The Sun.
London, England, 1846-06-20 00:00:00

Gentleman could persuade the public that Sir Edward Knateh-
[ bull sac wrong in making the speech wuich he had in 1829
' if the Right Hon. Gentleman could persuade the public that
I
the speeches he (Mr. Disaaeli) had quoted were never male, then
the Right Hon. Gentleman might appeal with confidence to
the public for a verdict, but that must he done. It would not
do to make a speech imputing the worst motivea tohisopponents,
and exercising a most ingenious argumentation upon the most
worthless materials—destroying accusations which never had
been made—( Hear, hear)—and putting an end to charges
which had never been brought forward. That was what they
required. They did not say they had a right to ask it. The
case was before the House, and they should feel perfectly satis-
-1 fied that it should remain there. It was not that book that he
f quoted—it was not the speeches of Sir Edward Knatchbull, or
the speeches of the Right Hon. Gentleman which induced
r his Noble Friend ever to make the statement which he had
i made. He spoke from his personal memory, he spoke from
his personal experience—he spoke from that in which he had
more confidence than his personal memory—and his personal
i experience—he spoke from a deep-rooted and enduring, and
' be (Mr. Disraeli) believed a growing conviction, which he—
and especially the friends and family, he believed, of Mr. Can-
ning—had, that the allegation which had been made was a
true allegation, and one which, he believed, could not be re.
futed.—( Cheers. )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Sir, I think
that the time has arrived, upon every ground, that it would be
desirable that this debate should be brought to a close. I do not
intend to reply to the renewed assertions of the Hon. Member
for Shrewsbury,
or point out to the House how easy it is by
culling extracts from particular speeches, to give to these a
the rs
representation which reading the entire speeches would not
bear out. —(Cheers.
) Sir,
r , luri n ..
thee have
of h
cause ea de
these
tphr
ereese funta ds
,i 3 rri na
tgh
etrh ea whole
witnessdebates,course
than
I f
uwas
is
teo,
enter into an argument. I say that I ' the
was present during
whole of these debates upon the Rom
an Cathholic question, and
I have no recollection whatever of any
opi-
nion on the part of Sir Edward Knaclstieullexpression of
i , as that to which
the Honourable Gentleman has referred
that his suspicions are well-founded. as confirmation
that the non-recollection of a fact can am aware
little against any expressions which might, prionve f but
have fallen from him. Considering the interest which I toor iti;
the whole of that proceeding, I think it impossible that a state-
ment of that kind could have been made without fixing itself
in my memory. But, Sir, the real question is, did the Right
Hon. Baronet entertain opinions in the year 1825, or was he
then prepared to make concessions on the Roman Catholic
question.—(Cheers.) Upon that I conceive myself to be the
best witness to decide in that case. I have been, from my first
entrance in political life, in constant private intimacy with the
Right Hon. Gentleman. I have sympathised with him in all
the public questions which have been brought before Parlia-
ment. I have acted in unison with him on every public ques-
tion which has been under discussion —( Cheers.) There has
subsisted between us a most unreserved communication of sen-
timent and opinion, both of a private nature and on public policy,
and at no time has he taken any important step in politics
without my being privy to it. At the time when
these occurrences took place, I was Secretary for
Ireland, and any Right Hon. Friend was Secretary of State,
under whose direction I was acting. We concerted together
upon all occasions upon the opposition to be made to the
Roman Catholic Claims as againstthe Members of the Govern-
ment, and it was impossible in this intimacy that he child
have entertained any change of opinion without my not being
aware of it.—(Cheers.) I can assure the House that I never
heard from him a single expression which threw a doubt on
the consistency of his opinions in the year 1825, and so much
was I surprised when the Noble Lord made his statement upon
the first occasion, that I immediately inquired of my Right
Hon. Friend, who was sitting near me at the time, upon what
ground could such a statement as that, so much at variance
with fact, be made. I rose as I said merely to give evidence
upon this case, and if the testimony of one who
has been connected with the Right Hon. Baronet
through all his political life, and who has been intimately
acquainted with the various proceedings which have taken
place during his life—if that testimony be worth anything, it
at once puts an end to the case.—(Loud cheers.) The Hon.f
Member for Shrewsbury has thrown out an insinuation to the
effect that while my Right. Hon. Friend has produced
the letters of the Earl of Liverpool, he has kept back those
letters which his Right Honourable Friend had addressed to
the Noble Earl.—(Cries of " No, no," " Hear, hear.") I am
anxious to state—for my Right Hon. Friend has authorised
him to do so—that having made search for these letters he has
produced all the letters upon the subject which he could find.
