The Sun.
London, England, 1848-06-10 00:00:00

THE STTN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, JUNE 10, 1848.

applied to the coasting trade, the fisheries, the carrying
trade, and colonial intercourse. The coasting trade and
fisheries were to bo preserved by Government. At pre-
sent the carrying trade was reserved for British vessels,
or for foreign vessels carrying the produce of their re-
spective countries. The Right Hon. Gentleman said
that he had conferred with Mr. Huskisson; and that he
was ready to carry reciprocity further than it was car-
ried now. Why, there was no greater breach of the
fundamental principles of the avie'ationlaws than that
very system of reciprocity; and how could the Right
lion. Gentleman ask them to preserve the fundamental
principles of the navigation-laws, when he himself ad-
mitted that he had laboured day and night with Mr. Bus-
kisson, and was even now prepared still further, to un-
dermine the very principles he was so anxious to up-
hold?—(Cheers.) He observed the Right Hon. Gentle-
man shake his bead; but he would convince him at once
by the arguments of those on whom he himself relied,
that reciprocity treaties were breaches of the fundamen-
tal principles of the navigation-laws. Mr. Young was
asked before the Committee if he thought the British
shipowners sufficiently protected? Ho replied " No;
his protection was invaded by the reciprocity treaties."
Mr. Richmond, another very able witness, said that
"He could not consider the navigation laws afforded
the shipowners much protection. They were com-
pletely mutilated by the reciprocity treaties. Every
treaty took something away. He could not have con-
ceived that those treaties left so little of the navigation-
laws as he found remaining. In fact those laws were
virtually repealed." And yet in the face of this the
Right Honourable Gentleman came down there and
exhibited his " fundamental principles"—(Loud laugh.
ter)—and asked them to pass an instruction to the
Committee that those principles should be observed.
—(Cheers.) Well, then, as to the colonial inter-
course. When Adam Smith wrote on that point, about
1775, he did not foresee the separation of America and
the circumstances which had since occurred. From that
period scarcely a year laid passed without an infringe-
ment of their " fundamental principles." And he must
here observe, that on the occasion of every such in-
fringement there was precisely the same sort of outcry
of " ruin to the shipowner."—(Hear, hear.) In 1782,
when they wished to admit Ireland to participation in
the colonial trade, the shipowners loudly complained ;
and those of Liverpool, in a petition which they ad-
dressed to that House, declared that " if any such thing
were permitted, Liverpool must inevitably be reduced
to its original insignificance."—(Hear, and laughter.)
So it was in 1825, when the House, not acting on
theories, but driven by the necessity of the case—
for the question was reciprocity or retaliation—
adopted the principle of reciprocity treaties. So it
was on every other occasion when relaxations were
adopted. In 1833 the Shipowners' Society absoletely
declared that " declining .quality and extent of Bri-
tish tonnage, the embarrassment, decay, and ruin
of the British shipowner was now an incontrovertible
position."—(Hear, and laughter.) Be it so; that was
proof that they ran no risk in modifying these laws.
But the fact was, the Shipowners' Society was wrong.
In 1833, when " the decay and ruin of tho British ship-
owner was an incontrovertible position," the British ton-
nage on the register was 2,634,000 tons, whilst in 1846,
under the application of the free-trade principles, it was
3,817,000 tons.—(Hear, hear.) What, too, did Mr.
Richmond say? " I am sure," he said, " that Ido not
exaggerate when I declare that half the capital embarked
in shipping during the last twenty-five 'years has been
lost, and that the other half is to a very great extent
totally unproductive of profit." He was certain Mr.
Richmond would not say a word he dial not believe. He
took his statement as a great authority; and if that was
the account of what protection had done for the ship-
owner, surely there was nothing in the statement to show
that it would not be for his benefit that there should be a
change. Could that change be made for the benefit of the
merchant, the capitalist, and the manufacturer, without
injury to the shipowner, or to the naval superiority of
the country? If it could not, be dropped the whole ques-
tion; but he thought it capable of proof that it could. In
1836, the tonnage of this country was 2,792,000; in 1842,
3,619,000; in 1847, when free trade ought to have been
fatal, 3,952,000. Our seamen numbered in 1841, 117,000;
in 1827, 151,000; in 1842, 214,000; in 1847, 232,000.
