The Sun.
London, England, 1840-04-16 00:00:00

cause it must be a mere net of wantonness. He thought
Howard had suffered sufficient putlishericht, but if the
Noble Lord wished to make a distinction between his
case and the others, he (Mr. Freshficld) would be sa-
tisfied if he were discharged immediately after the
recess.

Mr. WAKLEY was at a loss to understand hew
the Noble Lord could oppose the motion. The
feeling in the public mind would be that he
was kept confined, not for justice, but,
from vindictiveness. No one had been more opposed
to the Queen's Bench than he (Mr. W.) bad been, but
by the Bill they had passed they had acknowledged
that they had not the power of maintaining their privi-
leges. The had acknowledged that Howard was right.
—(Cries of " No, no.") The Act was a confession
that they could not maintain their privileges, and the
only course to pursue after that was to liberate the
whole of the parties from confinement.
The ATTORNEY. GENERAL said that if Mr.
Howard had sent in his submission, and expressed his
regret, he would have seconded the motion, but he was
most contumacious. The House should recollect who
Mr. Howard was. It was he who had expressed great
regret for bringing the fourth action, and on the ex-
pression of the regret, instead of being committed was
reprimanded by the Speaker, and told he had been guilty
of a breach of privilege. Was not that an implied un-
dertaking on his part that he would not repeat such
conduct? yet, within four and twenty hours, he brought
another action. Howard's case was a most gross one ;
lie had wantonly and wilfully violated the privileges of
the House. The Hon. Baronet, the Member for Ox-
ford, had said that Howard had refused to bring the
actifia in the first instance until urged by Stockdale,
who showed him:it was his duty, as a professional man to,
do so. He supposed that showing his duty consisted in
giving him to understand that damages might be ob-
tained and costs received—in short, that he might make
a good job of it.—(Cheers.) He denied that it was
Howard's duty to bring such an action. The duty of
every attorney was to ascertain in the first instance if
there was good cause for action, and if there was not
his oath required that he should abstain from bringing
it. It alarmed him that the Act of Parliament should
be the ground for bringing forward this motion, and if
on that ground the House were to come to a resolu-
tion discharging Howard, it would at once renounce the
vindication of all its privileges ; for if an action were
brought to test any, their most undoubted, privilege—
such, for instance, as the right of the Sergeant-at-Arms
to remove a person from the House, or from the lobby
—they ought, according to that doctrine, not to com-
mit the party but to plead to the action. He must
protest against any such doctrine, in the strongest pos-
sible manner, and he hoped that the House would not
consent to this motion.

Mr. WARD, although he had all along voted with
the Noble Lord in upholding the privileges of the
House, should nevertheless now vote against him, be-
cause he thought the punishment of Howard had been
sufficiently severe, and that after the Act which they
had just obtained, the past ought to be buried in
oblivion.

Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the
House divided—
For the Motion O2
Against it

Majority against the motion —2O
Sir R. INGLIS then moved that John Joseph Stock-
dale be discharged forthwith, but after the expression
of opinion which the House had just given, he should
not press his motion to a division.

The motion was then put and negatived without a
[livision.

MANCHESTER, BIRMINGHAM, AND BOL-

TON POLICE.

Mr. FOX MAULE brought in a Bill for the more
equal Assessment of Police Rates in Manchester, Bir-
mingham, and Bolton ; and to make better provision
for the Police in Birmingham, which was read a first
time.

The House then adjourned at Seven &Clock.

CHURCH-RATES.

SINGULAR DEFEAT OF THE BURSLEM
CHURCHWARDENS.
On Tuesday, the Police Court, held in the Town Hall,
was crowded with respectable persons, in consequence of
the Churchwardens, Messrs. Thomas Brindley, Thomas
Whittingham, Joseph Alcock, and John Haywood, having
obtained summonses, for the non-payment of Church-rates,
against Messrs. Edward Withinshaw, George Wigley,
Joseph Hall, W. S. Kennedy, and Charles Hutton, and
which were returnable this day, before Thomas Bailey
Rose (the Stipendiary Magistrate) and John Harvey,
Esqrs. The ease of Mr. Wigley was called, and the
amount was eleven shillings and sixpence. The pre-
liminary proceedings showed that, at a vestry meeting,
June 27, a resolution was passed that the churchwardens
should lay a rate of fourpence halfpenny in the pound on
all rateable property. When the defendant was called on,
he objected to the legality of the rate. Mr. Mousley,
solicitor, in defence, stated that he objected to the
authority to lay the rate. A rate could only be
legally laid by a vestry meeting, and ho argued
that " a resolution to lay a rate" was not " the laying of a
rate." He founded his objection on the authority of her
Majesty's Attorney-General, given March 30, on a case
submitted to kim by the objectors to the rate. Mr. Rose
carefully examined the opinion, and during the interval
Mr. J. P. Harding objected to the admission of this as
" evidence"—which was not intended. His Worship
stated (on handing over to Mr. Harding the opinion), " It
is against the validity of the rate from beginning to end."
Mr. H. submitted that there was an inaccuracy in the case,
as it called the New (St. Paul's) Church a " Chapel of
Ease ;" overlooking the fact that parish and district
Churches only are exempt from the latter designation.
He also stated that it was incompatible with the matter for
a rate to be prepared for the decision of a vestry meeting,
as that might decide on one of less amount than what had
been assumed by the churchwardens—twopence, for in-
stance, instead of fourpence halfpenny in the pound. Mr.
Mousley was proceeding to answer Mr. Harding, and was
about to quote, for his authorities, Degge, pp. 202, 203,
Prideaux, pp. 67-69, when Mr. Rose suggested that the
preferable way was for Mr. Nlousley to confine himself
to the single point—" the legality of the rate ;" as, if that
were proved invalid, all further argument would be en-
tirely unnecessary. Mr. Mousley then referred to Degge
and Prideaux, and Mr. Rose quoted Burn, vol. i., and
stated that his ()An humble opinion was that the rata was
not valid ; and placed as he was as a Government officer,
he was bound to give the most respectful attention to the
opinion of her Majesty's Attorney-General, which was de-
cidedly against the rate ; and that he was so far gratilled
to find his own opinion in accordance with such high au-
thority, for that would not havebbi,emo.rnhoenancltuetrhrreeedi:
de eveneeisainodhna,xdt.hai2st
beengivenc,onmt
r.- a. r yi
Harvey
vseuycheaxuptrheosrsiettyl .
audience manifested their approval in a proper, but not up_
roarious manner.

