The Sun.
London, England, 1812-07-15 00:00:00

CASE OF THOMAS BALL.

Eari STANHOPE said 'he held a Petition in his
hand, but of the person who sent it to hini he
knew nothing. He,:eferred in the petition to per-
sons who could speak to his character, but he
(Lord had not an opportunity of seeing them.
The Petitioner, however, be he who he may, had
a right to a fair and, a full trial; and he set forth,
that he was unable to bear the expellees of coun-
sel at his trial. If .any person ventured to state
any fact to that House, in such. a document, not
conformable to truth, the man so coming forward
Should be taken very severe notice of by the llcuge.
That. if what the petition stated was really fact, he
did not know a case of more severity, of more
hardship, or more unconstitutional, in some of the
proceedings upon it. In saying this, he meant to
cast no blame on ,any officer ; -something may •1
even be said in their justification.
.He would
read the Petition to their Lordships. _This the
Noble ki4rl proceeded to do. It was stiled " The
humble Petition of Thomas Ball, a prisoner in
his. Majesty's prison, the, Fleet, for an alleged
offence against the Revenues of the Crown."—
Amongst other facts, it was stated, that the peti-
tioner, -on the evening of the 30th of March , 1811,
was proceeding on foot from.:Rochester to Graves-
end, in expectation of coming up with the mail-
coach in-order to be conveyed to London-,-that
at about three miles.*rom.Rochcster, he met a man
in a post-chaise, who asked him if be wanted to be
conveyed .to town—he answered in the affirma-
tive, and was admitted into the post-chaise; he
soon observed .a, 'few barrels, resembling oyster
barrels, in. the chaise. On their arrival at Dart-
ford, a man opened the chaise-door in which the
petitioner continuedsitting, .and upon the barrels
beingexamined, they were found to contain con-
traband spirits, or spirits without the necessary
permit for conveyance. The post-boy immedi-
ately ran away, leaving the horses and-chaise; and
he believed he had never since been heard of.—
The petitioner continued sitting in the chaise";
being unconscious of committing any harm. The
officer took him to Mr. Mumford, 4,l,lusticeof the.
Peace for the County of Kent, who ordered him
to be detained,for want of securities, in the House
of Correction., at Dartford. The petitioner was
served with no notice until the October following,
when be was served with an instrument from the
Commissioners of Customs, and a subpoena on the
part of the Crown, to appear before. the Barone-
of the Exchequer, to answer certain articles ob-
jected against him, and riot to omit .so appearing,
under the penalty of 1001..t0 be levied for the use.
of the. Crown, and which subpoena was signed or
certified .fiy the Chief Baron of the Exchequer.
His pecuniary resources became exhausted, by
which he, was prevented from proceeding to. take
the necessarystep;for his defence--(so we under..
stood his Lordship).—That on the 28th of Octo-
ber, he wrote a letter to the Chief Baron, repre7
senting his case.; but .to which he received no an-
sWer : and that the trial took place in November
last, when'he was adjudged to the penalty of 1801.
That he remained in confinement,-where at first he
had sustenance, but of this. he was destitute-at
present. The petitioner4trayed for such relief as,
with a view to justice, to their Lordships should
seem meet. The Noble Earl observed, the case
should be considered in that point of views that
when a man :receives orders to appear in Court,
the person who holds him in custody ought to per-
mit him to go, to 'appear in his own defence:—
The petition was Ordered to lie on the table.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILLS.
The Earl of LauDERDALE present-ed the Re-
port of the Committee, on the recommitment of
this Bill—which was agreed to by. the House ; and
the Bill ordered to he engrossed.
After a few words between Lord Redcsdalc
and the Earl of Moir& the third reading of t4c
General Insolvent Debtors Bill was appointed for
Friday.
Lord HOLLAND notified his intention to propose
the second reading of
.his Bills respecting ex officio
informations on the same day.

The Revenue Penalties Bill was read a second
time. •

PALMER'S COMPENSATION BILL.

The Earl of Mot Rd. moved the
,Order ofthe Day
(upon which their Lordships were summoned) for
the third reading of this Bill.
On the question .being put,
The Earl of LIVERPOOL rose to oppose the
proceeding, and ..said he had never heard any an-
swer to those arguments, repeatedly urged against
the measure, and which he believed were unan-
swerable in themselves. The Bill proceeded
upon an assumption of a fact of which there was
not only nothing to warrant its being founded,
but, as was apparent by the evidence, was in di-
rect contradiction to the' fact assumed. He
meant, there was no evidence of any agree-
ment between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Palmer, upon
wkich the present claim c6uld• he brou'ght for-
ward ;' neither did there appear to be'an inten-
tion of any agreement whatever •that was not
made dependent on the execution 61 the duties-of
any office, that'was the full and faithful execution"
of these duties. It was evident that Mr. Palmer
sought tha.t office in order that ,he may controul

and superintend the business and execution of hig
own plans. It was also evident that the dismissal
of Mr. Palmer from that situation was not from
any act of caprice on the part of 4is superiors,
but that-the removal was in cOw-equelace,Of the
great misconduct of Mr. Palmer in that sittiation
.and lie could not avoid observing, that the A:lain:is
of. Mr. Palmer were not brought under the consi=
dc.ration of Parliament for an interval of pine
years, and not then, until after the death of the
person who was of all others the best acquainted
with the nature and circumstances of t',:e
He felt it his duty to move, that, instead of noW,
the Bill be read a third time that day three
mouths.