It was in the extent of our commercial marine and the
number of our seamen that our main reliance was placed
in war. As to impressment that system applied (quay,
whether the navigation-laws were maintained or not. But
had not the time arrived when it was incumbent on them
to consider whether it would be possible ever again to
put that system into operation.—(Hear, hear.) Let them
consider the changes which had taken place in our naval
as well as our commercial marine. After a long peace
it might be expected that the men serving in our,
commercial marine would be much less qualified to
perform the duties of a man-of-war than the men who
served in merchant vessels only during the short
intervals of peace. Then consider the progress steam
navigation had made—how little reliance could be placed
on their being able to work steam-vessels by men taken
by chance from our merchant-ships. The value of im-
pressment, therefore, was much reduced; but in either
case, as he said before, the value of that system would
depend upon the strength of our commercial marine.
Now what would be the effect of a change upon that
branch? What did we fear? The Member for Buck-
inghamshire, said of the Baltic ports, that they were
closed by the ice during four months of every year.
Compare our highly-favoured position with that of those
countries?—(Hear, hear.) Take France. France had
a strict navigation-law. Had it improved her commer-
cial marine?—(Hear, hear.) Did it not, on the con-
trary, suggest a doubt whether naval superiority did
not depend on the habits, pursuits, inclinations, and
associations of a people rather than on any code of
laws whatever?—(Much cheering.) Then, as to the
United States : now there was examined before the
Committee upon this subject a Captain Briggs,
" hailing," as they call it, from Baltimore, but who
was employed as the master of a liner between the
United States and this country. Captain Briggs was as
good a witness as he ever saw. He was examined as to
any circumstances which could entitle our shipowners to
any protection as against the shipowners of the United
States. He was asked what were the wages of ship-
wrights is tho United States. He answered 10e. a day.
Our wages were only 6s. a day. If they talked, there-
fore, on the argument that the Norwegian vessels could
be built at a much less price than our own on account of
the lower wages of the shipwrights, they had at least no
cause to fear the United States. Captain Briggs was
then examined as to wages. He was asked how much he
paid American seamen? He replied 645. a month. He
was asked if he always employed American seamen?
Ile replied, no; that he came to Liverpool and engaged
British seamen, to whom he paid 50s. is month. Well,
then, there was at once a difference between English and
American vessels to the extent of 14s. in favour of our
own country. Then, as to ship-building: let them see
whether there was a chance of our being able to com-
pete with the United States. The evidence of Captain
Briggs was to the effect that, for ship-building purposes,
the Americana obtained canvass and copper from Eng-
land and cordage from Russia, but paid 10 per cent. more
for it than the English. Shipwrights' wages and those
of seamen were higher, and timber was nearly on an
equality. Under all these circumstances, what fear was
there of competition with America?—(Hear, hear.)
Captain Briggs also stated as his opinion that we could
build a twelve years' ship as cheaply in England as they
could a ten years' ship in America. But the Americans
had some advantages. They had advantages in the
greater intelligence and activity of the masters, and in
the temperance and morality of their seamen, but in
none of these points had we any right to claim pro-
tective laws.—(Hear.) Take, then, the case of our
colonies. If freight could be had cheaper at New
York than at Montreal how much longer could we re•
sist the claim of Canada for the removal of the present
restrictions.—(Hear, hear.) On the grounds he had
stated he had come to the conclusion that the time
had come for the consideration of the navigation-laws
with a view to their extensive alteration. With respect
to the policy of excepting our coasting trade, and also
that of obliging our shipowners to hare their vessels
three-fourths manned with British subjects, he should
reserve himself for a future occasion. On the question
of reciprocity treaties, he thought it was deserving of
consideration, whether they were not in themselves often
causes of great embarrassment. They appeared per-
fectly fair and easily managed in theory, but when they
came to be reduced to practice, they often gave rise to
questions of very great difficulty. In his opinion, the
great advantage lay in independent legislation on these
matters. He feared that the power proposed to be given
to the Crown of re-establishing restrictions after a trade
had once been opened would be most difficult in opera-
tion. It looked very like inverting the usual order of
the constitution. The House of Commons would relax
while the Crown would restrain, and he feared that that
was a position which the Crown would find difficult and
unpleasant.—(Hear, hear.) He :thought it would be
much better to give a temporary force to the Act.
Suppose it were sent back to the House of Commons
at the end of five years, would not that be better
than a continual multiplication of treaties ? He should
advise those gentlemen who were anxious to exclude all
improvement to consider the great truth, that the pros-
perity of a commercial marine depended, not on a navi-
gation-law, but on the prosperity of our manufactures.
