The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-17 00:00:00

og
tOMMONS INCLOSURE BILL.

Lord CLI VE wished to know from the Right Hon. Gentle-
man the Secretary for the Home Department if he intended
to bring forward any measure of this nature during the present
session.

CLEFT SITTLNG.)

LATEST PRICES OF SHARES
IN BANKS, ASSURANCE, AND OTHER COM
PANIES' STOCK.

From te Official List,
PUBLISHED EVERY TUEADAY AND FRIDAY EVENING.
LONDON, FRIDAY, JULY 17.
JOINT-STOCIE

s Dividend Amount 1
' Name of Company. per of Paid. i Price
Annum. Share.
i
I
£ s. d. X s. d. I
Australasia -••••• • • • 6/. per cent. 40 0 0 40 0 0 i 20;
Britsh N orth American Si. per cent. 50 0 0 50 0 0 I 4314
Commercial of London Si. per cent. 100 0 0 20 0 0 ! 23%
' Colonial.. .. •• • ...... 51. per cent. 100 0 0 25 0 0 i 16
I Louth' and Westminstr 61. per cent. 100 0 0 20 0 0 27
London Joint-Stock .• • 61. per cent. 50 0 0 10 0 0 14%
) Metropolitan - 25 0 0 710 0
Provincial of Ireland.. 81. per cent. 100 0 0 25 0 0 48
Ditto, New......• • • 8/. per cent. 10 0 0 10 0 0 18y
National of Ireland .. Si. per cent. 50 0 0 20 0 0 20
• Nat. Provncial of Eng. 51. per cent. 100 0 0 35 0 0 30
Ditto, New. •••• • • • • 5/. per cent. 20 0 0 10 0 0
, Union of Australia •••• 61. per cent. 25 0 0 25 0 0 I 25%
, Union of London. -.. 5/. per cent. , 50 0 0 10 0 0 i 11
INSURANCE COIYIPANIZS.
Dividend - Amount
Name of Company. per of Paid. Price
Annum. Share.
-- , -
£ s. cl• i X s. U.
Albion •• .• •• -••• • • • 31. 105 500 00'50 0 0 74
Alliance Brit. and For. 6 per cent. 100 0 0 11 0 0 19%
Ditto Marine. ••• • • 6/. per cent, 100 0 0 50 0 5%
Atlas 13s. 6d. pr eh. 50 0 0 s 0 0 16
British Commercial •• 7s. per share 50 0 0 50 0 7%
Clericl,Med.& Gen. Life 51. per cent. 100 0 0 210 0 6%
County .............. 31. 100 0 0 10 0 0
Crown .............. 10s. 50 0 0 5 0 0 -
Eagle • 6s. 50 0 0 s 0 0 514 i
Eng.& Scot. Lave .. • • 51. per cent. 50 0 0 2 0 0 2%
European Life ••• • • • 5% per cent. 20 0 0 All paid. 20
Freemasons' ....... • • 51. per cent. 20 0 0 3 0 0
Glebe - 136
Guardian ............ 5/. per cent. 100 0 0 36 10 0 48
Imperial Fire ........ 6/. and bonus 500 0 0 50 0 0 240
Imperial Life ........ 12s. 100 0 0 10 0 0 163(
Indemnity Marine.... 11. sh. & be. 100 0 0 5 13' 1 29
Law Life ••..• • - • . . it. ss. 100 0 0 10 0 0 52
Legal and General Life - 50 0 0 2 0 0 6,i
London Fire • ....... 10s. 25 0 0 12 10 0 143¢
London Ship ........ 10s. 25 0 0 12 10 0 14%
Marine • • •••••• • • • .. SI. per cent. 100 0 0 15 0 0 10%
Med. Invlid&Gen.Life 431. per et. 50 0 0 2 0 0 3
National Lean Fund.. 51. per cent. 20 0 0 210 0 2%
National Life •
Palladium Life ...... • • 51. per cent. 50 0 0 2 0 0 21. Os.
Phoenix 3/. p. ct. & bs. - - 205
Protector Life •• . •
Provident Life -• • -
Rock Life.. •••-• • • • • • 4s. 5 0 0 010 0 414
Royal Exchange Si. per cent. Stock. 1 - 198
Sun Fire •
- - 210
Ditto Life • 1/. Os.
- I 49
Universal Life
CANALS.
e Dividend!
l
Names of p., Dividend Names a 2.4
I
Companies. f 4 per Price. Companies. per Price.
it. Annum.' .c 2 Annum. 1
X X 1_
Ashtn & Oldh 97 51.5 e. p e 70 Monmouthsh 100 81. 1 160
Ashby-d-la-Z 113 4/. 70 Mntgomrysh 100 51. j 93
Barusley• •.. 160 121. 180 Macclesfield. 100 - 38
Basingstoke.. 100 - I - Neath •• •• • • 100 171. 340
Brknk&Abrgi 150 51. 85 Nottingham. 150 12/. -
Cromford.... 100 141. 150 Peak Forest. 78 31. t 40 '
Dudley'. • .... 100 41. - Regent's ••• •33 1/. ss. 25 1
Derby .• •• •• 1001 61. 73 Rochdale.... 85 41. 77
Ellsmre&Chs 133 41. 55 Shropshire .• 125 81. - Eyewash •.• 100 321. 300 Somrset Coal 150 71. 10s. 130 , .
Forth & Clyd 100 41. - Do.LkFdSt 12 61. p. c. 11 1
GrandJunctnlloo 71. 953¢ Stffrd&Worc 140 281. 295 i
Grand Unioniloo 1/. 105. - Shrewsbury.. 125 15/. 230 i
Glamorgnsh .1172 13%1. 210 Stourbridge.. 145 201. 315
Gistr & Brklyiloo - - Strtfrdon Av 75 11. lOs
. - •
Grantham • • 'l5O 121. 100 Severn and 1
Huddersfield. 57 - - ' Wye Bald 26 1/. 85. 32
Kennt & Avu 39 7s. 6d. I 9% Trnt &Mr-) 8
Lancaster... 47 11. 10s. - sey, i 4 sh. 50 301. - ]
Leeds&Livrp, 100 341. 520 Thains&Med 19 - _
Leicester -.1140 101. 105 IWorcstr &1
Leicstr &Nth 831 41. 60 Binning.S 78 21. 44 s
Loughborogh 142, 701. 1 350 Wilts liz Elks] 67 11, ii co

