The Sun.
London, England, 1849-05-09 00:00:00

PRUSSIA.

We learn from the Kolner Zeitung that a meet-
ing of the Landwehr of the district of Eberlehi
took place on the 3d instant, at which a num-
ber of resolutions were passed, according to which
the Landwehr declared that they submitted to the
authority of the Frankfurt Parliament, and that
the Landwehr would not obey the orders of the Man-

teuffel-Brandenburg Cabinet. These resolutions
were
on the Gth Of May adopted by the Landwehr of the
districts of Sehwelm, Hagen, itonsdvrf, LiPtring-
hausen, Lennep, Huekeswagen, Solingen, Neuss,
Dortmund, Essen, and Miilheim, formerly the most
loyal parts of the Prussian dotninions.

SCHLESVVIG-HOLSTEIN.
The Danes have obtained the advantage over the
German troops, in a, shirmish at Taulor, one mile
from Frederizif,.—./4044,urei Borsenhalle.

ITALY—.
The following proclamatio
.7.1 has been addressed
to the French army by tote Roman
people :
"Frenchmen!—lLie land you tread on still preserves
the traces of your glorious ancestors; but these brought
us liberty, and you bring us slavery. In destroying
the Roman Republic you will destroy your own,
and you will be fratricides at the same time that
you injure 3-ourselves. Oh, shame! you stood by,
and regarded with a laugh of mockery the misfor-
tunes oi Lombardy. You had not a single word
of consolation tor the fall of Piedmont. Your venal
writers utter blasphemies and calumnies on the heroic
Worts of Hungary. On this very day, with an impu-
dent mockery, you come to destroy Roman liberty.
r your implacable Government subjects you
'canlall4g47::test of. all infamies, binds you to the train of
despothm and of injustice, and obliges you to follow
in the wake of the Croat and the Cossack. Are
you indeed soldiers? If you are, choose a foe worthy
of your courage. Do not come to defy the rising
strength of a petty state. If you wish to combatagainst
Republican arms, cease to be Republicans yourselves,
or confess that you are the satellites of tyranny and
hypocrisy. French citizens! tear aside the veil of
policy, and answer, Whom do you wish to restore
to power? Are they the priests? this heriditary race
who have caused so much blood to flow and occa-
sioned so many woes to France herself. Study your own
history, and you will see what a fatal present you are
about to make to us. Know it, once for all; from our
earliest infancy even to our old age, we have cherished
an implacable hatred of sacerdotal domination. You wish
to reimpose it on us by force. You are about to place us
on a level with the Chinese. You will force us to curse the
soil which has given you birth, We are unfortunate, be-
cause we are the sport of the violence of powerful
men; unfortunate, because we are despised and
trampled uncler foot by the very nation which was
always the illusion to our mind, and the source of our
hopes, Frenchmen before undertaking a detestable
work, ask of the
.blue. heaven that is above you, and it
will answer that it has been polluted by sacerdotal
iniquities, and by their horrors in all ages. Ask our
t
our wa
oe , and you will learn from them an
youth
uninterrupted a
nd
seductions, of debauchery, and of
venality. Ask of our farmers for whom they have
laboured? they will answer, for the priests! Ask to
whom belongs the fifth part of the state? to the priests!
Ask to whom belongs the most luxurious abodes, for
whom are the inest eXquisite delicacies, and who are
those obeyed by thousands of menials? The reply will
still be—the priests! the priests! Frenchmen! your mis-
sion is the Work of hell. It will bring down upon your
heads an universal malediction, for which your past
glory Kill not prove a recompense. OA this very day
you lose the pride and glory of warriors. The chil-
dren of the concverors of Arcola and I),larengo have,
alas, become the janissaries of the sacristy, and the
champions of the accused mitre!'
It is said that several of the French soldiers have
refused to fight in the cause of Austria and Naples,
and have joined the Romans in defence of liberty
and republioanism