—(Cheers.) Having thus given my evidence, as I thought
it nay duty do, I shall not trouble the House any further.
Mr. B.: ESCOTT quite agreed with the Honourable
Gentleman who had just sat down, that the House had had quite
enough of these personal discussions. He would not for a
moment venture to call upon the House for indulgence, if what
he was about to say related only to the question between the
Right Hon. Baronet, the Noble Lord the Member for Lynn,
and the Hon Member for Shrewsbury. I think that has been
disposed of by the unanimous verdict of the House.—(Cheers.)
I think that the public will well know what motives have ac-
tuated these charges, and will say that it is quite true that the
Right Hon. Baronet might have served his party more, and
kept them more together, but that in serving his
party more he would have served his country less. When
he considered the rank of the Noble Lord, although
he might compare it with his own humble situation, he trusted
the House would allow him to say a few words. It had
been stated by the Noble Lord that he (Mr. Escott) had be-
trayed the interests of his constituents. The Noble Lord said
that he was one of my constituents, though how he made that
out he did not know ; he certainly was not aware of the fact.
Lord G. BENTINCK—I have some property at Stock-
bridge.
Mr. B. ESCOTT—Oh, yes,l thel Noble Lord' had some
stables at Stockbridge, which gave him the right of being
his constituent. He would tell the Honourable Member,
with reference to the charge of betraying his con-
stituents that he had called a public meeting of his con-
stituents, and that a resolution was passed approving of his
conduct, there being only three hands held up against it. He
would tell the Noble Lord and the Hon. Member for Shrews-
bury that the public did not expect that the time of that
House was to be wasted by raking up old debates which took
place twenty years ago.
Mr. B. DlSRAELl—Nineteen years.
Mr. B. ESCOTT—The , public would not distinguish
the difference between nineteen and twenty years. They would
tell these Holz. 5/embers that they had been impeding the
Government in their desire to ameliorate the condition of the
people of this and the sister country, and had obstructed
measures which had been brought forward, perhaps, too late for
the protection of the best interests of the country and the
advancement of all classes of people at large.
Lord SANDON was surprised that the Noble Lord the
Member for Lynn, representing a great country party, should
think that he raises his party by attempting to back up his
statements by reports from old newspapers, and that, having
entered into these discussions, they should back it up by
quoting paragraphs, sometimes from the " Mirror of Parlia-
ment," from " Hansard," when that suited him, and from the
" Times" when it suited him, and overlooking all the papers
which did not suit him. He ventured to say, that if they were
to take one hundred gentlemen upon this question, their
opinions would he decidedly in favour of the Right Hon. Baronet.
Now he spoke in this manner certainly with no bias in favour
of the Right Hon. Baronet, and with no desire to cast into the
shade the memory of Mr. Canning. He would speak rather as
that great Minister's ardent friend, as he hoped he had proved at
the time when he was connected with the Administration in
1827. (Hear, hear.) He then declined to serve with the
Right Hon. Baronet, partly because of the Catholic question,
and partly because of the opposition which the Right Hon.
Baronet gave to Mr. Canning. He would not disguise that he
had seen with regret the course pursued by the Right Hon.
Baronet at that time, but he wouli not accuse him of the dis-
honourable conduct which the Noble Lord ascribed to him.
He thought the Right Hon. Baronet ought to have inter-
posed to check the language which had been used,
by his supporter when opposing Mr. Canning and his Govern-
ment ; but still he did not believe that he had acted in the
manner described by the Noble Lord, still less did he believe
that if he had so acted he would afterwards have had the weak-
ness to admit it The case was dubious at the best, and when
the Noble Lord saw that four or five of the newspapers were
opposed to the view which he had taken, he ought to have
exercised some caution before he made this statement to the
House. He thought he was called upon to express this opinion.
He did so, and no one could tax him with being a servile fol-
lower of the Right Hon. Baronet, or that he had sacrificed
office when he might have been a Cabinet Minister. He de-
clined it because he could not act with the Right Hon. Baronet.