LOrdERsKINE defended the Bill at some length ;
and laid much_ stress on the sentiments of the
other House of Parliament with respect to the
measure, and of the favourable reports of the
Committees of that House.

The Earl of HanaoWßY argued at some length
against the Bill, and referred to various parts of
the evidence in support of what he advanced.
Lord.ThisKlNE spoke in explanation.
The Earl of LAUDERDALE spoke warmly and at
considerable length against the measure, and ad-
verted to an opinion formerly given by his Noble
and Learned Friend, while at the, Bar, with re-
spect to the transactions in qtiestion, which mi-
litated against the arguments he advanced that
night.
The Earl of Motaa spoke with considerable
animation and eloquence in support of the Bill.
Lord ELLENBoaotiOn strongly-opposed it.
Lord ViSCOUIIt MOUIcTJOI supported the Bill.
The Are of HARDWICKE shortly objected to
the measure..

The Duke of SUSSEX. decidedly supported it,
and observed, ; there was every appearance in the
evidence of an intentional agreement at least.
The individual. in question bad acted upon the
faith of a leading Minister. Hs Royal Highness
adverted to a letter of Lord Camden's, in wiSich it
was stated, that the, appointment of Mr. Palmer
should be independent of 'every Administration,
which sheaved that it was intended to be vested in
that Gentlema❑ for. life.

The Earl of DARNLEY spokein support of the
Bill, when the question being loudly called for, a
division took place.

Contents, for the third reading of the Bill.—Presents 361 08
Proxies 6-2 J "
Not Contents.—Presents - 46
104
• Proxies J sB}
Majority against the Bill, which is consequently lost 6

At half-past nine o'clock their Lordships ad-
journed till to-morrow. •

HOUSE OF COMMONS, TUESDAY.

The Privy Purse Bill was read a second time,
and, ordered to go through a Committee to-
morrow.

The Report of the Consolidated Fund Bill was
brought up and agreed to, amrthe Bill appointed
to be read a third time to-morrow.

The further consideration of the Report of the
Frame-work Knitters Bill was postponed till, to-
morrow.

The Glass Act went through a CoMmittee, in
which it was resolved to suspend the present duty
on plate glass, and, to sUbstitute.a duty of 21'. 9s.
per ton on the materials, and a countervailing
duty of 2s. 9d. per square foot on glass imported
front Ireland, &c.. The Report of the Committee
was ordered to be received to-morrow.

The,Stone:Bottle Duty Bill was read a third
time and passed.
Thd Reports of the Manure Carriage Bill, the
&boggling Prevention Bill; the Warehousingßill,
and the isle 6.f Man Trade-841,-were brought up
agreedand to, and the Bills ap'pointed to be read
a third time to-morrow.

The Geneal inelosure Affidavit Bill- was read
a third time and 'passed.
. .

The Medicine Act Amendment Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to
,go thropgil. a Com-
mittee to-morrow.

Te Prisoners of War Escape Bill was read a
second time, and ordered to be committed to-
inorrov.

VOTE OF CREDIT.

The House having resolved itself into a Cota7
mittee an the Prince Regent's Message,
The CHANCELLOR of the EX6ITECIVER observed
that be anticipated- bat little opposition to the
resolution which was about to submit to the
Committee,. persualled, as he was sure they must
be, that in.the present situation of public affairs,
nothing ,could be more necessary than to arm the
GovernMent mjth such power, as would enable
them to-avail themslves of any circumstance that
might occur to interpose vigorously and success-
fully in aid of our allies in- the arduous contest in
whiCh we were engaged, The Committee were
too well aware of the circumstances to which be
alluded, to render it necessary for him to detail
them. More particularly in the North of Europe,
events might take place to render it expedient, on
the part of the British Government, to support
their allies in that quarter, and to carry the cre-
dit of British friendship, if possible, beyond its
present high character. It was not, however, his
intention to propose a :vote of credit to an amount
larger than that which he' had stated in his ac-
count of the necessary supplies for the year,.
namely, three. millions ; because he thought that
the provision made 'by Parliament in the present
Session for our military service was as large, as
in ordinary circumstances would be required. This
vote, 'therefore, was as large in reality as had ever
been agreed to by Parliament—(Mr. Tierney sig-
nified across the. table, that larger votes of credit
had passed that House).—lf larger in appearance,
they had "not been larger in reality, for the reason
which.he had just before stated. The amount of
all the;sunis voted this year for the military ser•
vice, was 25,000,0001. a sum which he trusted
'would he fully adequate to the expenditui*. This
would.appear more clearly, when it was consider-
ed, that..last year' two millions were lost in the;
naval and military services, by the depreciation of
the exchange, which there was reason to hope the.
establishment Of conciliation between Great Bri-
tain and America might .render .more favourable
to this country. He , concluded. by moving,the
.following Resolution

" That 4 sum mit exceeding Three Millions be granted to
his Royal klighrteJs the Prince Regeit,th eaable kali to take

saich meavnres as linty tend to disatToint and dei:at,the eh=
terprizes and designs of the, ehenly„a4 the exigediiti cT
affairs nib requires ; and that such aunt be raised by .Ex=
chequer • bills, to be charged on 'the first aids, of the ri,At
Sessitin."