Whatever tended to promote the prosperity of your
commerce and manufactures could not fail to be bene-
ficial to your shipping interest. Great reliance had been
placed on the authority of Mr. Huskisson, but instead of
relying on any particular dictum of Mr. Huskisson they
should look to the great principles he had laid down,
and which were of universal application. Having quoted
at some length Mr. Huskisson'ri opinion as to the advan-
tages of gradually removing all restrictions from our
colonies, and citing the advantage which relaxation had
saying
gd
thtoat ourlnd ia, the Right Hon. Baronet concluded by
a
duty to our colonies was, to bring them
as much as possible into contact with the nations of Eu-
rope, and to abandon that principle which had heretofore
regulated the conduct of all countries with respect to
their colonies—that of making their interests subser-
vient to those of the mother country.—(Cheers.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—I have been saved, Sir, by
the speech of the Right Honourable Gentleman who has
just sat down from any necessity of detaining the House
by going into a defence of the details of the means by
which the proposals of the Government should be carried
out. I find myself relieved by the consideration, also,
that, after the very fullest attention to a very long de-
bate—after hearing in the course of this night various
speeches of two hours' duration against the measures of
the Government, that those speeches contain more in re-
lation to other subjects than that upon the particular
proposition before the House and especially with regard
to the defence of the navigation-laws very little argu-
ment indeed was used.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
The Noble Lord who began the debate to-night
went rather into his own peculiar vein of argument
with respect to those measures of
which he was opposed—questions which do
not all
affect this question of the •
angution-laws ; and ac-

cording to promise, he told us that the whole advantage
of such a measure would go to the foreigner, and that
none would go to the people of this country. Bar, Sir,
the Noble Lord's view of foreign commerce is so narrow
and confined, that he argued thus :—Speaking of our
trade in America, he said, we took ice from the Ameri-
cans as some sort of return for our trade. As if our
taking ice was a great favour to the Americans, and not
a thing done for our own benefit. Why, sir, ice is an
article of luxury with us.
Lord G. BENTINCK—Rice—I said rice, not ice.—
(Great laughter.)
Lord JOHN RUSSELL—Well, whether rice or
any other article, it is the same. The Noble Lord ar-
gued as if it were a favour we were doing the
Americans in taking it. Now, Sir, we take these
goods for our own advantage—(Hear, hear)—and if we
take their goods for our advantage, they in like man-
ner take our goods for their advantage ; and it seems
to me that the advantage of doing away with the
difficulties is so apparent, that we need not de-
tain the House upon that part of the question. The
whole question really turns on whether these laws are
necessary for our naval supremacy or not.—(Hear, hear.)
I really think that a weight which hardly belongs to it
has been attached to the long existence whichlthese laws
enjoyed. I have no doubt myself but that these laws
were adopted by Protector Cromwell as a protection
against rival nations. The object in their adoption was
to injure ourselves in order to effect a greater injury
upon our rivals, and no doubt that object was effected
by them. But I very much doubt whether, if Protector
Cromwell heard what the effect of these laws at this late
period were, then he would think it desirable to keep up
that protection in order to prevent the descendants of
the Puritans, who were driven to the North American
colonies in his time, from enjoying an unrestricted trade
with the people of this country.—(Hear, hear.) But in
treating this question as a matter of naval defence, we
must consider it in the light in which it has been
viewed by the Right Hon. Gentleman who spoke last;
namely, us to whether it would enable foreign Powers to
supplant our commercial marine by engrossing the trade
of this country. Now, in considering that question, there
are evident indications why we should not fear such
competition. In the first place, with regard to the
building of ships, we know that with regard to iron,
canvass, copper, and other articles, we seem to have the
advantage over every other country. In the next place,
as regards labour, it is most true, as has been frequently
asserted, that English labour is not dear, because the
work which is done is superior to that done by the
people of other nations receiving a smaller amount of
wages. For instance, a comparison has boon drawn with
regard to work done at Bombay; but if a certain quan-
tity of work be done for 65., it is the same thing whether
that work be done, as it will be, by one man in this
country, who gets 6s. for it, or by six men at Bombay
who are paid only ls. a day.—(Hear.) If one man
earns 6s. and another earn only ls., it is a com-
parison between the quantity and fitness of the work
which each man performs ; and if the one man who
gets 6s. performs as much work as the six men in
Bombay who earn only one shilling each, it cannot be
said that labour in this country is dearer than it is at
Bombay.—(hear, hear.) Then, again, with regard to
the United States of America, it is proved that their
ship-building must be as dear as ours, and it is proved
also that the wages of their seamen are higher than the
wages paid to seamen in this country. Then there are
other indications also on this subjeca There is this
indication, which is a great test—that with regard to a