LIST OP SCOTTISH COMPANIES' PRICES.

Name of Company.

Bank of Scotland
Royal Bank of Scotland
British Linen Company
Commercial Bank
National Bank . ..
Union Bank of Scotland
Western Bank

Dividend
per

North of Scotland Bank
Clydesdale 8ank......
Eastern 8ank........

Caledonian Bank .

Edinb.& Glasgow Bank
(.3ity of Glasgow Bank .
Scottish Union Ins. Co.
Hercules Insurance Co.
insur. Co. of Scotind..
North British Incur...
Caledonian Fire Insur.
Edinku rgh Life Insur.
Edin. & Glasg. Railway
Ditto, 1.!, shares
Edin., Leith, & Grantn
Glasgw & Ayrshir Rail.
Glasgw & Greenck Rail.
fllsgw & Ganikirk Rail.
Dundee & Arbroth Rail.
Standard Life Asstirnce.

Name of Company.

Commercial
East and West India...
East Country
L)ndon .............
St. Katharine •.......
Southampton • •

Annum.

61. per cent.
61. per cent.
81. per cent.
61. per cent.
61. per cent.
73‘1. pr cent.
6/. per cent.
61. per cent.
61. per cent.
5/. per cent.
7341. pr cent.
61. per cert.
5/. per cent.
51. per cent.
71. per cent.
5/. per cent.
5341. pr cent.
10/. per cent.
61. per cent.
1/.los. pert.
7s. 6d. p. s.

71. per cent.
21. per cent.
51. per cent.
61. per cent.
51. per cent.

Amount
of
Share.

8. d

I 20 0 0
1100 0 0
110 0 0
200 0 0
100 0 0
100 0 0
50 0 0
12 10 0
20 0 0
50 0 0
25 0 0
25 0 0
25 0 0
50 0 0

DOCKS.

Dividend Amount
per of Paid. Price.
Annum. share.