TIERIMY observed, that ff, as Nva.s the case
last year, every ;farthing of the Vote ..of Credit
should be 'swallowed up in tlx Military ectiendi.;
ture, tIOW was it to be un,terstood that it would be:
practicable to meet any Of the pepbable exigenciel
in the course of the summer, to which the Right
non. Gentledtmi'had alluded
The CHANCELLOR of the.EXCAEQUEIif in
stated, that in- the present Session two millions
had been voted under, the head of Army Extraor-
linaries, more .than in the last Session ; there
would, therefore, be two mOre.td spare for
general purposes.
Mr.TIERNEY was not satisfieity 11 this answer;
and re-stated that the whole of the tote of Credit
()Nast year had been expended in military ,opera-

Lions.
Lord CASTLEREAGH allowed that it had'been
expended in military operations, but not in our
own military
.operations ; a considerable pui,.
tion of it had been devoted to the assistance of
themilitary exertions of our ?Cies: if, any exi-
gency that might occur' should call for a7greater
expenditre than' that which it was now proposed
to vote, the deficiency might be made good in dig
next Session of Parliament. - ' •

Mr. TIERNEY understood perfectly how the
means were adequate to the necessity, if. it were
admitted that for the deficiency the Government
mast run in debt. _ _

General TARLETON declared that he should
avail himself of 'the first regular opportunity of
expressing his sentiments on' the system pursued
by Government with respect to the Peninsula.
Mr. HUTCHINSON was of opinion that we were ,
not taking effectual steps to resist the French izz
the Peninsula, whenever they might choose to
make exertions todefeat our object there. Unles3._
we succeeded in organizing the Spaniards, our
object could not be ultimately gained; Dd the
Right Hon. Gentleman, or the Noble Lord sup-
pose it 'possible, that with his present ,military
force, and in the present miserable state of orga-
nization of the Spanish arty, Lord Wellingtom•
could advance into the heart of Spain ? Sucti an
attempt would be next to Tnaciness. He lamented
to hear the Right Hois. -Gentlertan's allusion to
what it was probable In his opinion the British
Government -might be Called upon w do in 'the
North of Europe. Such assistance as that ad-
verted to had fren.nently been repeated, and had
as frequently proved injurious to the cause and td
the finances of the country.
The Hon. Mr. HERBERT, Edrerting to A corn=
munication which he stated- had been made on
Thursday last to his Majesty's Government by the
American Minister, of papers tending to she: ,that
the Berlin and Milan Decrees had been practical*
ly revoked, and that no •-essels had been recently
condemned under those Decrees, which communi,
cation was accompanied with a request that the
information which the papers contained might be
conveyed to the Judge of the-High Court of Admi-
ralty, in order to assist him in the decision upon
the cases . of :several claimants in that Court
wished to ask the Noble Lord opposite, whether
the communication had been received, and whe-
ther it had been transmitted to the Court of Ad-
miralty.
Lord CASTLER,EAGH replied; that' the cases in
the Court of Admiralty, described by the Hon.
and Learned Gentleman, must depend- on the in-
terpretatiOu of the order of the 23d of April; by
which it was-declared that the British Orders ia
Council would. cease, when the Berlin and Milan
Decrees were generally -and completely revoked.
It was true that he had received some time last
week a communication from the American Miqi-
ter, of the natufe described by. the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman. -But it was. evident that the
claimants in the High Court of AdMiralty had
the same .opportunity • of submitting to that
Court the Tapers referred to,'as if -those papers
had passed through the hands of the British Go-
vernment.

Mr. HnRBERT observed, that the question was
of a much broader nature than it appeared to be
considered by the Noble. Lord. If the Orders in
Council were of a retaliatory character, they
must • be declared, in., the event of a revoca-
tion of the French Decrees, null and void ; 'and
he could not conceive , why, in the present
state of the relations. between Great Britain
and America, Ministers should Wish to interpose
between the High Court of Admiralty, and the
proof that thoseordershad been revoked. The par
pers had been in the first instance offered to the, '
Cotirt of Admiralty, the :fudge of which tkprcssed
livish to receive them in a Mere regular ftirm, and
sfated, that if they were first presented to theßritisth
Government, ht would be satisfied. He was stir*
that there must be some mistake in the business, -
and that it could not be the Noble Lord's intation
to prevent evidence from being bl•ought before the
High Court of Admiralty bearinron this impur*
taut subject ; on which, perhaps, the great clues-
tion of peace or war WithAmericainight ultimately
depend.
Sir W—Scovr declared, that. be had been rniiim
derstood in tvtiat he was supposed to have said itt
the Court of .Admiralty; he denied having stated
that he would receive the Papers in question as
evidence,. if they were first to pass through the
hands of Government.