great part of the trade with foreign nations, with re-
gard to the trade carried on between one foreign
nation and another, British ships do compete suc-
cessfully with the ships of foreign countries ; that
they carry, for instance, to, St. Petersburgh and to
Ilamburgli, goods from various parts of the world
in which they have no navigation-laws, or no
protection in their favour; and that, in doing so, they
compete with the ships of other countries with complete
success. The Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire stated
that at Rio there was a greater number of British ships
than of the ships of any other country; and at Ham-
burgh, it appeared from the returns for 18-16, that there
were 995 British ships there, and only twelve Ainericaa
ships, and so with regard to other years. That would
not be a lair comparison between England and America,
but as regarded the trade of Rio and Hamburgh, it cer-
tainly is a satisfactory proof of the ability of this coun-
try to compete with America.—(Hear, hear.) There
are, therefore, these two indications, first with regard
to the building and navigation of ships, and next
with regard to the state of the actual commerce of
the world. But I take it that there is another and
a stronger reason for believing that our naval
strength will not be diminished by the repeal
of these laws, and that is the main consideration of the
character of the people of this country, and of the ex-
tent of capital which we command.—(Hear, hear.) I
can imagine a country having a great deal of capital
and commerce, but not being trained to marine pursuits,
allowing its commerce to go into the hands of another
nation, and I can also understand why a country having
no capital, but with a turn for naval affairs, should also
allow its commerce to get into the hands of another
country ; but when I find a nation at once possessing
great capital and great powers, and proverbial
for its habits in naval pursuits, I cannot doubt
but that such a nation must maintain a large commer-
cial navy.—(Hear, hear.) But what aro the (conse-
quences experienced from these laws ? It has been
said, and I think fairly, that the reciprocity !Act of
Mr. Huskisson abrogated a very great part of
the navigation-laws with regard to those countries with
which we have formed reciprocity treaties ; and, as
far as I have been able to form a judgment of the
results of these reciprocity treaties, I am pled to
think that the benefits of the navigation-laws were, in
point of fact, illusory, and that we were left nothing but
the bark of the oak—the trunk being entirely destroyed.
—(Hear.) Looking back 24 years hence I find that in
the 21 years between 1803 and 1823 the increase of our
commercial marine was from 339,000 in tons, and 12,000
in men, up to 1.446,000 in tons, and 67,890 in men,
showing a vast increase in the four years under the re-
ciprocity treaties, compared with the twenty years before
the reciprocity Act was passed. Such being the case
then, I can have no doubt—not the smallest—that if we
abrogate the principal part of the navigation-laws that
are remaining, our commercial marine will increase
further than it has already done. I cannot doubt but
that these restrictions being removed, we shall continue
that which I believe to be the foundation of a great and
powerful navy, namely, a strong commercial marine.—
(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") I quite admit, with my
Right Honourable Friend, that if there were the least
reason to suppose that our maritime strength would
be, not destroyed, but even diminished by a measure of
this nature, it wonld be unadvisable for this House to
adopt it; but my belief is the other way. Seeing that
every measure tending to relax and not to increase re-
strictions, has had a tendency to increase our commer-
cial marine instead of to injure it, I cannot but believe
that similar relaxations in the same direction must be
attended with a like tendency.—(Hear, hear.) An
Hon. Member who spoke during this debate mentioned
one of the securities for having our navy well manned,
as being destroyed by the proposal of my Right Hon.
Friend, because it was intended to do away with the ap-
prenticeship system in the mercantile marine. But I
believe that there never was anything more injurious or
unjust than putting a tax on the commercial marine, by
compelling the shipowner to have a certain number
of boys in bis ship whether he wanted them or not,
in order to furnish the navy with men, and I cannot
understand how those who profess to be the advo-
cates of the shipowners and of the shipping interests
of this country, should come forward in support of a
restriction naturally so glaring as that of obliging the
shipowners to have a number of apprentices and boys in
their service that did not suit their convenience or their
necessities.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon. Member for
Buckinghamshire, who spoke in this debate, made what
I consider was a statement unworthy of his position in
this House, when he laid such blame on certain officers
of the Board of Trade who had laid returns before this
House and the other House of Parliament, and who had
given evidence before the Committees of both Houses on
this subject.—(Hear, hear.) I think that when these
gentlemen have furnished returns asked for by Ministers
in the several departments, or by Members of this
House, exactly in the form required, and that they gave
in every way most intelligent evidence ; and when we
consider that they have no means of defence in this
House—(dear, hear)—l think that under such circum-
stances, to turn the indignation of the House upon them,
and to represent them as making interested statements,
is a course unworthy the position of the Hon. Gentleman.