X s. d.
31. per cent. Stock.
61. pr cent. Stock.
1/. per slt. 100 0 0
51. pr cent. I Stock.
5 per cent. Stock.
41. per cent. 50 0 0

s. d

50 0 0

AIPER,IAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, July 16.
LORD GOUGH AND LORD HARDINGE'S AN-
NUITY BILL.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the bring-
ing up the report of this Bill, and in doing
so prayed that the Bill be restored to its
original form. He regretted that the first duty imposed
on him in his present situation should be the taking of
the preset course, which might be construed into some-
thing not like due acknowledgment of the great services
rendered by the illustrious individuals in question. He felt
however, the highest sense of the great services rendered,
still his duty to the public and to the other House of
Parliament compelled him to ask them to
reconsider the decision they had given, and to
place the Bill in its original form. Before
asking them to take that step, it would be neces-
sary for him to go into the circumstances that had
led to the proposal of the grant in question.
He was bound to say, looking at precedents under si-
milar circumstances, and looking at the substance
of the Bill, it seemed to him that it did
confer on these distinguished individuals ade-
quate compensation. This was his decided view after
taking a glance at similar circumstances in the history of
the country. He would only call the attention of the
House to the fact that a Noble Duke in that House,
after the battle of Talavera and a brilliant cam-
paign in Spain, was made a Viscount, and received
a pension of 2,0001. a year. This was considered ade-
quate compensation for the great services rendered then,
and therefore he thought the provisions of the pre-
sent Bill, as it originally stoood, was ample enough to
meet the case of the distinguished individuals in question.
If they were to make any alteration in the present Bill,
they would be doing more for Lord Hardinge than had
been done for those who had rendered the most re-
markable services, and obtained the most splendid ad-
vantages which had accrued to this country during the
last war. According to the tenor of this Bill, it was
arranged that the sum of 3,0001. a-year should be given
to Lord Hardinge, and the sum of 2,0001. a-year to Lord
Gough, over and above the sums which had already been
voted by the East India Company, with a view to enable
them to support the dignity of their peerage in that
House. If this Bill were to be passed in its present
shape, it would be giving more than had ever been
given in any previous instance. In order to bring this
matter properly before the House, he should remind
their Lordships that the annuities, to which reference had
been made, had been granted by the East India Company,
and were in fact a part of the government of the Com-
pany. Thus then, in fact, there was the guarantee
of the State. Now it was well known that as the East
India Company could not guarantee anything without the
authority of the Sovereign, the Noble Lords who were
about to enter upon the enjoyment of those annuities
would have the benefit of the Sovereign's authority;
and the reply, therefore, to those who took a stand
upon this Bill was, that there was only a temporary
interest in the possession of those by whom the annui-
ties were granted, but he thought that what he had just
stated was an assurance that that ground was invalid. In
the case of Lord Colborne, for whose eminent services
in Canada a pension had been granted by the North
West Company, the same course had been observed.
The object of granting that annuity was to enable him
to maintain the dignity of his Peerage in that House,
and no doubt had ever been started of the validity or
the permanence of the grant. He (the Marquis of
Lansdowne) had a long list before him of distinguished
individuals upon whom similar grants for similar ser-
vices had been conferred. The first he had upon that
list was the Marquis of Cornwallis, whom he had known
in early life, and of whom he never could speak but
with the utmost respect. Then there was the late Lord
Wellesley, than whom no man had rendered more
eminent services to his country in India. These, and all
the rest, were rewarded just in the same manner ;
so that there was little doubt of the continuance of the
annuity, especially when it was recollected that if the
interest of the East India Company was a contingent
interest, the Crown held the reversion. Again, he must
remind their Lordships that if this Bill were to be car-
ried in its present state, the amount conferred would
surpass all the lavish expenditure of the last war, when
the currency was depreciated, and, consequently, the
total sums were of less value. And, further than this,
he must also beg to remind them that if they refused to
accede to this proposition, they would be entering into a
contest with the other House of Parliament, which has,
at all times, assumed the right of managing the public
money. It would be expressing an opinion contrary to
that House ; and, in fact, would be sending down an
amended money Bill to that House, and thereby be likely