Lord CASILEStEAGH disclaimed any wish on the
pp-art of Government to deprive claimants in the
igh Court of Admiralty of evidence which they
.might think favourable to their cause. it was to
the Judge of the Court to determine on that sub.
ject. But undoubtedly no one was warranted in
the expectation that the British Government, by
permitting those papers to pass through their hands
to the Court, should give to them a validity not
justified by any knowledge on their part of the facts
which they contained:
Mr. BROUGHAM, in the present state of the 24=
lotions between this country and America (which,
in his opinion; could not fail, eventually, of
being favourably established), deprecated any dis-
cussion which might tend to throw a doubt upon
that certainty; and thought, therefore; that
the best and wisest course Which h.? could pursue
on the present subject was, not to biien his month
upon it. , •
The ResoliAtiori was then agreed to, and the

Ho.use having resnint( •;
the sport Wa3 nrderedle
Lr received to-morrov .

Sir W. SCOTT brought in a Bill for the better
regulation of Ef:clesiasti.al Courts in that part of
tie United Kingdom called England, and l'Or the
more easy recovery of {Nu:eh ltates and Tithes.—
`!es.—
he Bill was read a first time, and'ordered to be
printed.

tXethought it rathr hatl, that for.suet an
ottence, thotin he was the first cousin, that he
-should be confined to a dungeon for the space of
two years. At the time of the insurrection in Ire-
land, the letter stated Mr.-Mason to •harettpt
reputable boarding school at Sea Poiut, The
writetkof it said heicould not find.cut that any in-
tercourse had taken place at that time between
Mr. Mason and Emmett ; but though no proof of
the fact was in existence, he thought an•
course might be suspected to have taken place.—
It set foz:-.h, that Mr. Mason had certainly taken
no part in the murders committed in Thomas-
street: They were committed' at about nine in
the evening, at which time Mr. Mason was with
a large party, at the distance of. seven milts from
town, and three trout Sea Point: Even this cir-
cumstance, however, could not wholly exempt
him from suspicion, as the company with Whom
he was to.dine had been surprised at his not at*
riving before eight o'clock, and from the eircum-

stance Of his having came from town, and not
from Sea Point, and these suspicions were
strengthened by his having slept- the next. night
not at -Sea Point; but new• the place where the
murders had been comthitted.. An extract from a

copy of an anonymous letter, of the original of
which nothing• Was known, bad been brought fOr-
ward against him. It accused Mr. MaSon of being
concerned in certain transactions with three Stars, .
four stars„ &c.; and stated him to have been at
Wales, Coblentz, Embden, arid Cheltenham, and
afterwards to have come to Londonand taken'up
his residence-first at Kentish Town and afterwards
at Westminster, where he was connected with
several disaffected persons, particularlyowith four
stars, five stars, seven stars, &e. The contents
of this letter- were. whollyfalSe, as Mr. Mason
had never been in Wales, at Cheltenham, or on
the Continent.. It was urged against Mr. Mason,.
that be bad endeavoured to enable others to escape
from confinement.- It this were true should

.have thought they would have been glad to let hin;
out of prison, that they mitht_ get rid of so very
troublesome a person. . This- they had not been
anxious to do, as, in fact, Mr. Mason had made

hhnself very obnoxious by exposing.the monstrous
abuses which existed in the Irish gaols, and there
were thoSe who.tbr this were disposed to keep blin
hi confinement. After some further observations
on the hardship of the,Case, and on the absurdity
of the charges preferred,agaißst Mr. Mason in the
-evidence to which he had adverted,. the Right'
Honourable Gentleman , concluded by moving,
that the Paper transmitted by.ther, Duke-of Rich-
mond should be referred to a Select Committee,
and that Mr. St- John Mason shOuld be he-ard be-
fore the said Committee.

Lord CASTLEREAGtJ thought that he was joti-
fied in complaining cif the extent of Matter which
his -Right Hon. Friend had embraced in his
speech; and to -which his notice did not refer. He
was therefore unprepared to give a full, answer.
The House coulii perceive that proceedings were
adopted seven and eight years since with.regard
to the state of the prisons In Ireland which were
not applicabledhectly to the case of Mr. Mason.
His Right Hon. Friend had the credit of insti-