—(Hear.) And then the excuse for them is, I think, a
very weak excuse, that these gentlemen of the Board
of Trade are biassed in favour of free-trade principles.
—(Bear.) With regard to this subject, upon which the
Hon. Gentleman makes an accusation against us, I think
he might as well say that the University of Cambridge
was to blame because they had a bias towards the
Newtonian theory, as that the officers of the Board of
Trade, because they prepared certain tables, had a bias
towards the principles of free trade.—(llcar, hear.)
I reckon those principles to be the principles of science,
established now upon sixty or seventy years' discussion
in the opinion of all enlightened men who have re-
flected upon the subject. The Hon. Gentleman, how-
ever, has accused us of acting with recklessness and ig-
norance, because we have proposed to go into Committee
upon the navigation-laws, in order to see if they cannot
be amended. Our proposition is (I will not now enter
upon a consideration;of the question whether it is the best)
to act as if the navigation-laws had not existed, as if the
ships of all nations should be received in our ports in the
same manner as British ships, with the exception of
the coasting trade; and to reserve power to the Sove-
reign by order in Council to impose conditions and re-
strictions upon those who impose conditions and restric-
tions upon us. I think the principle is a right one. I
am quite sure that so far from being a sign of that igno-
rance which the Honourable Gentleman laments in us,
it is, upon the other hand, a sign of ignorance in him,
and in those who act with him, that they still persist in
maintaining a theory which is contrary to all acknow-
ledged principles, contrary to all the science of the age,
contrary to all who have studied the subject in the
closet, and contrary to all the dicta laid down by Pitt
and Huskisson, and other enlightened statesmen.—
(Loud cheers.) I am convinced it is the duty of
this House to act according to the knowledge of
the times—(Hear, hear)—and I am convinced that
if they were to refuse to go into Committee,
if they were to keep up these restrictions be-
cause they existed in former times, this House would
properly deserve the phrase of recklessness and ignorance.
—(Hear, hear,) But I am, on the other hand, convinced
that by removing these restrictions you will draw closer
those bonds of amity with foreign nations which are
ready to act in friendship and amity with you, and give
a proof of the great destinies that await you.—(Cheers.)
The House divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. Herries's amendment 177
Against it 294
Majority in favour of the Goverment •-117

The House then went into Committee, and the raso •
lution was agreed to and reported, and the Bill was then
brought in, founded on the resolution.
ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.
Lord J. RUSSELL moved that the House at its rising
should adjourn to Thursday; the 15th instant.
Teed to.

The other orders of the day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at a Quarter to Three o'clock.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS

(From the Votes and Proceedings of the Hause of Commons.)
NAVIGATION AND REGFRIDAY, JUNE 2.
ULATION OF SHIPS AND

SEAMEN.
Order read for resuming adjourned Debate on Amendmen,
proposed to be made to Question (May 29)
" That Mr.
Speaker do now leave the Chair ;" and which Amendment
was to leave out from the word " That" to the end of the
Question, in order to add the words " it is essential to the
national interests of this Country to maintain the funda-
mental principles of the existing Navigation-laws; subject
to such modifications as may be best calculated to obviate.
any proved inconvenience to the Commerce of the United
Kingdom and its dependencies, without danger to our
maritime strength," instead thereof:—Question again pro-
posed, " That the words proposed to be left out stand part of
the Question." Debate resumed :—Question put. The
House divided :

MAJORITY-AYES, 294.
Abdy, T. N. Freestun, Colonel O'Brien, John
Acland, Sir T. D. Gibson, T. Id. , O'Connell, M. J.
Adair, Hugh E. Gladstone, W. E. O'Flaherty, Anthony
Adair, R. Shaft() Glyn, George Carr Ogle, S. C.
Adore, Viscount Grace, O. D. J. Ord, W.
Adderley, C. B. Graham, Sir J. Oswald, Alexander
Agllonby, H. A. Granger, T. C. Paget, Lord A.
Alcock, Thomas Greene, John Paget, Lord Clarence
Anson, Colonel Greene, Thomas Paget, Lord G.
Anson, Viscount Grenfell, C. Pascoe Palmerston, Viscount
Ansley, T. C. Grenfell, Charles W. Patten, J. W.