STATE OF TRADE.
(From the Manchester Guardian of this day.)
MANCHESTER, MAY 4.—The present upward tendency
in Cotten, and the expectation that shipments would
now find their way into Hamburg!), gave rise, in the
early part of the day, to an anticipation of improvement
in this market, which, however, has not been realised.
Rather higher prices were at first demanded for yarns,
and for such cloths as are in current request; but it was
soon perceived that the continental merchants were
discouraged, and 'rendered indisposed for the slightest
upward movement, by the gloomy tenor of their actvices,
received last night ; from which it appears that the
German States were rapidly verging towards confusion
and anarchy. It was also found that the report of injury
from " frost," sustained by the growing cotton, is looked
upon as a repetition of one of those old stories which
are supposed to be stereotyped on the other side of
the Atlantic, for seasonable use in the manufacturing
districts. In the course of the day, therefore, the
sellers have gradually modified their demands, and
become willing to accept the rates of last week for most
articles. However, on the whole, the market is charac-
terised by much firmness, at previous rates. In yarns
for the continent the business has been very limited.
Qualities suitable for India, in Nos. 20 to 40, have been
purchased in a quiet way, and only to a moderate extent.
The buyers for home manufacture have operated more
sparingly than they had intended doing. In goods
there is no striking change. 7-8 printing cloths, ex-
cept of the finer descriptions, continue in good demand;
and 40-inch shirtings, adapted to the Eastern trade, are
so exceedingly scarce, that a o}errand, not equal to that
which lately existed, is insufficiently supplied. Light
goods are still the only ones that are wanted. Long
cloths, T's, and domestics, particularly the heavier sorts,
are certainly not becoming more easy of sale.
ROCUDALE, MAY 7.—The flannel market continues
very much depressed, and business is nearly at a stand.
In wool, also, there is very little doing, and prices may
be quoted a shade lower.
Iit!DDERSFIELD, MAY B.—Tl.ere is very little anima-
tion in our market to-day; but still a steady trade is
doing. Our fancy trade is suffering a little from the
continued dislurbance on the continent. The woollen
manufacturers are all anxiously looking to the sales;
and as they are fast approaching, noshing particular is
going nu nu that ilopartineut of our trade.
HALIFAX, MAY s.—Althougn L6cro tun rail. cr
better attendance iu the Piece Hall to-day, there bas
been no improvement in the demand for goods, and
prices are slightly depressed. In yarns we have no al-
teration to report, and wools remain inactive, with a
downward tendency.

_
and, a good many orders being still out,
h
LEEDS, MAY B.—There was a fair market here on
S
;mills are very well employed. To-day
t[heetild woollenrerbY a
s.nlosttbeen much business, done. Indeed, so fur
as the Halls are c,mcerned, the Tuesday's market is
now
of less importance than the Saturday's.

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE
OF TUESDAY.
DIVIDENDS,
At the Court, Basinghall.street.
R. Kimpton, Crescent, Jewin-street, Cripplegate, jew-
eller,at one—U. W. llenasworth, Primrose-
agate-street, wine merchant, May 31, at
twelve.at r e , M
Ba Lys h 3 o p,

In the Country.
J. Perry, Exeter, cheese and bacon dealer, June 7, at
on, at the Court, Exeter—W, Menadue, Liskeard and
Cumborne, Cornwall, watchmaker and ironmonger, June
7, at one, at the Court, Exeter—F. Davis, Weymouth
and Melcombe Regis, Dorsetshire, wine and spirit mer-
chant, May 31, at one, at the Court, Exeter—H. Warr,
Bridport, Dorsetshire, currier, May 31, at one, at the
Court, Exeter—R. Martin, Tavistock, Devonshire, tan-
ner, June 7, at one, at the Court, Exeter—R. Moyle,
Penryn and Redruth, Cornwall, ironmonger, May 31, at
one, at the Court, Exeter.

PAYMENT OF DIVIDENDS.
R. K. Mann, Kingston-upon-Hull, wine merchant, first
dividend of 6s. 8d , and final of ls. 4d., any Tuesday,
between the hours of eleven and two, at the office of Mr.
Hope, Leeds.
E. Jennings, Elorsforth, Yorkshire, corn miller, 9d.,
any Tuesday, between the hours of eleven and two, at
the office of Mr. Hope, Leeds.
W. Cameron, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, confectioner, 2d.,
any Saturday, between the hours of ten and three, at the
office of Mr. Baker, Newcastle-upon-Type.
NOTICES OF CERTIFICATES.
At the Court, B3singball-street.
JuGne.
6,C ePn—ro
jsp. Prospect-place,
üßna.l,l'us-xpbornidd,geb,raicnkdlaiyveerr:
Buckinghamshire, common carrier and farmer, May 29,
at twelve—W.. Pithy, Philpot-lane, Fenchurch-street,
Brooch-
icy, Kent, farmer and cattle dealer, May 31, at one—W.
merchant, May 31, at eleven—W. Waterman,
Simmons, Piccadilly, tobacconist, May 30, at one—G.
Cannon,
neolen;
Rait, Moorgate street, City, tailor, May 30, at eleven—
C. Sneezuw, Woodbridge, Suffolk, grocer and provision
merchant, May 30, at half-past eleven—J. Robinson,
Slough, Buckinghamshire, grocer and cheesemonger,
May 29, at eleven.