tuting an inquiry into the state of the prisons,
and the abuses carried on within the. walls ; and -
the consequence was, that by the vigilance of
Government, hose abuses had been corrected.
He did not expect that an evil long since removed
would be again brought to public notice. The
Noble Lord then sbe%f.ced, with respect to the par-
ticular
coMplairits of Mr. Mason, that he ,had
made many -unfounded ones'. Justice Downes,
one of "the Comthissioners of Inquiry, reported
that the statements of Mr. Mason were made in •
great irritation of mind, through misconception or
mistake. The Noble LOrd did not think that this
was the particular case in which yarliaMent
ought to make a distinction, by consenting to in-
quiry. Theletter upon Which Mr. Mason was
detained, and the grounds of that defantion, as,
furnished in the letter, could Rot, in good faith v.)"
the individual furnishing •the information upon
-which he was arrested, be laid beforo the public.
The distance of time sinte. the transact Orr oc-
, curred, precluded information' of the nature of
the pi oceedings, for Mr. Townshend, in his
states, that eight years had ,eliipsed, in which
'there had been Seven Chief Secretaries; three.
Under Secretaile.;;; and.thre.e Attornies General :
conSequently. the I;ghti necessary to -elucidate. the
Case could, not be obtained. The whole of Mr.
Mason's -4..onduc't while under confinement was
very blamable--the attempt to. procure the escape
of a pers6n on a charge of high treason, by brib-
ing the gaolers, were circumstances greatly against
him, and,suflicient to 'authorise the steps pursued
by the Government of 'lreland. His Right Hon.
Friend „might say what ;the ofrence of bribery was
but a'vedial one. It might be so ; but thatwciald
not be an answer in the ey of the law. There
was not only the attempt made with respect to ,
Mr. klmmet, but also a second time in the case
of Generalltussell. If mfr. Mason considered him-
-self aggrieved, he. had the opportunity of going
'to Ireland before Commissioners of Inquiry ;. but
he did not chose so to do. For these reasons
he slUitild oppose the. motion.
Sir F: BURDETT' supported' the motityn; on the
ground that Mr. Mason had been two 'years con-
fined upon frivolous charges Under anonymous in-
formation.'
,The Hon. Baronet referred. the
evidence taken before the Commissioners of In-
quiry, into the state of the prisons in Ireland, and
detailed some evidence• against Dr. Trevor, the.
Physician, against whom Complaint bad been.
made by Mr. :Mason. He thought the subject
:was--of so serious a nature, that •it could be bet-
ter examined into by a -Committee of the whole
House.

Roßtkgoic coincided in the opinions of his
Npble Friend, that it was not a case for inquiry,
.and that the Irish Government had acquitted
themselves of the charges attempted to be fasten-
ed on them. •Jf Mr. Mason had come to complain
of the solitary confinement, that proceeded' from
his own conduct; for it was. in evidence that the
reason he was s - Much alone in prison was, on
account of the dislike his. fellow Prisoners- -110 to
him.

Air. W. SMITH, from personal knowledge, could
state that Mr. Mason bad for several yeqrs been

employed in endea'foiiring to. obtain a bearing of
his case, but without effect. All he wanted was
to be and he' was prepared to shew that
the charges against him Werd unfOxindedi dn d
consequently that he had been rinjustly‘treated.
The Honourable Gentleman did not 'deny but
that his :,iubsequent conduct with respect to the
attempts to bribe the "Gaoler was indefensible,
and justified Government in detaining him.: There
was n blame imputable to rty Lorti Hardwicke..
Mr. DArnt.Tits'r conceived that the question be-
fore the House was not. as to the innocence or
guilt of Mr. Mason,' but what was the presninu
tion of guilt at-the time of his committal ? 4
judging of that, it was impossible to lay 'out of
the case the attempts to bribe the jailor, to effect
the escape of Emmett and Russell. From the
wholeof his conduct in these respects there was
ample ground for suspicion. He tthould therefore
oppose the motion.
Mr: Tionm and Mr. EltrzcilL*ort maintained
the necessity of inquiry.
After a short reply froin Ir. SHEitlDhic, the
house divided.

For the. Mation.
Against

11

Mje ifs
.4.40
FLETCIMit.
Sir F. BURnETT moved to refer the Petition,
-from Mr. Fletcher, the Brewer, complaining of
oppiession on the part of thtOilicei's of the Re-
venue, to the consiieration of n- Committee. - - •
The CHANCELLOR of tht EXCHEQUER and-Mr.
WHA RTO N referred to the papers on the table,. ,to
prove that the p litioner iiud been guilty,orn com-
plicated breach of the
The motion was negative i bout a divi'sion.
IhLI, FOR THE PRESERVATION OF T E PEACE.
Lord C A-T LE :_faliGH, in moving the Ordd of the
Day for the douse to resolve itself into a Com-
mittee on this Bill, observed, that it was his inter....
thm to propose, that the -House should go into
the Committee pro foitza, for the ptirpOse of re-
ceiving an Amendment xvhich he wished to be in-
-corporate(' into the Bill, and that the should
then be printed, and re:committed to-morrow.
Mr. TIERNEY, as the Noble Lard was about to
propose- some- alteration in the Bill,- thought it
wotild be better to delay the 'recommitment until
Thursday.'. •

Lord CASTLEREAGH replied, that the alteration
which he wished,to propose was but a trifling tech-
nical one. •

Mr. SIIERMIN regretted to 'hear it. 'llp•sug-
gested - the expediency of dividing the Bill into
two, in order that those parts of it which ►•ere un-
objectionable should. pas 3 w h as.nineh unanimity
as possible.