He had never fawned upon those in power • he had acted
honestly and independently, and therefore he claimed to be
heard as giving an unbiassed and independent opinion on this
subject. There was a general belief, even in the agri-
cultural districts to which the Noble Lord had so
frequently referred, that more evil had been done by
the Noble Lord, by his prolonged resistance to the Govern-
ment measure than would possibly follow from the 1 assing of
tte measure itself. The Noble Lord spoke of appealing to the
country. He (Lord Sandon) should have no fear of meeting
the Noble Lord in any country or on any hustings and appealing
to the people, either on this question or on anyof the other mea-
sures brought forward by her Majesty's Government. He
trusted the House would not be much longer detained by the
abortive attempts to prove a crime against one of her Majesty's
Ministers.
Mr. NEWDEGATE rose, and was beginning to address
the House, when
Lord SANDON said, in explanation, that the Noble
Lord behind him imagined that he (Lord Sandon) had afirmed
that the Noble Lord had read all th i newspapers when making
his inquiries on the subject. He (Lord Sandon) had not said
so ; he had only supposed, very naturally supposed, that the
Hon. Member for Shrewsbury would have looked at all the
papers of that day to see if he had the concurrence of every
journal in his opinion upon the subject.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said that he could not refuse to
give credit to the statement made by the Noble Lord on
this matter. He could not satisfactorily account for the in•
sertion of two paragraphs in two separate journals unless
there was something existing which warranted those insertions.
He asked the Noble Lord (Lord Sandon) how he could other-
wise account for the appearance of those concurrent para-
graphs in two newspapers, unless there was something to
justify them. (An Hon. Member---" What papers?") The
"Mirror of Parliament," and the " Times " news
(Ironical cheers, and cries of " Oh, oh ")—lf t h spapers--
ere was a con-
spiracy, as he supposed they intended to insinuate,
they account for the turn which the debate how could
(H was hiear, hear, and cheers.) Ittook afterwards?---
his hu
taking that insertion of those a mble opinion that
pragraphs, together with what
occurred in the debate afterward
tunities which the Noble 3—considering also the oppor.
Lord
had of forming a correct esti-
mate of these circumstances—he could not avoid coming to the
conclusion that the Noble Lord was perfectly justified to the
statement he had made to the House. He believed that the
Noble Lord had brought forward this charge with.thc.purte.
purest
intentions, and he bad certainly satisfied him (0r • Plewi
gate) that he had good grounds for
thisasseirtr deep regret the
Mr. HUME said that he had witnessed
attack upon the Right
course which had been taken in
'tehe w
Hon. Baronet. It was quitepess in the journals which had
might have arisen from a
but mistake possible that the whole matter
every one would s ee cause to
been so so often referred to, had
persisted,
,
ed notwithstanding the
gret that the party opposite h
p
triumphant answer of the Rig
R' ht Hon. Baronet. ow the
had just sat down, could deliver his
Hon. Gentleman who
opinion in the !lay he had done, was to him (Mr. Hume) a
matter of surprise; . .
but there was one thing which had not
been alluded to that night,
and which he thought would set
the question completely at rest. It was this, in the year
of Wellingtondetermined
when the Duke to
1829.
bring forward the Catholic Emancipation Bill, the
Right
Honourable Baronet tendered his resignation,
and the letter of the Right Hon. Baronet, addressed to the'
Duke was read to the House in bringing forward that quit-
tion•
In that letter it was shown that the Right Hon. Baro-
net had not changed his opinion, and he afterwards expressly
stated, that although he had carried out that measure afterwards
he had never once altered his opinion. That admission was
frequently used against him on after occasions. He (Mr.
Hume) could not, therefore, understand why the party which
wasaled by the Noble Lord should have pursued this course
after the very triumphant explanation which had been made
by the Right Hon. Gentleman, and nothing but the meanest
party motives could have prompted them to persist in this state-
ment. He had expected that after that explanation the Noble
Lord, the Member for Lynn, would have risen in his place to
have said that he was sorry in having brought forward this
charge.
Lord MORPETH having hadthehonour of oceupyinga seat
in Parliament at the time that Mr. Canning was at the head of

the Administration, trusted the House would bear wish him
while he addressed a few remarks upon this subject. He hag.
felt for that great Mhister feelie..es of the most profound ad,
miration, and although he did not sympathise in the political
measures of Mr. Canning, he yet viewed with great disappro-
bation the course pursued by the Right lion. Baronet at that
period. The Noble Lord, the Member for Lynn, had brought
forward certain charges against the Right Hon. Baronet.
words, that
pe:
hlhteaeh tteLe
Rightl yocvgrhodeatH7er
He would not attempt to repeat them, but he must say, that he
gave the utmost attention to them, and he had no reason for
thinking them to be true, on the contrary he had every reason
to believe that they were untrue. Ile was confirmed in this
impression by his distinct recollection of Me.-Canning standing
up in the House, and saying in a marked mariner that for the
resignation of the Right Hon. Baronet he was fully prepared.
