The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-12 00:00:00

of Good Hope, a duty of 50. 6d. per gallon, and that the
duty on wines imported from the Cape of Good Hope
ahould be 2s. 9d. till the Ist of January, 1834, and after
that day the duty on that should be se. per gallon.
Mr. GEORGE ROBINSON would not object to the
interpretation the Noble Lord had put on the Methuen
Treaty, not because he had not an opinion on that subject,
but because he would leave that part of the discussion
to abler hands. He meant to confine his remarks to the
commercial policy ; and if there was a proposition at
variance with sound policy, it was that of the Noble Lord.
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had not entered into
the inquiry as to what the conduct of Portugal would be;
but he would tell the Noble Lord, before he made his pro-
position, that he ought to consider well what would be
the consequence of an equalization of duties on English
and other manufactures and produce in Portugal. It had
been stated that the Methuen Treaty was not favourable to
this country, and that infractions of it had been frequent ;
but before the Noble Lord acted on such a supposition, he
hoped that he would remember the fate of his budget, and
give up his present proposition, as he had given up several
of his former propositions, The Noble Lord had held
out the wisdom and the advantages of extending our trade j
with France, and had regretted that the trade with the
two countries was so small, which he attributed to the
restrictive at stem. The Noble Lord had referred to the
effect of the alteration of the duties in 1825. At that
time the duty was reduced about 7s. a gallon; hut what
was the effect of that reduction? Had that increased
our trade? He admitted what the Noble Lord said as
to our imports was correct, and these imports had been
increased by the alteration in the duty. The imports had
increased from 1,536,000/. to 3,159,0001., but the ex-
ports to France had very much decreased. They amounted,
before that alteration, to 1,124,000/. and they fell to
643,000/. He hoped that Hon. Gentlemen would
not over look this fact. Ile would tell the Noble
Lord, who was a great advocate, with many other gentle-
men of that House, for the Coctrine that exports de-
pended on imports, that this was a most fallacious doc-
trine. He did not mean to look at the case of Portugal
with any political feelings, though he was afraid that gen-
t!, men allowed their judgment to be influenced by the Go-
vernment of Don Miguel. He would look only at the
trade with Portugal, which he considered very advan-
tageous Our exports to Portugal amounted to 2,500,000/.
while our imports only amounted to 500,000/. Was that
amount of exports produced by the imports? No; but
by the regulation which gave the British manufacturers
the exclusive possession of the market of Portugal.
Let the House look then at the probable effects should
Portugal make reprisals on our trade.—(Hear, hear.)
The Government of Don Miguel being under the influ-
ence of our Government, might rot make such repri-
ds, but he was sure the Constitutionalists, should
they ever have the opportunity, would, arid thus we
should hazard our valuable export trade to Portugal,
fie- the chance of obtaining a trade with France. Of
our trade with Portugal, the wine trade was an unim-
portant branch ; ard the Noble Lord would hazard the
whole of that trade, for an increase of revenue to the
amount
,of .180,000/. Why did the Noble Lord give
these proposed advantages to France ? Was there anything
in the state of that country, which made it advisable to
reduce the duty to Is. 9d. per gallon ; and risk the whole
of our trade to Portugal, for the advantage of the drinkers
of Champagne, Burgundy, and Claret ? Instead of check-
ing our expoits, or running any risk of doing so, it was
the duty of the Government to do what it could to find
vent fur the produce of our manufactories. The interest of
Ireland, ton, was eonsidered in this measure; for consider-
able quantities of butter and other things were exported
from that country to Portugal. Were all these advantages
to be Lezarded fur the benefit o f a supposed trade with
France.—(Hear, Lear, hear.) [There was here a noise
as of a boat-race, arid a great many Members rose to leave
the House, which occ :sinned a momentary cessation of the
debate.] He recommended that there should be no con-
cessions made to France unless by treaty of reciprocity,—
All the countries for whom we had made concessions had
met those concessions with restrictions, and therefore he
recommended making none unless by treaties of recipro-
city. The trade to Portugal, which was now to be sa-
crificed, was more than equal in value to the whole trade
to France, Sweden, Norway, Dennisrk, and Prussia. All
these countries prohibited our commodities. Portugal re-
ceived them, and the consequence was, that our trade with
Portugal exceeded the trade to all these countries united.
Considering the great importance of this subject, lie begged
the Noble Lord not to press the question. With respect
to Newfoundland, he acknowledged be was interested in
that trade ; but gentlemen might nevertheless take his ar-
guments for what they were worth. The very existence
of that colony, he believed, depended on this trade. By
the present regulations we were secured the exclusive sup.
ply of that market with salt fish. The Noble Lord said,
that our salt fish might compete in the markets of Portu-
gal with the salt fish of Norway and America, as it com-
peted with thet in Italy and Spain ; but the fact svas,
that the rate of duty kept all other fish but that caught at
Newfoundland from the Portuguese markets. Even if the
duty were equal, the consequence would be—certainly we
should compete with other foreigners—hut it would he
by lowering our prices to theirs, which would he
the ruin of Newfoundland. At present one hundred
and thirty square-rigged vessels were employed in that j
trade ; the trade which the Noble Lord wished to esta-
blish with France would be carried on in French ships,
and thus our shipping also would be ruined, in order to
give French wines cheap to our club-houses. For this
nobody petitioned, and nobody would thank the Noble
Lord. The Noble Lord might avoid all these evils, and
get a revenue of 220,000/. instead of 180,000/. by placing
an additional duty of Sd. per gallon on all foreign wines.
lie recommended .the Noble Lord to do this. The Noble
Lord was, perhaps, wrong in expecting an increase of
trade with France. Certainly after the reduction of duty
in 1824, the importation of wine from that country had
increased to 762,000 gallons ; but in 1829 it was only
474,000 ; in 1630, only 408,000 gallons ; and up to
January, 1831, it was 337,000 gallons. The Hon.
Member concluded by recapitulating his arguments, and
earnestly pressing it on the Noble Lord to withdraw his
propositions, declaring that he meant to oppose them to
the utinof;t of his power.