• Mr. Antr,CROMBIi supported the propriety of
dividing- the Bill, on the same ground.
Lord CASt,LERtAdH and Mr. BATIII7RST refused
to concur in this propo,sition, contending that it
would only multiply the laws and embarrass the
Magistrates ; and that Government,ought not to
be called upon, by putting any part of the Bill
into.a separate provision,' to admit by inference
that it ,was liable to serious objection.
The House then resolved itself' into the COM-
tnittCe.

Lord CASTLEVEAGri seated; that the present
tinalificatiOn of Magistrates was 1001. a year in
landed,. or 3001.-a
-year in. funded property. It
was desirable, however, that in the disturbed dis-
tricts a
.greater numbe-r of Magistrates should. be
created than could be done consistently With this
regulation. He should therefore propose a,clause
to empovrx his Majesty to put ~into the Commis-
sion of the Peace indiyiThials whose qualifications
were less than those which the law at present
:prescribed ; observing, that this power Was only
to be co-existent with the Bill, aud co-extensive
with the disturbed "districts.

Mr. 'FIE.RNEY characterised this proceeding. of
the Noble Lord as the most extraord;riary of all
the ektraordinary things ht! bad ever known ,biln
tai do. Having get the House into the COM-
mittee, on the pretence of introducing some little
technical alteration in the Bill, the Noble Lord
proposel a clause, the effect of which would be
completely to change the whole character of the
'measure. The proposition was neither less - nor
more than to enable Coverimnent to superdethe
' respectable and established magistracy by the
substitution of their ova :gents. In common,
decency,te trusted, that after making so great a
change in the the Noble Lord would not
press the re-commitMent before Thursday.
Lord CASTLEREAGH replied, that, he saw no.
'reason for the suggested delay. The clause might
be discussed not only in the Committee to-morrow,
but on the Report, and on the third reacling of
the Bill.

rr. D. GIDDY, though he approved of the
original Bill, thought this new proposition highly
inexpedient.
Mr. BanllAlll recomniended, that the Bill.should
not be. re-committed until 'Thursday. This new
clause was one which demanded r serious con-
sideration.

W:BooTLEwas against delay, 'and' trusted
he should bear this new proposition,. which ap-
pearedito him to be objectionable, and for which
he confessed be was not at all prepared, well dis-
cussed on both -sides.

BAIfINGTONr thought the clause objection-
able, as going beyond the-necessity of the ease.=
At any rate he 'recomniended that some qualifica-
tion, if it were half the present should be indis-
pens'aible.
After a conversation-of some length, Lord CAS-
TLEREACM consented-to withdraw the motion.
Mr. VANStTTART obtained leave to bring in A.
Bill to enable COmthissionerS to inquire into the
Extent of the Crown Property in the West India
-Colonies and Atherica, aad to manage-the same:
Lord PALMERSToti obtained leave to bring in a
Bill to extend the klalf-pay and Allowances of
Officers wounded in the service.

Adjoiirned at TtVo o'Cloc% this niorning.

•. PRICE OF STOG
2.17 214 k •
Nary 5. per Ct.
4 per Cent. :7=2:71 • • 1
3 per Cent. Rea. 55 56 '5l
3 per Lent. Can. 55iPA,x:dir•
hank L. ;Inn. 14 14-16ths
Indiez Stock,. 164 i

c.ti IESTERDAY,
'Oki Bonds, 03.145.
Ext.:liege t.r Bills; 344. per day,
• 2s. 4s. 3s. dis.
Ditto, 31d. Fr day, 4s: Is. pr.
Oinniunt, 1 t 4 I pr.
leop)triiil 3 per Cont.
Cyns. fof Opening, 57i