H
Gentleman,
ee
shattered.—(axemtpna prtteletes
to,
eaoit
fgano
r, be set
uslteieett
great
errhneswe),pa
ttagainstmt
nut himth,ahtrefer-
encea hadlei
hnkiop
He considered, therefore, to use the Right Hon Baronet's own
egorenba.
ylapreparedt
qualifying
against
eae nn
sst t ot:
hbmel
should be obliged to do so at a moment when he was conduct-
ing to a triumphant issue the greatest question which perhaps
had ever been agitated in that House.—( Hear. )
Mr. VILLIERS said that he did not consider it beside the
question to ask to what side Mr. Canning. if he were alive,
would attach himself.._( Hear, hear.) They had heard
wonderful professions of respect and veneration for that illus-
trious man, but the Noble Lord was allied at the very
moment with that very party who had hunted him to death.--
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had identified himself with
the very party and the very principles most opposed to that of
his illustrious relative; and what was the reason that he was
assailed in that bitter spirit? It was because he had attacked
the corn monopoly. That was the occasion for all the
bitterness of feeling which had been manifested, and
he was attacked precisely in the language which was now
used against the Right 'Honourable Gentleman. It was the
law of ISIS which the landed interest were attached to. Mr.
do away with it and carry out free trade • and that be could
then
assailed. reason he was insulted and
Canning saw its gross imposition, and he was determined to
assure the House was
Mr. Cannin
He had identified himself with every enemy of g
How, then, and with what grace could
he make them, even If
assailed. And now the Noble Lord made these charges.
they were true? He was sure that Mr. Canning, if he were
alive, with his generous spirit, which was his cha-
racteristic, would join heart and soul in the great
_trsear. )
ove-
ment which they were now about
The party which the Noble Lord represented, had joinedin the
cry, because their
immediate i
n
t
e
r
e
cars
tswring out.—(H
eyre
attacked. The
Noble Lord knew these facts as well as he could tell him. Why
what was the question they were then d'scin
o sing? The cha-
racter of the Prime Minister. The people took no interest its
a certain point of view in the question,
bnt he .ld tell the Noble
Lord that they received with unmitigated
e°tl'
gated di must the per-
sonal attacks which had been made upon the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman; and there was one class in the
e country who would
take no interest in it, and that was the British eactner, of
whom they were always talking. They brought evidence
against the Right Honourable Gentleman of ninetesen
years' standing.—( Hear, hear.) And :for the last ten.
years they had been always preaching to the British farmer
to put their trust in the Right Hon. Baronet. Although
they had this evidence in their pockets against him, and they
had been telling the British farmer that he was the
only man who could lead them safely„ and securely,
and that he was the only man who was trust-
worthy, with what decency could these charges have been
brought forward? The Noble Lord had drawn a distinction
between following the Prime Minister and following Lord
Stanley. Why, Lord Stanley followed the Right Hon. Baronet,
and the Noble Lord bad followed Lord Stanley, and where was
the difference though the distinction had been taken. Did or
did not the Noble Lord follow the Right Hon. Gentleman P—
( Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had professed that he was
exceedingly shocked by treachery to party. Why, he must
recollect that his leader (Lord Stanley), when be used to cross
the House, after he changed his opinion, was met with such
jeers thate had at last to sit up, n the side of the House:from
which he had seceded. Yet the Honourable Member foe
Lynn, who followed that Noble Lord, was shocked—
exceedingly shocked, at treachery to party.—(Hear, hear.)