Mr. CRESSETT PELHAM maintained, that after
having raised the duty on French wine at 13 former period,
now to reduce it, while she still remained our commercial
rival, would be to stultify our legislative proceeding,.
Mr. P. THONISON contended that Portugal had all
along conducted herself as if she were not sensible of de-
riving any benefit from her connexion with this country.
On the contrary, she had thrown every obstacle in the way
of our trade; and every remonstrance on the part of our
Government had been almost entirely, if not entirely, un-
attended to. When the Hon. Member for Worcester
talked of the benefits which we had derived from the Me-
thuen Treaty, lie assumed that which was not borne out
by the facts. He would show of how little real importance
those benefits were. This was not, however, the time to
argue whether at the time of its conclusion the Methuen
Treaty was desirable; but it was well known that all
writers on commercial subjects, and Adam Smith in par-
ticular, ha,l i•ondentned it. The stipulations of that Treaty
ha?. been hedeen by Portugal; and the only question
which our Government had now to consider was whether
it would be better to incur the penalty attending on ter-
minating the Treaty, than make any endeavour, by ne-
gociation, to set tie matter right? Did Hoe. Gentle-
men know the situation of our wine trade in Portugal?
Under the Methuen Treaty, Portugal becz.me entitled
to send Her wines to this country, at a duty a third less
than that oa French wines; while, on the other hand,
Portugal was to engage to take our goods on favourable
terms. In 1756, a Company was established at Portugal,
with privileges greater than were ever before enjoyed by
a commercial body—privileges almost royal in character._.
privileges which prevented the British horn availing
thamselves of any competition in the sale of wine in Por-
tugal. .I\'‘, wine could be exported for England without hay-
;lng Arst been submitted to the inspection of this company.
To allow the extraordinary nature of the charter which had
been granted to the Oporto Company, it would only he neees•
nary for hirn to state, that one of the articles provided that
no Judge or Tribunal should take cognizance of any of
their proceedings • and that they should not be accountable
to any one for their conduct, except to their successors.
Such were the original powers of the Company, and those
powers remained to this day to a great degree entire. It
bad been truly stated by his late [tight Hon. Friend (Mr. bluskisson), that the effect of the operation of this Com:
pany was to raise the wires of Portugal to the consumer
fifteen pounds a tun. In 1787, Mr. Pitt expressed his
determination, unless Portugal relaxed in her commercial
regulations, admitted British goods on more favourabh-
to•rns, and, above all, put an end to the Oporto Company,
to equalize the duties in this country on the wines of Pot:-
tugal and France. The negotiations into which Mr. Pitt
tote red with reerence to that subject were put an end to
by the breaking out of the French war. It must be evi-
lent, however, to whoever reads Mr. Pitt's speeches on
:he subject, that he had made up his mind, unless Portu-
oil conceded much greater advantages to this country, to
to away with the existing connexion. in 1810, trade
with Portugal suffered many grievances, especially on the
tart of the Oporto Company. A negociation took place;
;Id in 1813 our Ambassador was authorised to declare,
hat unless the Company were abolished, or placed on a
cry different footing., and unless British subjects were
4.,4,17e,„,
"kftl/4 4/r4 'll4l 4h
e.,,„ • P 14.4
110,a414
in 7 P4PO " arrt4-hlr,"t'll , tlt • *Jo