. ,
Filsir. the. 'L .-NWON ‘l2- 137 tr 21%; , JJy H. z,*

DIVIDENDS.-L-At..Gtiildhall, London.
„.
Aug. 21. H. Oghu.rt,- Crown-street, Finsbury- =street, Finsburyuare,
maker.-ht ten: • . . . •
4,1 y 14. G. Prit.'harti, St: Pall's ChurCh-yard, china-eOP
at eleven.
July i 2.. N. G. Ingram, jun. Threadieedle-stret, merchant;
zt eleven. .
Aug. 1. J. WiHats, Gracechurch-striet, bardwaretrian, at 12
'Aug. 1. l;V. Jackson, Bryanstone-street, Portman-square, sty
truer, at twelve.
Ang. 1. J. P. Woolley, Walham-green, lireWer tWelve:
july 48. G. Cox, Snow's-fields, carpenter,' at eleven.
Aug. 13. G. Thompson, Duke-street, Westminster, met',
chiant, at eleven.
•
Aug. 6. T. MolTat and J. Brown, Goswell-street, bltie-ma'
nufacturers, at eleven.
Aug. 1. 11. Drake and E. God -lard, Newgate,,street, wine and
brandy-merchants, at twelve.
Aug. 1, J. Badger, Old Jewry, merchant, at twelve.
July 25. H. Arnold, Cateaton-street, wareirousethan; at ten-.
Nov. 3. W. Milbaru, Old city Chlruhers, Bishopsgate-street?
-merchant, at ten. --
Aug. 1. it. ?ti'l Jarlie ~, Little Queen-street, coach-ropier' at
Aug. 1. -J. Hilton, James-street, Covent-garden, oilman, $`
. eleven. •
Aug.' 1. J. T. rairleos, Staples inn, money-scrivener, at 14.,
Aug. 1. i. Herbert, Middle-row, Holborn, bootseller, at tell.
Aug. 1. J. Dodson, Cranbrook, Kent, brewer, at ten.
July 18. W. Ewer, Little Love-ian e, Berinoudse, merchant;
at ten. •
Aug. 1. T. Gordon, T. Stt-arlilian, S: Howland, Toivcig
street, merchants, at eleven.
Aug. N. Butcher, Windmill-street,- Finsbury-squarei
butcher, at ten: •
•
CERTIFICATES—Arra
.1. Johnson, late of Congletati; Che;h}vY, cotton. spinner.
W. Purnell, now or late of •'riitnl, cortx-f;tetor.
Tie.:l, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, woolien,drarer.
It. ftatellif, of umoutn-s shippn.ildeF;"
C. I)eele, of Newgate-st.rel.*, tailor.
.I,,Tlisnstor-q-uf.Car.herine,street, Strand, uphols'terer. ' -
J.
.W,lliaThSon, late of l'onliridge-place, Nelv4ond, bnil4er.;
AL,nners, of the 80r0,1411 of krk, hanerdasher.
W sen. end W. Pollan?, u n.. of Tkiitul, mere-want*
V. me' calf the 'll , near Durham, miller.
.1. : ,;,of t•r.
Nlo ->re, of, Wort i ter.
Leatlbetter, of Ince, Law:

•
From the LOIWO c Z Jab/ 14.

•
BAIsICRUPTCY ENLARGED.
James Thompson, ilertithrd, from August 35
to 25.

I. • . - BANKRUPTS.
`-.tbilip H4ley, PlymOuthDock, Devon, cabinet-maker, to flit
• render, August 4, 11, 25,-at eleven, at the Auction Marti
• Plymouth Dock. Attorney, Mr. It. Bone, Plymouth Pock'
Thaivas I.l.inson, Orange-street, St. Martin's in the Fiel4s,-
carpenter, 'July 18, 28, and August 25, at ten, at:Gni'&l44
London. Attorney, Mr. Patton, Hatton-Garden.
aalett,- Caerphilly, Glanaorganshilre, shapkeepir,
• August 5,6, • and 25, at eleven, at the Crown, Mertntr-
Tydvil. .Attornies, Messrs. Jenkins, James, and :Abbott',
New-Inn, London, or Mr. Meyrick, Merthyr-Tydvil.
Hart,Phillips, Green-street, Manchcster,July 18, at ten, 22,4
nine, and August 25, at ten, at Guildhall, London. AttOr-
' ;ley, Mr. E. Isaacs, Bu'ry-street, St Mary-Axe.
Daniel Alder,' late of the East-India Chambers, Lear/villa-
street, July 18, 29, and August 25, at ten, at Guildli..lll,
London. Attorney, Mr. Clutton, St. Thomas's-streeti
Southwark. •
Joseph Robinson, 'Huddersfield, Yorkshire, merchant,. Au:
gust 11 and 12, at the Saddle Inn, Huddersfierd and 2.5, •
tenet the Swan Inn, Huddersfield. Attornics, Mr. Zol''
Battyv, Huddersfield, or Mr. Battye, Chancery-la"'
London. -
Thomas Wilson, Nelvcaltle-upon•Tyne groOer,- July 21, gr_
August 6, and 25, at eleven, at the G:orge,Neweastle-erP"
Tyne. Attornies, Messrs. Atkinson, Wades, and Mat liaralls
Chancery-lane; London, or Mr.' J. Ba..nbridge, Netvcastte-
upon-Tyne.
Jacob Chattetton, Eccles, Lancashire, flour-merchant, JO-Y
27, 9,S and_ August 25, at tea, at the Bush, Deal.,scatc4
Mandeester. Attornies, Messrs. Foulkes and Crowell,
Manchester, or Messrs:Long-dill and Beekitt, Gray':.-10,
. London. .
Sa.inuel Hunter, Macclesfield, Chester, ironfounder, 1131 Y :I
at five; 30,.at eleven, and August 25, at three, at the Any',
Macclesfield.
°.l
Macclesfield. Attornies, Mr. Norbury, •Macclesfield,
Messrs. Slim-Win and Hall, Great 'James-street, Bedford'
row, Landon:, .
John Bayley, New Romney, Kent, corn-merchant;July 30, 434
and August 25, at eleVen, at Guildhall, Canterbury. 4*"
tornies, 'Mr. Robert Avery Webb., Folkstone, or Me.sits-
Egan and Waterman, Essex-,street, Strand, London.
John ,O'Brien and Thomas John Lyileh; (and -not Tbera:,
Lynch, as advertised by mistake in last Saturday's Gazettei
Bloomsbury-square, Irish linen merchants, July 21, 25,
August 22,at eleven, 'at Guildhall, London. Attorati, r.
G. Morton, Gray's-ion-square.'
John Hancock, Haymarket, S. Martin's-in-the-Fields, sl191"
keeper, July 21.2,, and August 9.6, at eleven, at .Guilahaly .
London.. Attorney, Mr. George Ellis, Abingdon-3t Let'
Westminster. '
Samuel JohnsontNottingliam,hoSier, August 6,7, and es,
f
elevetWat the Pu'rieh-Owl, Nottingham. Attornies, lkfes,s.,
Kinderley, Long, and Austen, Gray'Auti, or Mr. 11. Pebli.
Nottingham. -