E. Burnell, jun., Blitntet nh!
GC ol
onunctersyt
ershire, cattle dealer,
May 31, at eleven, at the Court, Bristol—E. Brooker,
Cheltenham, carver and gilder, May 31, at twelve, at the
Court, , Bristol—T. B. Jones, Brecon, maltster and
brewer, May 29, at eleven, at the Court, Bristol—W.
L. Adams, Selby, Yorkshire, clock and watchmaker,
May 29, at eleven, at the Court, Leeds—J. Cooper,
Newcastle-under-LYme, small ware dealer and haber-
dasher, June 12, at ten, at the Court, Birmingham.
At the Court of Review, May 29.
J. Thotnpsoi, Leeds, tea dealer and grocer—R. Ash-
forth, Birmingham, hardwareman—T. Nesbitt and R. C.
Nesbitt, Sunderland, brewers and spirit merchants—C.
J. Spence, Stockton-upon-Tees, Durham, timber mer-
chant—J. R. Price, Aberdare Iron works, Glamorgan-
shire, druggist and stationer—W. Thornley,
Derbyshire, grocer—T. Wilcock, Leeds, cutler—A. J.
Crowther. Church Garfortb, Yorkshire, draper and
grocer—J. Holley, Norton Saint Philip, Somersetshire,
miller—J. Frayne, North Molton. Devonshire, draper.

PARTNERSHIPS DISSOLVED.
H. Barnes, C. Barnes, and E. Barnes, Liverpool and
Melbourne, Port Philip, merchants (as far as regards E.
Barnes)—A. Ogg and T. Howard, Northampton, iron
and brass founders—W. Douglass, T. Cairncross, and G.
Cowley, Sunderland, ironfounders (so far as regards W.
Douglass)—M. Wallis and G. Holman, Mayfield, Sus-
sex, surgeons—J. Leishman and E. Price, Dollar and
Uttoxeter, railway contractors—S. Meldola and A. Bar-
laudina, Camomile.street, City, printers—W. Barlow, S.
W. Sexton, and F. Wilde, Openshaw, Lancashire, wool-
len, silk, and cotton dyers (so far as regards W. Barlow)
—J. Hutchinson and T. B. Stone, Little Waltham.
Essex, surgeons—J. Gaunt, J. Wardle, J. Alsop, and J.
Wain, Leek, Staffordshire, silk manufacturers—J. Whi-
taker, and J. Milos, Spotland-bridge, Lancashire, dyers
—Jane S. Thomas and 11. G. Thomas, Penwith,
Cornwall, grocers and general merchants S.
natal!, and J. Hill, Bolton-le Moors, and Man-
chester, toilet and quilting manufacturers W.
Burdett and J. F. Wood, York-terrace, Commercial..
road, linendrapers—J. Chadwick, sen., and T. Chad wick,
Manchester, estate agents—W. Copp and J. H. Poynter.
Exeter, linendrapers—T. Shepherd, 11. J. Evans, and
W. Meredith, rairadyrodog, Glamorganabire, coal mer-

chants (so far as regards W. Meredith)—J. Graetzer,
H. Hermann, and J. A. Hofmann, Huin-lane, Wood-
street, Cheapside, commission agents (so far as regards
J. A. Hofmann)—D. Rose and D. Rose, M xley Forge
and Darlaston, Staffordshire, iromnavers—J.
and H. J. Stevens, Mark-lane, City, corn factors—J.
W. Dali and C. Dalt, Samlisbiary, Lancashire, cotton
spinners—T. Palin and T. Woolley, Liverpool, painters
—G. B. Hetherington and T. 11. Grimsdale, Uxbridge,
Middlesex, brewers —S. Myers and P. Mann, Leeds,
maltsters —J. Shaw and G. Manes, Scarborough,
clothiers—Jane Elizabeth Hunter and Elizabeth Caro•
line Hunter, Barking, Essex, laundresses—T. Jarvis and
J. W. Marsh, Rotherham, Yorkshire, slate merchants.
INSOLVENT PETITIONERS.
James Anstey, Birmingham, greengrocer.
Benjamin Baduain, Walton, Somersetshire, teazle dealer.
John Lawrence Hinton, East Stonehouse, Devonshire.
James Law, Kettering, Northamptonshire, builder.
Daniel Smith, Neen Savage, Shropshire, miner.
Thomas Davies, Bedwillty. Monmouthshire, mason.
SCOTCH SEQUESTRATION.
W. Wilson, New Scone, wool spinner, to meet within
the Salutation Hotel, in Perth, May 14 and June 4, at
one.