permitted to buy and sell, when, where, and how
they chose, wine, brandy, and vinegar, the British
Government were fully determined to propose a measure
to Parliament for the purpose of encouraging the importa-
tion iota England of wines from other foreign coun-
tries. This was a proof that at least at that period we
were resolved not to suffer our treaty with Portugal to be
violated with impunity. No improvement, or if any a
very trifling one, had been made in the character of the
Oporto Company since the year 1813. At the present
moment, all the substantial vices of the Company fully ex-
isted. No wine was allowed to leave Portugal without
being marked with the brand of the Company, and with-
out being subjected to every kind of imposition. Under
these circumstances what course could his Majesty's Go-
vernment take but that which they had adopted ? And
what was the penalty which we should suffer by the aban-
donment of the Methuen Treaty? The extent of it would
be the prohibition of our woollen goods in Portugal.
Amid what was the amount of the woollen goods annually
exported from this country to Pottugal ? The declared
value in 1828 was only 164,000/. ; in 1831 it was but
214,000/. The declared value of our woollen goods an-
nually exported to all countries independent of Portugal
was 5,500,000/.—(ilear.) The whole ameunt, there-
hire, of the penalty to which we should subject ourselves
was an annual export of 214,0001. So much for the loss ;
now for the inconveniences of which the Hon. Member
for Worcester had said so much. By the treaty of 1810
Portugal was bound to take our goods at a rate of duty
amounting to about 15 per cent. But that was a treaty
by itself, and had no reference to our connexion with the
3letbuen Treaty. It was to remain in force for 15 years
—and long, r, unless either party gave a twelvemonth's
notice of a wish to abandon it. That no such notice
had been given by Portugal was a proof that she cons
sidered the treaty advantageous to her, and therefore the
probability was, that it would remain in its present state.
The Methuen Treaty did not give us an iota more claim
to have our goods favourably received in Portugal than did
this treaty of 1810. But the Hon. Gentleman had ob.
,erved that Portugal consumed a large amount of our
manufactures. But that was because we took her pro-
duce at so much easier a rate of duty than the produce of
other countries. But, after all, to what did our exports
to Portugal amount ? Ile held in his hand a statement of
the official value of our exports to Portugal for a series of
years. Had it been an improving, an increasing trade?
Just the contrary. Separating Portugal from the Brazils,
it appeared that during a course of years our exports had
been diminishing. The declared value of all British ma.
nufactures exported to Portugal, to Madeira, &c. in 1815
and 1816, was 2,933,0001. In 1828 it had dwindled
down to 1,018,000/. ; and in 1829 was not more than
1,200,000/. The lion. Member for Worcester bad dwelt
on the benefits which we derived from the favourable ad-
mission of our fish into Portugal. In the first place, he
would observe, that the real duty levied on our fish in
Portugal was eighteen per cent. instead of fifteen. There
could be no doubt that a large quantity of fish was ex-
ported from Newfoundland to Portugal. The total amount
of fish exp rted from Newfoundland in 1830 was 788,000
quintals ; of which above 300,000 quintals went to Por-
tugal. This was certainly a large proportion. But still,
even if we lost the existing favour in that respect, we
should not be placed in a situation of great disadvantage.
The fish of Newfoundland was capable of competing in
the foreign market with the American and Norwegian
fish ; and the price of our commodity was necessarily re-
gulated by that competition ; so that, although we might
lose something in the event alluded to by the Hon. Gen-
tleman, it was not probable that we should lo'e much. It
was clear, however, that Portugal would not be disposed
to break the treaty on the subject, unless she wished to tax
her own consumers. Now, so unpopular was the increase of
the duty on fish in Portugal, that a proposition to that
effect made in the Cot tes was necessarily abandoned. A
contrary course had been one of the means by which the
Sovereigns of the Brageoze Family- had obtained popula-
rity. The last Queen of Portugal, on her entrance into
Lisbon, had been received by the people with the utmost
enthusiam and joy. Why ? She had reduced the duties
on salt fish. Ile now came to the Hon. Gentleman's ar-
gument about France. The Hon. Gentleman asked why
we made an unproductive sacrifice? Why we reduced
the duty on French wines, while France did not reduce
the duty on English goods? The Hon. Gentleman said
that the imports from France had increased, while the
exports to France had not increased. Now, if the im-
ports had increased, how did the lion. Gentleman sup-
pose the French were paid ? The Hon. Gentleman
seemed to think, what he (Mr. P. Thomson) wou'd be
very happy to find the case, that the French gave us
1,500,0001. of imports fur our 600,0001. of exports.—
There was an old doctrine well known among commercial
men, and all who were familiar with the celebrated work
called The British Merchant—namely, that the gain or
loss of a country in trade must not be calculated upon a
comparison of its exports and imports. It mould certainly
be better if France would take our manufactures directly
from ourselves, instead of forcing us to send them in the
first instance to America. But who were the losers?—
Did not France thus compel herself to pay all the expense
of a double freight ? He perfectly agreed with the Ho-
nourable Member, that nothing could be so absurd
on the part of France as her policy, in going to
a distance for that which she could obtain near at hand,
or making at home what she could purchase at a cheaper
rite of her neighbours. The Hon. Gentleman seemed to
think it would be better to negociate than to legislate on
the subject. He perfectly agreed, however, with his late
ever-to be-lamented friend 3lr. Huskisson, that other na-
tions would believe we had a sinister intention in recent-
mending a liberal corntnercial policy, unless we set them
the example. It was only by the general and unrestricted
adoption of that cyst, m, that we could convince other
countries that we were really in earnest in our opinions.
If we were again to attempt to neariciette, what would be
the result? That, after long and repeated attempts to
overreach one another, we might conclude some bargain__
some Methuen Treaty--of which we should at a future
time repent, finding it was a clog to our commercial pros-
perity. The policy which France had pursued on subjects
of this kind had not been attended with much advantage
to her. lie wished that those who, no doubt conscien-
tiously, although in his opinion most unwisely, approved
of restrictions on trade, and thought it better to produce
an article at home, if it cost 100/., than to buy it abroad,
although it might cost only 50/., would look at the com-
mercial state of France, not now alone, but before the re-
volution. In proof of this assertion, the Right lion.
Gentleman read extracts front the report of a commission
appointed in France on the subject, in the year 1926, and
front a recent tremotial to the French Government from
the nine districts of that country; by which latter docu-
ment it appeared that in those districts, a fifth part of
France, more enlightened commercial views were begin-
ning to prevail, and the continuance of the prohibitory
system was strongly deprecated. By adopting the measure
now proposed by his Noble Friend, the House would give
arms to those who were fighting in France for the cause of
liberal commercial intercourse.—(Hear, bear.)
Mr. ATTWOOD observed, that the Noble Lord's
measure amounted in fact to a proposition to make
110,0001. by the introduction of a new duty, and while
he admitted, that if it were found absolutely necessary for
the sake of the revenue to impose this additional tax of
180,000/., he knew no object on which it could be more
properly raised than wine; yet be considered that the
course adopted by the Noble Lord on the occasion had
been extretnely tortuous and indirect. In a financial point
of view, the proposition went to add 180,0001. to the re-
venue; in a commercial point of view, it went to transfer
to France part of the wine trade of Portugal, and the
whole wine trade of the Cape; and, in fact, it carried
farther the theory of free trade than it ever had been car-
ried before. It likewise really was a measure for the in-
troduction of a new tax, though it had been set forth by
the Noble Lord, that in consequence of his judicious
shuffling of time duties, there would be no additional burthen
imposed upon the people. The effect of levying ss. 6d. a
gallon on all wines, French and Portuguese, and Spanish,
was to fix a duty of 100 per cent. upon one wine, and 50
per cent. upon another, which accordingly acted in the one
case as a bounty, and in the other as a discouragement—
the bounty being given to the wines of France, and the
discouragement to the wines of our own colonies. He
protested against the alteration proposed to be made with
respect to Cape wines, and considered, that if Government
wanted this sum of 180,000/. they ought to obtain it by
an equitable rate of taxation, imposed according to the
value of the wine.

Sir J. GRAHAM denied that the conduct of his Noble
Friend had been tortuous or indirect ; and in proof of this
assertion referred to the first part of his Lordship's speech,
wherein he had expressly stated, that the tendency of the
measure was to introduce a new impost. Alluding to the
measure before the House, he remarked that it was 1111.•
possible for a country to go on importing without export-
ing, and that all means should be adopted to increase the
amount of exports. The question to be considered was,
not whether we could justly depart front the Methuen
Treaty, but whether we could do it wisely? It is allowed,
too, that if a new duty be necessary, no article could be
better selected for taxation than wine; therefore the only
question in reference to this point of the subject was, it
French wine should not be taxed as well Lis Portuguese?
Now had it been argued on the other side, that no ad-
vantage should be given to France, except according to
the prov;siouz of a treaty of reciprocity ; but his -Noble