The public were beginning to be worn out by he personal
quarrels of that House.—(Hear' hear.) The public looked
upon such personal matters with disgust—they looked upon
these personal attacks as disgraceful to the House—disgraceful
to its honour and dignity, and disgraceful to those who made
them, and to those who took part in them. His opinion was,
that the result of those attacks would be, that instead of
damaging the Right Hon. Baronet, it would but exalt him in
the estimation of the public. —( Hear, hear. )
Mr. STAFFORD O'BRIEN said that he was the only
Member in that part of the House who escaped the
sweeping censure of the Honourable Member whew
had just sat down. The Honourable Gentleman
had made a charge against a Noble Friend of his
(Lord Stanley) with having changed his principles,
and the great reason why the Honourable Member had
charged the Noble Lord with change of principles was not
that he had swerved from his principles entirely, but that be
had done so by introduCing the Canada Bill. The Hon.
Member had charged that part of the House with having
offered an opposition to this measure wholly uncalled for, and
the result of which was only to delay the passing of the mea-
sure. lie felt that this charge of protracting that debate was
not only uncalled for, but that it was only consistent with
the character of the Housei that that debate should have been
a lengthy one ; and compared with the great magnitude
of the question, that its whole bearings should
have been discussed. It was quite consistent with
the character of the House, that whenever a great
change was proposed it should be freely discussed, and
he was sure that the Hon. Members who differed from him on
that question, and he would say the Right Hon. Baronet him-
self, would not think that the opposition to the measure had
led to any uncalled-for delay in the progress of the Bill.
Mr. VILLIERS explained. What he had said was not
properly understood by the Hon. Member who had just sat
d)wn. He had stated that the opposition of the great landed
proprietors to Mr. Canning was occasioned by his advocacy of
free trade,
Mr. PETER BORT HWICK rote amidst considerable
laughter. He did not wish to take part in the personal squab-
bles which had that night occupied the time of the House, for
humble as was his dignity, he did not think that taking his
share in such matters would add one atom in the way of ex
aping his position. He said, however, if he bad reason to
thank the Hon. Gentleman for the compliment which had been
paid to himself. He was sure the Right Hon. Member for
Tamworth had great reason to regret that the Hon. Gentleman
had taken upon him his defence. Never had any one
more reason to say, " God defend me from my
friends" than had the Hon. Member for Tamworth
to-night, when the Hon. Gentleman rose to defend him.—
( The Hon. Gentleman sat down amidst cries of " Divide,"
and " Adjourn.")
An HON. MEMBER, who moved that the debate on the Pro-
tection of Life (Ireland) Bill should be adjourned to Monday,
remarked that he understood such was the expectation of the
Right Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham) from what had
fallen from him.

Mr. HUME here pointed to the clock, it being but twenty
minutes past eleven o'clock.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM consented to the adjournment,
which was agreed to.

CHURCHES BILL.
Mr. HODGSON moved the second reading of this Bill,
and explained its nature and provisions.
Mr. HENLEY would object to the second reading unless
all the alterations proposed as to the levying of the poor-rates.
and the appointment of parish overseers, were struck out.
Mr. HUME would object to the second reading if the sug-
gestion of the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down were
carried out, as the Bill would then become useless.
But he objected to it in its present form, first,
because it recited twelve or thirteen Acts of Parlia-
ment which ought to have been repealed ; and secondly,
because it authorised three-fourths of the inhabitants
to raise rates for the building of churches, despite the remain.
ing fourth of the people. He there ore moved that the Bill
should be read a second time that day six months.
Sir H. ELPHINSTONE said that he quite agreed with his
Hon. Friend that the present system of repairing churches, by
means of church-rates, was a very bad one ; and where a dis-
trict containing several parishes, }riving a large church, existed,
it would be under the necessity of levying a separate rate in
each parish. This Bi,l rer: oved such a necessity, and it should
therefore have his support.
After a lew words from Mr. HAWES,
Sir J. GRAHAM said that the effect of the present
Bill would be to render the law more complicated than it now
existed. The first object of the Bill he was disposed to believe
was effected by the existing law ; and with regard to the other
_
two objects, he had an insuperable objection to them, for he
was not disposed to carry the power of building churches by
church rates further than the present law allowed. He thought
(hat it would be better to adjourn the question, in order that the
Bill might be considered by the Law Officers of the Crown,
and afford an opportunity of introducing a Bill which would be
better calculated to meet the objects in view.
Sir R. H. INGLIS concurred in the view taken by the
Right Hon. Baronet. He thought an adjournment for ten
days would give an opportunity for re-considering the Bill.
Mr. B. ESCOTT. thought the clauses were so objection..
able that the Bill ought to be thrown out at once, instead of
trying to amend it in Committee.
Mr. HODGSON defended the details of the Bill against the
objections which had been urged against it.