to create an increased jealousy in that House, which was
an evil at all times to be deprecated. There was no
no doubt but that the representatives of the people were
the proper persons to impose the taxes which
the people had to pay, and to direct the way
in which they ought to be levied. On this very
day he had received a letter from a distinguised lady
regarding a person who was the subject of this conver-
sation, ,and who was alike distinguished by her own
merits and for her ancient descent. This was Lady
Emily Hardinge, now Viscountess llardinge. This
lady stated that she and her family—and she was quite
sure that their feelings were quite in consonance with
those of Lord Hardinge himself—she stated that they
were perfectly satisfied with the amount of the allow-
ance and the way in which it was conferred. She was
the grand-daughter • of the first Lord Camden, than
whom a more excellent lawyer and upright individual
never existed. She was the niece also of the second
Lord Camden, who renounced the per centage on the
Exchequer, which he was granted in consideration of
his public services. He (the Marquis of Lansdowne)
hoped, therefore, their Lordships would rescind the
vote which had been come to on this question on a
former occasion, and vote for the measure brought in
by the late Government,
The Duke of RICHMOND opposed the motion. His
opinion on the subject was unchanged. The Noble
Marquis stated that he had received a letter from Lady
Hardinge, in which she expressed a desire that the sub-
ject would not cause any division in their Lordships'
House. Ile (the Duke of Richmond) could not, how-
ever, look upon it as a private question. It was on public
grounds he opposed it. There were few prizes in the
lot of a soldier's life, and the ability, energy, and
courage displayed by their armies entitled the,o to the
highest rewards the country could bestow. He would
ask, did the grant of foreign lands to the Noble Duke, in
consideration of his great services, weigh for a mo-
ment when the Parliament of this country rewarded his
glorious achievements ? No, the country considered
that it was deedly his debtor, notwithstanding all the
rewards he received from foreign powers. He (the
Duke of Richmond) was surprised at the conduct of his
Noble Friend (the Marquis of Lansdowne) in taking the
course he at present adopted, for three weeks ago when
the Bill was read a second time he did not vote at all, but
went below the woolsack. The Noble Marquis—also
the Postmaster- General—would, he hoped, adopt the
same course he did then, and vote against the measure-
-(Laughter)—and ho trusted the Noble Lord (the
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster) would not go
below the woolsack, but express his opinion unre-
servedly on the Bill. He saw no reason to alter the
opinion ho formerly expressed, and he would firmly
resist the motion of the Noble Marquis.
The Earl of RIPON defended the course adopted by
the late Government in regard to the present measure.
In questions of this kind it was difficult to fix the precise
amount to be affixed for such services as those which had'
been rendered; still he thought enough had been named
in the Bill. In the case of Lord Nelson, for the brilliant
services he had rendered, the utmost sum granted was
3001. a-year. In other cases the same principles of
economy had been observed. It was
apainfouviecrinrmeurlint
stance to interfere with a feeling of generosity, but-
he thought it was the duty of the Government
to see that no undue application of the
publice
morn
de
iyn
gwe t,s
he was
Winithlnrdegiaardthteo
representativethe
caseo Lord
ord
of
the East India Company, and had advantages and emo-
luments such as did not fall within the reach of those
who held office under the Crown. Thecompany had,
on many occasions, conferred great advantages_ on, those
office who held under them. Lord Clancarty, , Lord
Cornwallis, and other Governors-General of India had
received pensions and large grants of money. Lord
Hastings received no less a sum than 60,0001., and his
son had also been treated with great liberality. Lord
Wellesley had also been treated in a similar spirit. The
grant proposed by the company in the present instance
ryas said to be offered independent of the execu-
tive and the Legislature, and that that grant
should not be allowed to regulate the one
proposed by Parliament. But this was not the fact.
The Government was virtually a party to the act of the
company, as the latter held its charter under the
.Parlia-
ment of the country, and conducted its operations in
harmony with it. If they gave reins to their generosity
they would involve themselves in continual difficulties.
They ought to deal as liberall: as the circumstances
would warrant, but nothing more; and he was per-
suaded, that if a grant of 8,0002 a year was allowed to
Lord Gough, it would be the means of serious incon-
venience in future, when similar cases were to be con-
sidered. From all precedents, and judging from the
circumstances of the case, the late Government con-
sidered they could not go further than the provisions