Armstrong, Sir A. Grey, Sir George Pearson, Charles
Armstrong, R. B. Grey, Ralph vr. Peel,;Sir Robert ,
Arundel, Earl of Grosvenor, Lord It. Perfect, Robert
Barkly, Henry Guest, Sir J. Philips, Sir G. R.
Baring, If. B. Haggai, F. It.' Pilkington, James
Baring, Sir F. T. Hall, Sir Benjamin Pugh. David
Barron, Sir 11. Hallyburton, Lord Puscy, P.
Bellew, R. M. Hamilton, Lord C. Raphael, Alexander
Berkeley, Captain Harmer, Sir J. Rawdon, Colonel
Berkeley, H. liastie, Aleiander Reynolds, Jouh
Bernal, Ralph Mastic, Archibald Ricardo, J. L.
Birch, Mr Thomas Hawes, B. Ricardo, Osman
Blackall, S. W. Hay, Lord John Rich, Henry
Blake, M. J. Ilayter, W. G. Robartes, T.J.
Bolling, William Headlam, T. E. Roche, E. B.
Bouverie, E. P. Heald, James Romilly, Sir John
Bowring, Dr. Ileneage, G. H. Russell, Lord John
Boyd, John Ileneage, E. Russell, Eduard S.
Boyle, Colonel Herbert, henry A. Russell, F. C.
Brand, Thomas Herbert, Sidney Rutherford, A.
Bright, John Hervey, Lord A. Salem., Colonel
Brotherton, Joseph Heywood, James Sanders, George
Brown, W. 'Lindley, Charles Sebolefleld,iWilliam
Bruce, Lord E. Hobhouse, Sir John Scrope, G. P.
Bulkeley, Sir R. E. ILobhouse, T. B. Seymour, Lord
Buller, Charles Hodges, T. L. Shell, R. L.
Sunbury, E. H. Hodges, T. Twisden Shelburne, Earl of
Burke, Sir T. J. Hogg, Sir J. W. Sheridan, R. B.
Buxton, Sir E. Reiland, Rolijort Simeon, John
Callaghan, D. Hope, Sir .1. Smith, R. V.
Campbell, W. F. Hope, IL T. Smith, John A.
Cardwell, Edward Hope, Alexander Smith, M. Tacker
Carew,ilV. P. Horaman, Edward Smythe, G.
Carter, J. B. Howard, C. W. Somerville. Sir W.
Caulfield, Colonel Howard, E. G. Spearman, H. J.
Cavendish, C. C. Howard, Sir R. Stansfield, W. R.
Cavendish, G. H. Hume, Joseph Stanton, W.:11.
Chaplin, W. J. Jervis, Sir John Staunton, Sir G.
Charteris, Francis Keating, Robert Stuart, Lord I).
Childers, J. W. Keogh, William Stuart, Lord J.
Clay, James] Keppel, iGeorge T. Sullivan, Michael
Clerk Sir George Ker, Rickard Sutton, li. M.
Clifford, Henry M. Kershaw, James Talbot, J. H.
Cobden, R. Kildare, Marquis Talfourd, Sergeant
Cochrane, A. King, Peter John Taucred, H. W.
Cocks, T. S. Labouchere, Henry Tenison, E. K.
Coke, E. K. Langston, J. H. Tennent, , . J.
Colebrooke, Sir T. Lascelles, W. S. Thesiger, Sir F.
Conyngham, Lord A. Lemon, Sir C. Thicknesse, Ralph
Corbally, M. E. Lewis, Sir T. Thompson, Colonel
Courtenay, Lord Lewis, George C: Thompson, George
Cowan, Charles Lincoln, Earl of Thornely, Thomas
Cowper, W. F. Lindsay, Colonel Towneley, John
Craig, W. G. Littleton, E. R. Towneley, Charles
Crawford, W. S. Loch, James Townley, It. G.
Currie, Henry Locke, Joseph Traill, George
Currie, Raikes Lockhart, A. E. Tufnell, H.
Dalrymple, Captain Lushington, C. Turner, Edmund
Davie, Sir Henry IPCulla,gh, W. T. Tenser, G. J.
Denison, J. ,E. DPGregor, Joins_ Tynte, Colonel
D'Eyncourt, T. Maher, N.
_.... Vane, Lord H.
Divett, E. 3lalson, O'Gorman Verney, Sir 11.
Douglas, Sir C. Maitland, Thomas Villiers, Viscount
Drummond, Home Mangles, R. D. Villiers, Charles
Duncan, Viscount Marshall, William Vivian, J. H.