Friend held not this opinion, observing, that such treaties
were for the most part inefficient, and only tend to jea-
lousy between countries; he had accordingly deemed it
iirach more advisable to set France the sound example, by.
'educing the duty upon her prime article of produce, which
in many cases amounted to a prohibition, and to show her
that we entertained no jealousy—that we were confident
we could receive her produce without injury to ourselves
—and that she would see occasion before long to act upon
liberal policy, and receive our manufactures in return.
In re'ereace to the Cape wines, he stated, that the protec-
•ion now afforded would, according to the present law,
expire in 1833, when 7d. a gallon of additional duty was
to be imposed. Now it was not the intention of Govern.
inent to increase the duty as soon as it would he increased
according to the existing law, for they did not pro-
pose to carry the alteration into effect until 1834. But
wh it, he asked, had been the effect of this protection ?
Had the consumption of Cape wine in this country in-
creased ? Nu ; it was found to be an uucongenial article,
and the consumption had, in truth, decreased. In 1827,
696,000 gallons of Cape had been imported into this
country ; in 1828, 652,000 gallons ; in 1829, 57:‘,000
g 'lions ;in 1830, 537,000 gallons. Now this, lie con-
tended, proved that the taste for Cape wino had been on
the decrease, and it was admitted on all hands that Cape
was the great menstruum for the adulteration of the finer
wines, and this to the great detriment of the Revenue. If
timely notice were given at the Cape to enable the mer-
chants to withdraw their capital and have the produce
diminished, he considered that perfect justice would have
been done; and as a matter of fiscal experiment and of
political expediency in extending our relations with France;
he thought there were good grounds for the measure, and
he hoped it would be supported by the House.
Mr. HERRIES said, the proposition was at first brought
forward simply as a matter of finance, but afterwards it
was advocated as a great question of political and com-
mercial policy. The Hon. Member then referred to the
Methuen Treaty, and real the clause which permitted Ens_
land to introduce French wines, without any difference be-
tween them and Portuguese, on her paying the penalty of the
exclusion of her woollen goods; and contended, thataltbough
Portugal, from having originally had conditions too
onerous imposed upon her, had been led on many occa-
sions into conduct which demanded reprobation, yet that
we bad, upon the whole, derived great benefit, political
and commercial, by our connection with the Peninsula,
and that it was, and always had been conceded by all
former Governments, that nothing could be more impolitic
than to avail ourselves of the right we possessed to depart
from the treaty. Mr. Canning, for instance, he could take
upon himself to say, had scouted the idea. And he begged
to ark the House it, under the present circumstances of
Europe, the course pursued by Ministers was a politic
course to pursue ? It had been frequently debated in the
late Cabinet, how in the best, and fairest, and most ami-
cable manner to Portugal, they could get rid of the
Methuen Treaty ; but never did they dream of cutting the
knot after the fashion now recommended. The necessary
papers had not been submitted to their legal advisers, and
they undoubtedly observed that, according to the provisions
of the clause in question, we might get ourselves free of the
treaty by paying the penalty in the exclusion of our
woollen manufactures, but that an this was not a thing to
be contemplated between amicable parties, they at once
dismissed it. It bad been said by Hon. Members, that the
amount of our woollen goods received in Portugal was
very trifling—equal only to 200,000/. ; but be begged the
House not to view the matter in this light, but to observe
the relation which Portugal, or rather, he said, the whole
Peninsula. bore to the other European kingdoms as a re-
ceptacle for our manufactures. The fact was, one-sixth of
the whole amount of our exported goods were taken in
the Peninsula ; and would any man venture to say that
the abstraction of one-sixth of our exports would not be at-
tended with great distress to our commercial and manu-
facturing interests? In the year 1825, the Ministry had
discovered, that to maintain the system of high duties
was only to incur continual sacrifices, and the duties
were therefore reduced ; but in 1830 the Noble Lord
wanted a sum of 180,000/., and to make it up, he re-
sorted to the expedient of increasing the duties on wine,
although they had formerly been diminished with the ex-
press view of benefitting the revenue. [The symptoms of
impatience manifested during the speech of the Right
Hon. Gentleman were so great, that we can only state
generally the purport of his observations.] The conse-
quences of adopting the present proposition of the Noble
Lord would be, that the consumers would be charged a
higher sum than before, but the revenue would not gain
in the same proportion; inderd, it was more likely to be
diminisheda—(Question, question.) He could assure the
House, that he would detain them but a short time ; but
he must express his surprise at the impatience thus mani-
fested upon a most impoi taut question. He maintained
that the Ministry had adopted a wrong course with re-
spect to Portugal. The most obvious course for them to
have pursued was to have adopted an amicable course to-
wards that country, to which we had been so long and so
closely bound by commercial treaties.
Mr. SADLER rose in the midst of the loudest cries of
" Question," which were continued so long, that at last
Mr. ATTWOOD moved an adjournment.
Mr. HUME objected to the adjournment of a question
which had already been pretty well discussed.—(Hear.)
He trusted that there cries of " Question" would not be
continued, and he must say that a more disorderly House
he had never witnessed.—(A laugh.)
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON knew there were several
gentlemen who wished to express their opinions on this
subject, and unless they were permitted to be heard, he
should support the motion for an adjournment, and should
renew it at every opportunity presented to him.—(Cries of
" Go on," mixed with " Question," " Divide.")
Mr. SADLER said the proceeding now recommended
by the present Ministry was one which bad been marked
with the reprobation of a preceding Parliament ; and
which, he trusted, would be marked with the reprobation
of this Parliament, when it was fully understood. The
present Ministry adopted an anti-colonial policy, which
he was convinced would be the ruin of are empire; and
then their changes were directed against the comfort of
the poorer classes. They took 25 per cent. from the
luxurious beverage of the rich, and added 15 per cent.
to that of the poorer classes.--(" No, no," from Mr.
Hunt.) He regretted this, for this wine was the cordial
of the bed-side in sickness. The anti-colonial policy
system was advanced in a book published by a Right Hon.
Gentleman, who, as he was now in the Ministry, no
doubt gave all the effect he could to his own opinions.—
He feared that the opinions of the Right Hon. Gentleman
had been adopted by the Ministry, from the fact, that they
were now attempting to cut up the existence of the Cape.
They did not act upon any principle of fairness ; they put
an ad valorem duty of 40 per cent. on the wines of
France ; an ad valorem duty of 80 per cent. on the wines
of Spain and Portugal ; and an ad valorem duty of 150
per cent. on the produce of our own colonies. He re.
pealed that this was utterly unfair.
Mr. HUNT disclaimed on the part of the poor, the
statement made by the Hon. Member, that the Cape wine
was the cordial of the poor; if it was a cordial, he was
sure it must be most offensive to them. lie never knew
that they purchased this wine, or that medical men ever
recommended it.—(Hear.) If this were really a tax on
the poor, he would cut off his right hand rather than vote
for it; but it was not, and he should therefore give his
willing support to the measure.

Mr: SADLER with respect to the liquor so much re-
probated by the Hon. Member, would take on himself to
say that he had had it analysed by one of the best chemists
in London, and that it contained a superior quantity of al-
cohol to any other wine—(Laughter)—and was equal in
quality to any wine imported.—(Loud laughter.)
Mr. ROBINSON said a few words in the mi,lst of loud
cries of " Question, question."
The gallery was then cleared for a division, but none took
place; and on our return we found
Mr. GOULBURN opposing the measure. He did not
approve of the mode of conducting the foreign policy of the
country by means of measures of revenue moved in a Com-
mittee of the whole House. Our treaties with Portugal
ought to be discussed regularly and formally, and should
not thus be brought incidentally before the House. The
Noble Lord said that he brought forward this measure,
in order to conciliate the French, that there might not
be war with the French at a future period.—(No, no.)
He would only observe, that if that answered as a mea-
sure of conciliation, it must fail as a measure of revenue;
for if the French wine should be so generally consumed in
this country as to supersede the wines of Portugal and
Spain, the Noble Lord would receive only 4s. 10d. instead
of 59. 6d. By giving these privileges to the French, we
should lose the advantages we had long enjoyed from our
connection with Portugal—advantages which were not
conceded to us by any other independent nation.—(Hear.)
If we acted in that manner towards Portugal, that country
would be justified in not giving us the monopoly of the
sale of fish, and might properly. claim the benefit of
strong,course and were,
now
pro.
admitting others to compete. with us in that article in her
ti less
the
mat kets. She might, for instance, admit the Norwegian,
into the fish market.
.These were commercial considera-
tions; but those
to,iftepoasliccylelavreraegatTnt,
our adoption by the Ministry. Much had been
said of the friendship.subsisting.between this country and
pinosti,sl ofoprinion, q
Portugal, and the obligation which rested upon us to main-
tain our connection with an ancient ally. lie confessed,
to his mind that argument brought no conviction, more