Mr. W. MILES thought the inhabitants of parishes, who
might be called upon to subscribe under it, would have great
objT
ectionsheco
se tno
dag o
itsre provisions.din
fas
the Bill w then negatived without a
division.OF THE PEACE AND CLERK OF THE
(IRELAND)torilinglLinLa.
cLER
K
Lord LINCOLN obtained tained leave
Bill to provide
that the office of Clerk of the Pe
Ireland should be hereafter filled
by the same person.

PUBLIC BATHS AND . W ASHHOUSES.
Om the motion of Sir G. GREY,
boroughs and paribbes
Leave Was given to bring in a Bill for promionti
volun-
tary establishment, in
danand
Wales, of public baths and washhottses.
The House adjournedat a Quarter past Twelve.

iIh—BRUSH E S.—NEW INTENTIONS.
One stroke of this is equal to the
nye small-tooth combs, and one even.
rush • to be had in four sizes, No. 7, 5. 6d ; No. 8. 7s.
cut brash
gs. 6d. ; No. 10, 1 Ls. 6d. The Double Anti.
effectAh eopfTvor2pealTpeerirsnnearrranßtisturr.ug..,
Press6d. tire Nail Brush, which does not divide the quick from the
nail, no pressure being required, and thoroughly cleans and po.
fishes the nails in a tenth part of the time of any other Ille*
6Nt hto d p
w; ;
Tooth-pick
oor
tch4e:
psiincs bone,
Brush,
andne ,
oNf
which
l all
ile, 2
sizes
zes ;
s.
entirely
nNo . 2
d enterspr , 2 i
cse e.
between 6di n .
ivory.
3 r
y.t
he
The
i 33
teretices of the closest teeth ; marks, full-sized brushes, No. 1,
hard ; No. 2, less hard ; No. 3, middling ' • No. 4, soft. TM
narrow brushes, No. 5, hard ; No. 6, less hard; No. 7, mid-
dling ; No. 8, soft, at ls. each, or 10s. per dozen in bone ; and
2s. each, or 21s. per dozen in ivory, the hair warranted never
to come out. The Medium Shaving Brush, between the
usual badger hair and bristle brush, being a selection of the
strongest hair only from the badger skin in a variety of sizes,
both in bone and ivory. The above articles are the inventions
of Ross and Sons, 119 and 120, Bishopsgate-street, Londe'',
and, being protected, any one imitating them will be proceeded
against.

[ADVERTISEMENT.] SIGHT AND HEARING. 39,
Albemarle-street. Piccadilly. Newly-invented Spectacles, Tele.
scopes, Opera Glasses, Microscope., &c. Patronised by Generale
Sir Edward Paget, Sir Evan Lloyd, Sir John Keating., Walston,
Frederick Goodfellow, Clayton, Grosvenor Morrison, Dyott Robert-
s on, Mackenzie, Galway, Biggs, Woolf, Murray, Walker, Fox,
Price, Lindsay, and Thackray ; Major Generals Sir H. Elphinatono,
Sir John Ross, Sir James Cockburn, Achinty, P. Fyers, D. Macleod,
Bonverie, Sir J. Mecdonall, Sir It. Barton, Sir T. Dallas, and Sir
Wm. Eustance : Admirals Lord John Hay, Sir G. Cockburn, S
George Munday, Sir George Martin, Sir James H. Whitshed, Sir D.
Gold, Ross, Alexander, Curzons, Tompkinson, Hollis, and Price.
Vice-Admiral Sir F. Austen ; Rear-Admirals Brown and Ribonlean,
&c. Messrs. S. and B. Solomons, Opticians, have invented Spec-
tacle Lenses upon a new construction. Immediately they are placed
before imperfect vision, that mist and dullness which appear beim.*
the eyes is at once removed, every object becomes clear and distinct,
so that the most aged imperfect sight becomes bright and brilliant.
and is brought to its y ouththl. natural, and original state. Also.
Achromatic Telescopes, Opera Glasses, Microscopes, Invisible and sit
kinds of Acoustic Instruments, for relief of most extreme deafness.
Cantion—Messrs. S. and B. Solomons, Opticians, are not in any war
connected with a person of the same name in their immediate neigh.
bourhood. To prevent mistakes be cautious, and Observe—Oak, ts
be had at 39, Albemarle-&e4, Piccadilly, opposite the York Hetet,