Duncan, George Martin, ,T. Wakley, T.
Dundas, Admiral Martin, C. W. Wall, C. B.
East, Sir J. B. Martin, S. Walter, John
Ebrington, Lord Matheson, A. Ward, 11. G.
Ellice, Edward Matheson, James Watkins, Colonel
Ellice, E., jun. Matheson, Colonel Wellesley, Lord C,
Elliot, J. E. Mamie, Fox Westenra, John C.
Enfield, Lord Molgund, Viscount IVesthead, J. P.
Estcourt, J. B. B. Milner, W. 111. Whitmore, T. C.
Evans, John Milnes, R. Moncktou Willcox, Brodie
Evans, William Milton, Viscount Williams, John
Ewart, William Mitchell, A. T. Wilson, James
Fagan, William Montt, George Wilson; Matthew
Fergus, John Molesworth, Sir W. Wood, Sir Charles
Fitzpatrick, d W. Monsen, William Wood, W. P.
Fitzrey, Henry Morgan, 11. K. G. Wortley, J. S.
Fitzwilliam, G. W. Morpeth, Viscount Wrightson, N.B.
Foley, John H. Morison, Sir W. Wyid, James
Fordyce, A. D. Morris, David Wyvill, Marmaduko
Forster, Matthew Mostyn, E. M. L. Young, Sir John
Fortescue, Chichester Mowatt, Francis TELLERS.
Fortescue, J. W. Norreys, Lord Hill, Lord Marcus
Fox, W. J. Nugent, Sir Percy Parker, John

MINORITY-NOES, 177.

. -
Alford, Viscount Fellowes, E. Neeld, Joseph
Archdall, Captain Floyer, John Newport, Viscount
Arkwright, G. Forbes, Win. Noel, G. J.
Bagot, Hon.W. Forester, G. C. Ossulton, Lord;
Bailey, Joseph Fox, S. L. Packs, C. W.
Bailey, J., jun. Fuller, A. E. Palmer, Roundel!
Baillie, 11. J. Galway, Viscount Pattison, J.
Babies, M. T. Goddard, A. L. Pigot, Sir Robert
Baldoek, E. H. Gordon, Admiral Plowden, W. 11.
' Bankes, G. Gore, W. 0. Powell, Colonel
Baring, Thomas Goring, Charles Powlett, Lord W.
Barrington, Viscount Granby, Marquis of Prime, Richard
Bateson, T. ' Grogan, E. Reid, Colonel
Beubow, John Gwyn, Howel Renton, John C.
Benoit, J. Male, R. B. Eepton, G. W.
Bennet, Philip Belford, Sir Henry Richards, Richard
Bentinck, Lord G. Hall, Colonel Robinson. George
Bentiuck, Lord H. Halsey, T.P. Rolleston, Colonel
Bernard, Viscount Hamilton, J. 11. Rufford, Francis
Blackstone,SW. S. Harris, Hon. Capt. Rushout, Captain
Boldero, Henry Heathcote, G. J. Sadlcir, John
Bourke, Richard S. Henley, J. W. Scott, F.
Bowles, Admiral Herries, J. C.
Brackley, Visc.unt Hildyard, R. C. Seynier, 11. K.
Bramston, T. W. Hildyard, T.JI. T. Shirley. H. J.
Bremridge, Richard Hill, Lord E. Sibthorp, Colonel
Brisco, M. Hood, Sir A. Smyth, J. G.
Broadley, Henry Hothain, Lord Susollett, A.
Brooke, Lord Hudson, George s
Bruce, C. L. Ilumphery, Ald. Sea ham,
Somerset,
Viscount
t ,
Captain
Sotheron, T. 11. S.
Buck, L. W. Ingestre, Visct. Spooner, Richard
Buller, Sir J. Y. Inglis, Sir E. ii. Stafford, Augustus
Bunbury, William Johnstone, Sir J. Stanley, B.
Burghley, Lord Jolliffe, Sir WG. Stephenson, Robert
Burrell, Sir C. Jones, Captain Stuart, Henry
Burroughes, 11. Kerrison, Sir E. Stuart, J.
Cabbell, B. B. Kuightley, Sir C. Talbot, C. R.
Cayley, Edward S. Knox, Colonel Taylor, Thomas E.
Chichester, Lord J. Lacy, H. C. Thompson, Alderma
Christopher, It. Lascelles, E. Thornhill, G.
Clive, Henry B. Law, Hon. E. C.
Tollemache, John
Cole, H. A. Lennox, Lord G. H. Trollops, Sir J.