especially when he remembered the recent conduct of that
country towards this. Our communications with British
residents there had been fur some time, en their part, little
more than a series of complaints against the Portuguese
Government for infractions of that treaty ; and even, within
a short time, we had been under the necessity of sending a
fleet to the Tagus for the purpose of protecting the rights and
properties of those residents. He therefore thought that the
arguments of the Right Hon. Gentlemen opposite ought not
to have that weight with the House which those who de-
livered them expected. The Right Hon. Gentleman who
spoke last had said, that if the alterations now proposed
were carried into effect, the Portuguese would reduce the
duty on the fish of other countries, to the obvious detri-
ment of our trade ; hut surely the Right Hon. Gentlemen
must recollect, th the present resolution gave them no in-
creased facility for doing that, nor did it afford any reason
why they should. They might do so at the present Hio-
client if they thought proper, or at any time past.
The House then divided—
For the resolution '259
Against it 157
Majority -10'2
On cur re-admission we found that the Order of the
Day for the House resolving itself into a Committee of
Supply had just been moved.
AFFAIR OF CASTLEPOLLARD.
Mr. O'CONNELL sincerely hoped that the Irish Go-
vernment would pause before they resolved upon proceeding
contrary to the wishes of the parties most injured. A
memorial had been forwarded to the Castle, in Dublin, on
the part of the relatives of the deceased, praying for l er-
mission to be allowed themselves to prosecute. It was,
to be sure, said, that they were to have an additional
Coun,el to aid in the prosecutions, but that made no im-
portant difference ; for a junior Counsel so circumstanced
had nothing to do with the conduct of the cause—no
power to call any witnesses—no right to be present at any
consultation, and his connexion with it afforded no ac cu-
rity against the whole matter being mismanaged ; neither
did the character of the Attorney-General ; for it might
be mismanaged even without his knowledge. It was of
the highest importance that the people should have confi-
dence in the Government.
Lend ALTiIORP said that Government was placed in
circumstances of considerable difficulty. There were
three courses open to them--either to prosecute on the
pact of the Government, without any assistance from the
relatives of the deceased, or to leave the matter entirely
in their hands ; or, pursuing the third course, of uniting
with the parties in the business of the prosecution ; and
when the House remembered, that both the Hon. and
Learned Gentlemen (the Members for Kerry and fur the
University of Dublin) joined in censuring the conduct of
Government, that afforded some ground for assuming that
Government had not acted unwisely in avoiding either ex-
treme, and adopting a moderate proceeding—that of giving
assistance to the people. It was a mistake to suppose that
the additional Counsel would be inefficient, for it was un-
derstood that he should be made acquainted with the whole
conduct of the trial, with full power to complain when-
ever grounds for complaint presented themselves, and with
full power to call any witnesses whom he might think
proper.

- Mr. LEFROY complained of the conduct of Govern-
ment on this matter, on the ground that it amounted to a
administration of justice by a mode unknown in this
country. He regretted much that the Hon. and Learned
Gentleman, the Member for Kerry, should avail himself of
opportunities such as that to excite political agitation in
that House.

Mr. O'CONNELL certainly did call it a slaughter ;
and it the Hon. and Learned Gentleman thought that too
harsh, he should be obliged to him for a gentler phrase in
which to express the slaying of 13 or 14 Irishmen.
Mr. HUME thought it natural for the relations of those
persons who were killed by the police (whether that killing
was to be called a slaughter or not) to desire that justice
should be done.—(Hear.) Nothing could go further to
appease party feeling in Ireland than the fair administra-
tion of justice —(Hear.)
After a few words from Mr. Goulburn, Mr. North,
Colonel Rochford, and Mr. O'Connell,
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said, he thought that
there was nothing unusual in the course followed by the
Attorney-General for Ireland. All Crown prosecutions
were necessarily under the controul of that officer ;
but there was still no reason why he should not
avail himself of the assistance of Counsel employed by the
relations of the persons slain.—(Hear.) There was no-
thing in the course adopted by the Attorney-General for
Ireland different from that usually pursued in England.
Mr. MAURICE O'CONNELL hoped the Crown law-
yers would not pursue the course adopted by their prede -
cessors in 1829, in the Clare prosecutions—(Hear)—in
which the Counsel for the Crown refused to join in the
challenge,' of the prosecutors.
Mr. STANLEY thought the Irish Attorney-General had
afforded every facility to the relations of the persons killed,
and had honourably and impartially executed his very
difficult and delicate duties in Galway, Clare, and Ros-
common.

Mr. PERRIN could see no reason why the Attorney-
General should take a prosecution oat of the hands of the
relatives, who were willing, and who had the means, to
prosecute. He knew such interference had occasioned
great discontent amongst the people.--( Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUNT (amidst considerable confusion, which he
said should not put him down) rose to say a few words.
He could not perceive why the Attorney-General interfered
In those prosecutions, unless it were fur the purpose of
protecting certain parties.—(Hear, hear.) If it was the
wish of the Government to save the yeomanry, and it
they thought that body prosecuted with too much avidity,
why were not Counsel sent down to defend them, who had
need of such protection, instead of forcing assistance upon
those who did not wish for it ?

