con-
tract was worth the advance of 1,200,000 francs,
and the check was duly honoured. Nor was
Ouvrard mistaken in his estimate ; but having
unluckily acted without due discretion, and
laid himself open to proceedings which ren-
dered a temporary seclusion indispensable, he
confided the care of his papers to a sure per-
son, who was thus involuntarily made acquainted
with certain secrets which he did not regard as
altogether sacred. Among other curious parti-
culars, it is said, that there was a process verbal
drawn up in solemn form, and stating with great
minuteness a case of necessity which had occa-
sioned a cargo of corn to be thrown into the sea ;
whereas, in point of fact, no such cargo had ever
been shipped !—Possibly_the forthcoming report
of the Committee of Inquiry may present a
counterpart to this transaction. Meanwhile M.
Ouvrard is safely confined within four walls, at
the suit of one of his creditors.

[MORNING HERALD.]
In the House of Lords, after many petitions
had been presented against the Catholic Associa-
tion Bill, the Bishop of Exeter presented a peti-
tion from the Clergy, &c. imploring the House to
resist any further concession to the Roman Ca-
tholics. Lord King lamented the presentation
of such petition, praying, as it did, that the Ca-
tholics might continue deprived of their civil
rights ; observed that the Clergy of late had be-
come great Politicians ; and particularly deplor-
ed the part which the established Churchmen took
with respect to this question. Lord Darnley
also expressed his regret that the Clergy deemed
it right to present such petitions. The Bishop of
Exeter, in reply, submitted that the Clergy had
as much right to petition Parliament as the rest
of his Majesty's subjects ; and added, that they
failed not to approach that House with respect-
ful language, on a subject too, which they might
be excused for feeling to be one of great im-
portance. Lord Suffield afterwards moved that his
Bill, declaratory of the illegality of using spring-
guns for the preservation of game, be committed.
The Duke of Wellington said that the ac-
cidents mentioned in justification of the Bill,
would not warrant Parliament in limiting its
operation to instances when spring guns were set
for the preservation of game ; if the Bill passed
at all, his Grace thought its operations ought to
be general. Lord Ellenborough declared that if
the use of spring guns, under any circumstances,
was declared illegal, the market gardeners in par-
ticular, about London would not be able to protect
their property. The Lord Chancellor said, as to
the law of the subject, the Judges were divided
upon it ; and that with respect to the use of spring
guns to preserve game for sporting, it was contrary
to the practice pursued in his younger days.—
Sportsmen then went to the mountains tops to
meet the rising morn in pursuit of game ; but as
preserves must be had for modern sportsmen, and
spring-guns to guard those preserves, it was ma-
nifest, his Lordship continued, that the law should
be made clear and unequivocal. He for one
would never consent to endanger the lives of his
Majesty's subjects by the use of such dangerous
engines ; and certainly not for such objects.—
Lord Liverpool subsequently moved the third
reading of the Irish Unlawful Societies" Bill.