IMPERIAL PARLIAIIIENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, May 8.
JOINT-STOCK BANKS.
(Continued from our Fourth Edition of ;ast night.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
his Hon. and Learned Friend had, in the course of his
speech, gone into variou-, details of the measure which
he proposed to submit to the House ; but into those de-
tails he would not follow him, as he was opposed alto-
gether to the principle of limited responsibility in banks,
which the Hon. and Learned Gentleman contended for.
He thought it was but fair to him to state at once his
opposition to the principle of the Bill, and his determi-
nation to take the decision of the House on the principle
of limited or unlimited responsibility as applied to
banks, and, therefore, it would be uocessary for him to
go into details. Last year he had certainly received
ihree or four representations from parties in favour of
the views held by the Honourable and Learned Gentle.
man, but all of them came from the town of Newcastle,
where this notion of limited liability had taken hold
of the public mind. From no other part of the
country had he received a single representa-
tion in favour of the principle of limited liability.
His Hon. and Learned Friend had stated correctly that
the 7th and Bth of Victoria prohibited limited responsi-
bility; but he had referred to an advertisement of a
bank about to be established in London, in which
limited liability" was put forward. This advertise.
ment was extracted from the Newcastle Chronicle, where
it had been inserted no doubt to meet the views of the
people with whom the advertisers had to deal. It had
been inserted probably by the agent of the proposed
bank in Newcastle, and it contained in large letters the
words "responsibility to be limited."—(A laugh.) Any
one, however, who read the advertisement would discover
how far the liability would be limited, and there would
not be found in any paper but the Newcastle Chronicle
the words " responsibility limited."—(A laugh.) It was,
in fact, a quack advertisement, meant tor the people by
whom it was to be read.—(Hear, hear.) His lion. and
Learned Friend, however, rightly stated thet the 7th and
Sth of Victoria enacted that the partners of a bank were
responsible for the liabilities of the bank. The ques-
tion was whether a limited liability or an unlimited
liability tended most effectually to the ultimate solvency
and good management of a bank. Attaching as he did
no inconsiderable importance to the ultimate solvency
of a bank, he agreed with his Hon. and Learned Friend
in thinking, that the immediate solvency and good ma-
nagement of a bank was of still more importance. He
did nut think it necessary to enter into the history •ot
the various attempts to alter tho law on this subject. He
had at all times found public opinion to be against
limited liabilities. In 1838, on the motion of his Hon.
Friend the Member for the Tower Hamlets (Sir Wm.
Clay), a Committee on: Joint-Stock Banks was ap-
pointed. That Committee sat
:for three successive ses-
sions. His Hon. Friend examined several witnesses,
and had the opportunity of ascertaining the opinions
of practice' men, and of expressing his own opinion on
the subject of limited and unlimited responsibility, but
not one single word was said in the report of that Com-
mittee on that subject. That was rather a
strong prcof that his Hon. Friend could not
prevail on the Committee to express an opinion one
way or the other. Gen. Austin was examined before the
Committee, and he said,—" There is a great difference
of opinion as to unlimited liability and limited liability.
I think that a middle course may be steered." Mr.
Stuckey was also examined, and he gave it as bis opinion
that " Persons of wealth and respectability would join
with limited liability. I every day hear of persons of
property taking shares." Mr. James was of opinion that
"Unlimited responsibility affords better security. Un-
limited responsibility does not prevent persons from em-
barking in joint-stock banks, properly conducted." Mr.
Gibbing stated that " A charter of limited liability might
induce respectable persons to purchase shares, It might
make the directors more negligent in looking atter the
concern. I think there might be danger to the public
in limiting the liability." Then came Mr. Robertson,
who said—" Where there are small stock banks, with
small proprietaries, I think the security which they
would give to the public would not be of that unquestion-
able description which it ought to be." Then there was
an Irish Member, Mr. Callaghan, who stated—. I think
the condition of unlimited liability is the better
of the two; it is a security to the public. In the in •
stance of the late bank that stopped we have full
proof of that." There were only two other witnesses
examined upon that subject; the one was Me. Samuel
Martin, who said—" I du not see myself any public ad-
vantage or security to be derived from limited responsi-
bility," The last witness was a gentleman whose
was often mentioned in that House as one of the hiname
;e,hest
authority upon all commercial affairs—Mr. Samuel
Gurney. Ile was asked—" In reference to the system
of joint-stock banks, do you conceive it would be an
improvement or a disadvantage to the present system if
jeiei se et, keens e-see t dulisllt'd with
a limited liability? I think it would bo a very serloue
addition to the evils of the case." What he had thus
read must leave a decided impression on the House that