SIR A. B. KING.
The SPEAKER having left the Chair, and the House
having resolved into a Committee of Supply, a short con-
versation took place between Mr. Rice, Mr. Goanox, and
Mr. G. DawsoN, respecting the case of Sir A. 13. King,
which Mr. DAWSON said he would bring before the Com-
mittee that evening.
On the motion of Mr. RICE, the question was put that
a sum not exceeding 15,796/. 10s, be granted to his Ma-
jesty for the Retired Allowances.
Mr. G. DAWSON rose to call on the Committee to do
lan act of justice to a useful and meritorious individual, and
he was confident that, upon the statement which he should
make, his proposition respecting that person would meet
with their unanimous concurrence. Ile had no doubt
that the Noble Lord opposite (Althorp) would be able to
give satisfactory reasons for not having come forward on
that occasion to ask of the House a compensation for Sir
A. B. King. At the same time he hoped that the claims
of the Baronet would not be prejudiced by his (Mr.
Dawson's) advocacy.---(No, no, and hear.)—The family
of Sir A. B. King had held for many years, by patent,
the office of stationer to the Crown in Ireland—indeed
from 1760 to the present time. He (Mr. Dawson)
was aware that the long possession of the office, and the
emoluments derived from it for a long term of years might
be referred to, to induce the House to refuse compen-
gation.—(Hear, hear, hear.) But he could not think
that it would be any disadvantage to Sir A. B. King
that the House should take it into its consideration
that his family and himself had so long held that office
without any delinquency on their part, and with ad-
vantage to the country.—(Hear, hear, hear.) It
was complained in 1829, that such a monopoly
as the Baronet possessed should ever have been
granted to an individual, and it was referred to a
Committee to inquire respecting his patent. That Com-
mittee reported that the transactions of the King's sta-
tioner with the Government were not under sufficient
controul, and they recommended that Sir A. B. King
should be induced to surrender his patent, and that the
supplying of stationery to the public offices in Ireland
should he conducted on the same principles as in England.
He (Mr. Dawson) had been a member of that Committee,
together with his Noble Friend opposite, who, he was
sorry to learn, was then determined to take a hostile part
to him on that occasion.—(Hear, hear.) It had never
been doubted that Sir A. B. King had exclusively the
right to serve all the public offices in Ireland with sta-
tionery, nor had it ever been questioned, on the other
hand, that it was in the power of the Crown to deprive
bins of that right.—(Hear, hear.) But it was a power
which had never been exercised but where delinquency
had been proved, which had not been the case with
regard to this gentleman. Mr. Dawson read an extract
from the report of the Committee, in which it was
recouusended that Sir A. 13. King should be induced to
surrender his patent. As soon as that recommenda-
tion reached the Government of that day, an applica,tinn in
was made by the then Secretary for Ireland, •
King, in answer, stated that he was pe; fectl
u
tic.r.ciotiriitnl.g ince with the suggestion of the Committee. Si,
office.y
him
(Amf After r
D somea
willing to enter into an arrangement for the surrender of his
patent, and that he delayed a final and decisive answer as
cti?lmioetiv,eonment, Sir A. 13.
to the terms on which he would surrender it, only because'
here Wai a little difliculty—(A laugh)—in ascertaining the
Kin)g,
l'as'ashewlivilaisngthen Secret dry to the Treasury. But he
uonfi
tahttoei nspurbovifiinttlisit htolilsfe
s(osnlr. Dawson) did not think that it was competent
to him, or to any but a principal stationer, to decide
the matter. It was accrudindy referred to tsvo " pro-
fTtchteramcoomunmt