POLYTE,i;HNIC INSTITUTION,
REGENT-STREET.

Some remarkable experiments founded upon the lec-
tures of Mr. Brande and Mr. Farraday, at the Royal In-
stitution, have lately been undertaken at the Polytechnic
Institution, for the purpose of demonstrating the possibility
of producing fac &miles of engraved copper-plates by
means of voltaic electricity. These experiments were
completely successful, and have established the utility as
well as the practicability of the chemical means employed:
The process may be thus described. The original plate
from which a duplicate is to be taken is placed at the
bottom of a properly prepared vessel, and then covered
with a solution of sulphate of copper, through which a
current of voltaic electricity (galvanism) is subsequently
transmitted, By this chemical action the constituents of
the salt are removed from each other, in other words de-
composed, the metallic copper being deposited in thin
latninal upon tha surface of the original plate over which
it forms a second plate. Upon removal it will be
found to bear every line and mark previously
traced by the graver or etching tool upon the other,
with this difference, that what is bas-relief in
one will be alto-relief in the other, and the sunk
lines of the original will be raised lines in the dupli-
cate. The plate thus produced becomes a mould or normal
plate, from which an unlimited number of other plates may
be taken by a similar process, the whole of which will be
identically the same as the original plate, and equally
perfect with it in every respect. Printed impressions from
the original and duplicates will also be found to be exactly
alike; there is no discovering any difference. The ap
proving testimony of several of our first-rate engravers has
been given in favour of this important discovery, the prac-
tical application of which wiil supersede the necessity and
consequent expense of steel-plate engravings, and afford
the means of economically multiplying,
engraved works of our artists.
odefutphli faput le The same process is also
ad infinitum, the
one
of
Doloymteeenhine
applicableba to coins, dies, and medals, of which several
sppleacteimoefnsanare dispersedp throughout the galleries
attractive
expensive original Polytechnic Institution, where also may be seen a
engeaving from
w phiteethurwe os
novelties, theare lainrgaecsttiyvect p
rperpoadruactei
odn.
Some very
for Easter week, of •
count beforehand. may probably give an ac-

SIR W. BRABA
--(COLONEL BUTLER—
COLONEL FITZGERALD. ZAOiNr
published his second letter t", O'Connell, as he promised, has
calling their attention to theoalt;hse men of Mayo and Kilken is
representatives. Limerick too incidentallyis'eicerom Parliament of their
Ac-
cording to his letter Colonel Butler alluded to. Ac-
try, because they have refused to give
indisposed to the Minis -
his friends. Sir William BrabLu?sointments to some of
known, that the Tories will not give him
unsteadiness is so well
a
" It is impassible for any man to have a lessn ex
substantial pair.
than Sir William Brabazon. He has an amlellsee f for absence
has no family. All I require of you is, to insilltha7rtune—he
:Nhilst he
represents you he shall be at his post to do his dutyt. '
As to
the Member for the county of Limerick, ~he has been s been
alto-
gether absent durinti the present Session--absent without ex-
cuse or pretext, that I, at least, have ever heard of ! Why
this should be so, I cannot even form a conjecture that could
palliate the enormity of his dereliction of duty. I hope there
may be s'inie valid excuse for him— I know of none ! lie has
Leen hitherto amongst the fiends of his country. I ask—why
has he ablndoned her in her present need? lint, for the pre
sent, I shall pursue th.li subject no further than to invite any
friend of his to come forward to defend, if possible, his conduct."
EXECUTION AT YORK.-011 Monday last, at
noon, James Bardsley, a young man about five-and-twenty years
o„ar, no was convicted at the Yorkshire Assizes, on his
Quhrle"ion, of the murder of his father at the Village of
sent in the West Riding of Yorkshire, suffered the extreme
sentence of the law •
Since
the trial
in front of York gaol.
convict had • manifested
signs of",,t,riti the greatest indifference, expressing no