the weight of evidence of the majority of those who
were most competent to give an opinion on the subject
was distinctly against the principle of limited liability.
His Honourable and Learned Friend had said there
were two points that would be obtained by limited
liability coupled with the publicity of the accounts.
Now, as to the publicity of the accounts, his Honourable
and Learned Friend appeared to place inure reliance on
that circumstance than experience induced him (the
Chancellor of the Exchequer) to do. Then his Hon. and
Learned Friend was ot opinion that limited liability
would command greater confidence than unlimited ; but
he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not think
there was much in that argument. He did not believe
that a bank founded on limited liability would, in the
case of a panic—which it was said generally occurred
every ten years—prove to have obtained less credit—at
least,. credit sufficient to get everybody into a scrape—
than a bank founded upon the principle of an unlimited
responsibility. Upon the whole, he must say, from
what they had seen of late days—that as to a restricted
confidence being placed upon a limited responsibility—
the extraordinary sums which had been vested in rail,
ways completely refuted that supposition, while the
utter falsification of accounts and the utter mismanage-
ment of those concerns must convince every impartial
mind that neither in the case of restricted confidence nor
in the accuracy of accounts was the argument in fa-
vour of limited liability. Upon the question of insole
vency, no man could entertain the slightest doubt that
a bank, where all the partners were liable to the full ex-
tent of their property must afford a better security than
where the partners were only liable to a limited extent.
In the case of a bank of limited liability no one would
think et vesting his whole property in it; but in the
case of a bank of unlimited liability the whole property
of the person holding a share in it would be responsible.
Now, unless his Hon. and Learned Friend could prove
that a part was greater than the whole, an unlimited re-
sponsibility must be better than a limited responsibility.
That was capable of mathematical proof. Then came
the question of good management. What was the best
security for good management? Surely it was the con.
sequences that would fall upon the shareholders it they
did not watch vigilantly over the affairs of the bank, It
was true when banks of unlimited responsibility got into
discredit they found themselves obliged to do extraordi-
nary things for the sake of maintaining their credit, but
banks of limited responsibility did much the same. They
paid interest on moneys borrowed and dividends on their
shares out of their capital. In the case of railroads those
establishments were founded on the principle of limited
responsibility—they paid interest on sums borrowed, and
dividends on their shares, but how? Out of their capital.
Within the last six or eight months these railroad
companies—with a limited responsibility—had taken
steps quite as extraordinary and quite as dishonest as
any body founded on unlimited responsibility ever did in
this world. It was alleged that there had been great
mismanagement on the part of joint-stock banks. He
admitted the fact, but it had not often arisen from their
having invested not only their deposits, but their paid-
up capital in securities which rendered it not immediately
available when wanted? Neither a limited liability, nor
the publication of accounts, could protect under those
circumstances against failure. What was the best se-
curity for good management? The degree of interest
which the parties felt in seeing that their concern
was so conducted as to protect them from loss. If,
then, a party was liable to the amount of 10,0001. he
would feel a greater interest in looking after the ma-
nagement of the concern than if he were liable only
to the extent of 100/. But the principle advocated by
his Hon. and Learned Friend was quite the re-
verse of this ; and it was one which appeared to him
to be contrary to mathematical truth, to all the prin-
ciples that regulated human action, and to the dictates
of common sense. In the United States the principle of
limited responsibility was acted upon; but had there
been no failures there? Now, in Scotland, where the
principle of unlimited liability prevailed, the failures
were remarkably few, while in the United States he
found it stated in a book written by Mr. Gilbert —a most
eminent practical banker—that no less than 165 char-
tered banks had failed in America. In his History of
Banking in America, that gentleman said—" Unlimited
liability gives greater security to the public." . . . .
" Unlimited liability is to a certain extent .e guarantee
for prudent management."
cases even this has been found to fail, are there no
failures on the other side? Has not limited liability been
also tried and failed? Are the 165 chartered banks that
have failed in America to go for nothing?" The Right
lion. Gentleman concluded by say ing that he thought he
had shown that the principle of limited liability was no se-
curity whatever against mismanagement. lie did not at
this time consider it necessary to go at greater length into
the question. He agreed with his Hon. and Learned
Friend that the two main points were to secure imme-
diate solvency, but still more good management; but he
did UPI COACeiVe that these two objects were so likely to