fessional stationers of high eminence and great eita-
aiedbybySirthe
A. B
Chaia:
ofcellos of th the wEl'xnen'ieq(ulnee was nn
Exchequer, the
other King. They, not aareeing, called in as umpire, a most
eminent stationer ; and the award agreed upon by the ar-
bitrators was, that 2,5001. per annum was no more than
a fair compensation to Sir A. B. King for the surrender
of his patent. If the award had been while the late Go-
vernment was in office, it would have been confirmed by
a minute of Treasury : but he understood that it was now
contended, that as it was only a patent during pleasure, no
compensation was due. He must he allowed to say that
this was the first instance of visiting on a metitorious
officer the displeasure of the Crown, by revoking a patent
which had always been considered as granted (luring life :
and it might be remarked, that although 40 Irish offices
had been abolished, yet in every case compensation had
been given. He would admit that there had been an ex-
travagant issue of stationery, but at the same time it was
to be observed, that this issue was not within the controu!
of Sir A. B. King ; and therefore, though there was now
a saving of 10,0001. effected out of an issue of 22,000/.
per annum for stationery, it was by a general system of
economy that this saving was produced, and not by any-
thing connected with Sir A. B. King. He therefore
trusted, that he had made out that the House of Corn
mons would be justified in giving a compensation of
2,5001. according to the award of the arbitrators. Ile
hoped that whit he had stated had been gone through
without any exhibiti. n of party feeling; and he could
safely say, that he believed that this compensation was in
strict accordance with the justice of the House. He
should therefore move, as an amendment, that 2,500/. be
added to the grant DOW before the Committee, for the pur-
pose of making a compensation to Sir A. B. King.
Lord ALTHORP said, that when the question svas be-
fore the Committee that had been appointed,it had never been
understood by them that the patent was only granted (lur-
ing pleasure. As soon as he found that that was the case,
he had deemed it advisable that it should be revoked. The
Right Hon. Gentleman, therefore, was not quite correct
when he had stated that Sir A. B. King had voluntarily
resigned the patent. He would, no doubt, have resigned
it in consideration of a compensation of 2,500/. a-year
—(Hear, hear, and a laugh)—but he did not come to the
House as having resigned it without that award in his
favour. Since there was, according to the admission of
the Right lion. Gentleman, a saving of 10,000/. a-year
nut of the 22,000/., it certainly did appear to him than
Sir A. B. King, having been for so many years in the re-
ceipt of such enormous profits, his was not a case in
which compensation ought to be made.—(Hear, hear.)
The Right Hon. Gentleman had stated that he (Lord A.)
bad ackno 'edged Sir A. B. King's claim to compensa-
tion, because he had allowed him the grant up to the year
when the patent was revoked ; but he did not think that
was at all pronouncing that such a claim did really exist.
He did not wish, in anything he said, to appear to pass
censure on Sir A. B. King, but merely to show the
grounds on which he acted in refusing the compensation ;
after which, it would be for the House to decide whether
he had taken a right view of the sulijeet.—(Hear, hear.)
Colonel SIBTHORPE supported the amendment. If
they were not to grant compensation in this case, it would
be a direct robbery of the individual.
Mr. It. GORDON, as a Member of the Committee,
bore testimony that that body had not been aware that the
patent was one during pleasure only. The Right Hon.
Gentleman had called Sir A. B. King a useful and meri-
torious officer, and perhaps the Right Hon. Gentleman
thought that those qualities were evinced in the country
having had to pay 10,000/. a-year too much during his
supply of stationery.—(Hear, hear.) It was said that
the compensation was calculated at the rate of 131 on his
receipts ; but that certainly did not appear a very fair mode
of reckoning, when it was recollected that, in addition to
paper, &c., there was actually money paid to almost every
officer in the Lord-Lieutenant's Household.
Mr. T. LEFROY supported the amendment, and said
that Sir A. B. King's character was unassailable, it was
proved in his having been elected to be Lord May or of
Dublin—(A laugh)—and in his having received marks of
approbation from the Sovereign.—(Laughter.)
Mr. O'CONNELL also supported the amendment.
They ought to consider the faith upon which the patent
had been surrendered.—(Hear, hear.) Every one under-
stood that the patent had been granted for lite ; and Go-
vernment had called on him to surrender it on the under-
standing that he should get compensation for it —(Hear.)
S'r A. B. King had surrendered it ; and the question
now was, whether he was to get that compensation
or not.—( Hear, hear, hear.)—The Right Hon. Gentleman
had talked of the extravagance practised ; but was that
the fault of Sir A. B. King ?—(llear, hear.) He defied
any one to prove that that was the case. Sir A. B. King
had nothing but his instructions to go upon. He did not
dare refuse his obedience to them ; and the question now
was, whether, on this account, he and his unoffending
family were to be consigned to poverty and distress ?
(The Hon. and Learned Gentleman was loudly cheered in
these remarks by Mr. G. Dawson and Col. Sibthorpe.)
Mr. HUME thought the House might find it difficult
to resist the appeal of his Hon. and Learned Friend.--
He must, however, make the House aware that the fault
was the Government's, not that of Sir Abraham King.—
The patent ought to have been withdrawn in 1822 ; and
that it was only now withdrawn was a proof of the manlier
in which the public money was managed. Sir A. B. King
ought to think himself too happy to have enjoyed so much
of the public money. The late Government was much to
blame.—(Hear, hear.) Sir A. King, instead of receiving
more money, ought to refund.—(Hear, hear.) He had
not discharged his duty as a faithful public servant ; and
if his patent had been brought before any tribunal several
years ago, it would have been voided. He was much
surprised that the gentleman lately in office advocated this
cause ; and he was happy to congratulate the country en
having, at length, one honest Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, who would do hie duty to his country. The late
Government ought to have ascertained whether the patent
were for life or not. Ile should support the Noble Lord,
the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Mr. CUTLAR FERGUSSON admitted the great merit
of the Nubile Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer; but
still he thought good feeling as well as justice was in fa-
vour of the view taken by the lion, and Learned Member
for Kelly. The patent was for life, like all pensions
grantedw by the Cron. The question had been settled by
a reference already made to arbitrators, and the Govern-
ment was bound to abide by that arbitration. The sub..
jest had been investigated, the investigation had been
completed, and the present Government could not alter
the decision. Sir A. King was bound and concluded by
the arbitration, and he could not go into a court of law
to set it aside. Was he to be bound by it and nut the
Government? That was not justice. If they did not give
effect to the award of the arbitrators, they would do a gross
act of injustice.
Mr. G. DAWSON explained, that Sir A. King bad
surrendered his patent, and that it was his (Mr. Dawson's)
fault that it was not taken by him. lie contended that
the profits said to have been made by Sir A. King had
been much over-rated, He never had charged 100 per
cent. profit. The utmost he had made was 161 per cent.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE thought, if it were not fully
made out, that justice and law demanded the compensation,
the finances of the country were not in such a state as to
allow of liberality to gratify the feelings of Hon. Members.
If there was no foundation in justice or law for Sir A.
King's claim, it was the duty of that House not to squander
the public money. It was said that this was a question
between Sir A. King and the Government. He believed
it was a question between the public and Sir A. King.
The patent, he believed, had been abused, and he bad no
doubt that if a scire facias had been brought, the patent
would have been void, d. He was struck by the fact, that
it had riot occurred to the Members of the late Govern-
ment that the patent was held during pleasure (it was
well known, the Hon. Member was informed)—if it were
well known, he could not conceive the negligence which
had allowed such expense for so many years unchecked.
But if it were well known, to whom was it known :
And if it were known, how came it that a Committee
of that House was kept in ignorance of this subject.
—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") This was a delusion
practised on the Muse. He denied that the case bad
been referred to arbitration. What was referred? Why, not
the case as now known, but an assumed right, and he pro-
tested against that Committee giving a compensation for
an assumed right—a right without foundation. The House
was asked, then, to make good an arbitration founded on
an assumed right. It was understoo./, he believed, that
the patent had been resigned ; but the public was noiv in-
formed that Sir A. King had no right whatever. Thus a
bargain had been made with him for what did not belong
to him, and was the public to pay him for what he had no
right to ? If anything had been taken away from Sir A.
King, he would say pay him ; but if nothing had be.n
taken from Sir A. King to which he had a just claim, tha'
H. wise could not give hien the public money. He had LW
right to the public money ; he had surrendered no right to
he compensated ; and the only question was, what were
tl,e chums of Sir A. King on the benevolence of that
House? But that House had only to do justice, not to
grant a benevolence. Sir A. King had already profited
much by the public, and had no claims on the benevolence,
of the House, lie, therefore, should support the view of
the Ministry.
Mr. GOULBURN would admit that Sir A. King
.had
no just claim in law ; but the extreme of justice was often

!gross injustice. It WM enatomary to make such eompew
.ation. That patent had been twice printed, and mult,
have been known to the House. Sir A. King had held 10
patent fur upwards of sixty years, and it was not unres:
enable that he should have a compensation when b''l
patent was taken away. He did not think compensation
bkely to be an injury to the public, as a fair allowance
.could induce persons holding such patents ready to resign
them, and not to p!ace obstacles in the way of making ad'
vantageous public arrangements. On the Right Hon,
Gentleman taking his seat, there were loud calls of
question, and the Gallery was ordered to be cleared far
a division.

The Committee then divided--
For the amendment 45
Against it ioa
Majority -58
The original resolution was then agreed to ; and the
House, having resumed, the report was ordered to be re'
reived this day.

The other Orders of the Day were then agreed to ;
and at Half-past Two o'clock this morning the House
ddjourned.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SUN.