buildball.' -
ANlst 29_ T. 'Preston, Aldermanbury, Warehouseman, at lc'
August 22. R. James, New London-street, merchant, at 11.
August 15. J. D. Hose, jun. Walbrook, merchane,•at-tWeite.
AuouSt B. J. Perkins, Queen-street, stationer, at ten.
-August 4.. J. Boraman, Brighton-place, flour-factor, at .11-r,
Attgast 4. J. Brown and J. Brown Kingston-upon4lull,
chants; at ten.
Aug-AA 4. J. Peat, ari,d W. Smith, Piccadilly, sadiers,st
.Augnst 4. -W. Eames', Littlefoorfields, at to
July 18. W. 'Hall, Silver-street,
July 25. R.,1-Lidiesley, N-AtiriOain-trte:tt alerL:ihl3, at 11•
Ang. 4. G. P. Carruthers;_Strand, lottery-oilice-keeper, r. 1511.
„
Au4tast 4. W.:-..ndeitoa and R. Lightollees, thoticv,..cctw'
spinnei.s, at . •
August d. R. 1-I,mtden, St. Margaret's, Southwark,
drapt.r, at eleven. -. •
August 4. R. Claridge, Upper George-street, Manchol,47
square;upholSterei.,_- at ten.
CERTIFICI‘TES.-IAtT as t.7l* 4.
W. D. Ormond, Bristol, wine-merchant.
J..l3reakspear, Oxford-street, silversmith.
S, Ora.m, Carthusian-street, Aldersgate-street, cooper..
T. Wood, Macclesfield, draper.
W. Brooks, Lant-street, Skonthwark, carpenter.
P. Hunt, Nottingham, grocer.
It. Wool Lane-End, Staffordshire, potter.
G. Crossley, Manchester, silver;mita.
D. Terney, sou. aad D. Terney, Jun. Commercial-17=1, roes'
makers.
W. Guudry, Wellingtbn, Soinersetshire, tanner.

- BIRTHS. '
fibert
On the 9th inst. at Eltham, the Lady of tic Hoe. - L
\ . ,
Gardner, of a Daughter. - . 0f s.
In Bedford-place,. the Lady "of II !n Ifallam, Esq.
still-barn child..
_-.

NI:1.11111ED. ' •
On Wednesday last, a
mt. Dublin, Charles Hayes, of Flu"Ite:,;"
street, Bruiick-square, to Ellen,. second da.aghtEi.
the late Edwin Saunders, Esq. of Mountjoy-:aquare, D4uvoi
and Portland-place, Bath.

. -
DaiD
On the 4th' inst. at Brockhurst. Cottage, near 00,1g:4
John Dredge, Esq. near 40 years in the Navy.
The same day, thin ald Malcolm. Esq. ee'
On Monday the Rh" inst. Mr. R. Martin, of the CA'fr
house, Epsom, aged 41.
On Friday last, at the house of her mothe'r,.. at Dudley, ifl,
the prime of lifei Maria. Wright Crocket, wife of the 11';
Robert Crocket, of Fordhall, Shropshire.-
wal-
On--Satui•day the 13th inst. Mrs.' Moy Thomas, of , .
brook, aged 62. ,
On Sunday Morning last, at his house at Dulwich; ll'aliii°
Griffith , 'Esq. in- his 6•2 d year. se°. tt,
' The. same day, at rarest-hill, ne:ir Peckham, Virat.!
Esq. of East Blair, in the Connty of Fife.
ring'
On Monday, after - a 'short illness', in N'.:•....-street, spry
gardens, in the 20th year of his ago, Mr. William Hgy.,
Manning, eldest. son of William Manning, Esq. :'l•l3*
vernor of tlie Bank.. : ..

The. same day, Yin. Kettlewell, of Clapham common. at.
Yesterday morai,q, at his house id Little Portland-Vl'
Jo!ia iu his 69tli yhx:
The, same#ay, at Nemington:Litts, Mr. dames44=4sl
aged 68. . • • •