SIR,-The system of imputing the measures of public
men to unworthy motives, and of advancing charges against
them not supported by any thing approaching to satisfac-
tory evidence is very pernicious. Its t-ndency is to exas-
perate the good and harden the bad. The correctness of
this view of the subject is well exemplified by the dispute
between the Member for Middlesex and the Members for
Mahnesbury and Tamworth, reported in The Sun of the
2d instant. Sir H. Ilardinge is a soldier and a man of
honour. On service he deservedly attracted the notice of
the Duke of Wellington, and other individuals distin-
guished for their civil as well as military rank. When
the Duke had succeeded in obtaining the absolute
command of the Administration he introduced into
it his follower, Sir H. Ilardinge, a well-disciplined
soldier, a warm-hearted and a grateful gentleman. Such
being his character, it may be well understood that for his
leader he entertained the strongest sentiments of fidelity
and devotion, and that towards the body of his fellow-ser-
vants he was animated by much of the esprit de corps.
Such feelings hare not forsaken him, although his Captain
is cashiered and his comrades are disbanded. You may
remember how incensed he was with a young Lord, who
he thought had spoken against the Duke. He looked at
his Lordship as though lie was going to dash his Lord-
ship's brains about the floor, and said something about
scorning such a fellow.' Again, when Mr. Hume, on the
Ist inst., expressed his suspicions that certain republican
papers had proceeded from the enemy's camp—meaning
thereby some of Sir H.'s late comrades—Sir H., with that
generous credulity which induces hint to fancy all his friends
as honourable as himself, spurned the idea, and retaliated
upon Mr. Hume with much asperity and fury. Sir R. Peel
too got up, and with the most astonishing and consummate
effrontery proceeded to rebuke Hume for harbouring such
suspicions. He said he had a thousand times rather be
the object of them than their author. Surely the Hon.
Baronet must remember that he is the author of statements
much more scandalous than the suspicions in which Mr.
Home professes to indulge. Hume only suspected the
Ex• Ministers or their supporters of resorting to a some-
what shabby trick. But Sir R. Peel has substantially
asserted, that at a critical conjuncture, when the well-
being of the State required the continuance of Parliament,
his Majesty's Ministers, influenced only by selfish motives,
demanded its dissolution.' Now let any person but calmly
compare the suspicion with the statement, and he will, I
doubt not, agree with me, that the latter is by far the most
ungenerous. Your obedient servant,
AN OBSERVER OF PUBLIC MEN.
Parliamentary Debates, April 2'2,1831.

DO VER, JULY 12.—Arrived from Calais the
Sovereign, IIAYIvARD, having on board the Belgian De-
puties, Count DE MERODE, Baroa D'HOOGVOORT, DR
311INTENAEN, FLEAUPItE, anal LEBEAU, Who proceeded
immediately for London to offer the throne of Belgium to
Prince LEOPOLD, on the terms he prescribed, and sanc—
tioned by a majority of 56 in the Belgian Congress. It
is confidently expected in the Netherlands that their new
KING Pill without delay repair to Brussels, and com-
tnence the important functions of the high situation to
which be has been thus honourably called.

It is now said that Lord BROUGHAM has
absndoneu his Bankrupt Court Bill during the present
Session, owing to the necessary absence of professional
Members on the Circuits.

The Right Hon. THOMAS SPRING RICE,
M.P., derives a considerable accession to his property by
the death of his relative, Mr. STEPHEN RICE, late Assis-
tant-Barrister, county Kerry. —Limerick Chronicle.
The Duchess of ST. LEU, daughter of the
Empress JOSEPHINE, and wife of LOUIS BONAPARTE,
Ex-King of Holland, went last week on a visit to her
Grace the Duchess of BEDFORD, at Woburn Abbey. It
is generally believed in the neighbourhood that, in the
course of the present summer, the KING will honour the
Duke Of BEDFORD with a visit, at his Grace's splendid seat,
—Bucks Gazette.

The valuable living of Hodnett, which is in
the gift of a late M.P. fin• the University of Oxford, still,
we under,taild, remains without a cure. Should an ap-
pointment to it not take place soon, it will lapse to the
CI own.

The Duke of BEDFORD has caused to be
printed and circulated a series of Rules, Orders, and Bye_
Laws, fur the better regulation of Covent- Garden Market,
which are drawn up with infinite care, and in a style of
great simplicity and clearness, perfectly intelligible to all
classes of society.

An illustrious personage has recently ex-
pressed himself in terms of indignant anger towards one
of the members of his family, in consequence of that indi,
vidual having used very audacious langu ige, in puidiG •
company. in relation to the Ministers and the Reform
Bill.—Court Journal.
LANDER, the traveller, lies dangerously
at his house in the Adelphi. During two or three days
last week, little hope was entertained that this elven-
turous young man would survive, the fever was so ex-
tremely violent; but'the application of powerful blisters
on the head, has occasioned its violence in some degree to
subside, and the medical attendants are sanguine in their
expectations that he will recover.
Mr. COBBETT states in his Register that his
Jury were equally divided, six being for a verdict of guilty
and six for acquittal.
BLACKFRIARS-BRIDGE.—This great lead.
ing thoroughfare to the metropolis, which has been closed
for some time, for the purpose of being paved with large
stones, with layers of cement underneath, is nearly com-
pleted.

The population of the extensive parish of
Marylebotie, under four successive censusecr, turns out to be
as follows :

Males. Females. Total. -
1801
1811
1821
1831
aving nearly doubled in thirty years. By the recent re-
;urns it appears that these are in tl e parish 11,608 inha.
kited houses, 756 building, and 921 unoccupied.
Mrs. MARGARET ROSE, sister of the Right
Hon. Sir G. ROSE, died at Montrose, on the 20th ult., in
her 91st year. It is said that some 20 or 30 years rAgn
this spirited maiden, to whom her thrifty and thriying
brother refused any adequate provision, put up a sign at
her little habitation, intimating " Alauciattv.T Ros 4,
sister to the Right Hon. Sir GEortGE Roar, Treasurer of
the Navy, takes in washing here."— Glasgow Chronicle.
ABINGDON, FRIDAY, JULY B.—The influ-
enza has been very prevalent in this town arid neighbour.
hood during the last week u r ten days; and, as the oes:sor..
rence of an epidemic is generally a tended by great exalt.
thgeration, so it was currently reported here on Monday, last
at a nsost malignant disorder, called the " block fever,"
had broken out in the village of Ridley; but, un minute
po°oPreol',lle.fa.t4EDN"EY, Who ter--
inquiry, it was found the malady was only the very pre_
vailing one, that might in many cases be traced to inc4;i%
years on Baturday last, after four
tious conduct in the bay-fields during the lase thowfiv
weather as the cause; and that no ease hgdha; operocyuerdre fp
f?orr,
:slloanynslteh,
urinated i,ts,
it:
:villaconfinement
:l
tgigfneena, e .
no, indeed,i
tfel
t):93:ili,sayt?lb,
ateu, d .
At the death of TIIRALE, in 1781, the brew,-,
house, and all that appertained to it, were sold by Dr. Jorrssos and the older executors to Mr. l'Exxxss (the
penterson t
a whno,an for some years, had been the chief superintend ~
d, aalary of five hundred pounds) and to :.
me„ BARCLAY, a descendant of ROBERT BARCLAY, of .
Ury, or one hundred and thirty-five thousand pounds. '.
Such has, however, been the success of this sort of pre-
perty, and its increase in value, that, two or three years
ago, a gentleman, well known for his liberal principles
and his kind and charitalde disposition, who happens to
possess one-quarter share of this concern, received fur his
proportion of one year's profits, upwards of fifty thousand
pound%