Coles, Henry B. Leslie, C. P. Tyrrell, Sir J. T.
Cubittt, William Lockhart, W. Verner, Sir W.
Curteis, H. M. Lygou, General Vesey, Hon. T.
Davies, D. A. S. Mackenzie, W. F. Villiers, F. W.
Decdes, W. Mandeville, Viscount Vivian, J. E.
Dick, Quintin Mannors,•Lord G. Vyse, It. H.
Disraeli, B. Westerman, John Waddington, David
lima, J. S. W. Mannseli, T. P. Waddington, 11. S.
Duke, Sir J. Maxwell, J. P. Walpole, Spencer
Duncombe, A. lieux, Sir Henry Walsh, Sir J.
Duncombe, 0. Miles, I'. W. S. Williams, T. P.
Dundas, G. Miles, W. Williamson, Sir H.
Dunne, F. I'. Moore, George H. Wodehouse,E.
Du Pre, C. G. Morgan, O. Worcester, Marquis
Edwards, Henry mulgrave, Earl Wynn, Sir W.
Emlyn, Viscount Mullings, J. R. TELLERS.
Farnham, E. B. Kure, Colonel Beresford, William
Farrer, James Neeld, John Newdegate, N.

NATIONAL LAND SCHEME.
The Select Committee appointed to inquire into the
merits of the National Land Scheme met yesterday
in Committee-Room, No. 21, House of Commons. Mr.
William Hayter, in the chair. The other. Mem-
bers of the Committee were Sir Benjamin Hall, Mr. G.
Thompson, Mr. Scholefield, ILir. Feargus O'Connor, and
Mr. Monsell.

Mr. Chinnery was called and:examined. ID said the
number of allures held by the persons who signed the
deed was 25,393. The deed was signed by 7,566 per-
sons, and the complete registration of the emnl'anY was
effected in February last. Mr. Feargus O'Connor told
him first of all to register the society under the
Friendly Societies' Act; and if he should not succeed, to
register it as a joint-stock company. Mr. O'Connor
had never said it was not his intention to register. Wit-
ness made Mr. Robert, the solicitor, acquainted from
time to time with the progress which he had made in
effecting the registration. Mr. Roberts's name was in.
serted in the deed of settlement as treasurer of the com-
pany. Did not know that every person who became a
shareholder signed the rules of the National Land
Company. Knew nothing of Mr. Roberts's conduct as
treasurer in carrying out the provisions of the deed. The
gentlemen named as truitees in the deed were Thomas
Esq.,
Slingsby Duncornbe, Esq., John Sewell, and
Ernest Jones, Esq.; but none of the property bough t
with the money of the company had been conveyed to
those gentlemen. It might have been conveyed to them
just as well as to Mr. O'Connor if' they had been named
for that purpose. No land whatever which had been
purchased with the company's money was conveyed to
any one except Mr. O'Connor. The first purchase
of land was made in March, 1846, and consisted of one
hundred and three acres, called the llerringsgate Estate.
The purchase-money amounted to 2,344/ The next
purchase made was of land, at Lowbank, in Worcester-
shire, in October, 1816. It consisted of 470 acres, and
the cost for the freehold was 8,560/, which was paid by
Mr. O'Connor in hard cash, in, the presence of wit-
ness. Snigsend and Mot Farm was the next land
purchased by the company. There were 268 acres,
and the amount of purchase-money was 12,2001. Another
purchase was of land at Minster Lovel, in Oxfordshire,
consisting of 297 acres, at the cost of 10,8781 ; 280
acres :were also purchased, called Dodsford, Hold-
fordswell, for 10,350/, which included timber,
and the estate was unencumbered. They were
at present completing the purchase of an estate
called Maythorn for 15,050/, exclusive of the
timber upon it. The total amount of money actually
invested in land, in the way mentioned, amounted to
44,332/. Upon the last purchase a deposit 'had
been paid of 1,5001. No part whatever of the
land so purchased had been sold to any person.
Mr. O'Connor was the only proprietor of the
land and labour bank, with was connected with the
National Land Company, and the depositors in the bank
had nu legal claim upon the land which had been pur-
chased. Both the establishments were hold under one
roof, and that fact might be calculated to mislead per-
sons, and induce them to believe that they wore one and
the same concern. There were no directors, treasurers,
solicitors, or other officers connected with the bank, and
it was solely under the management of Mr. O'Connor.
The whole expense connected with the preparations and
execution of the deed was 2,1761, which included the
cost of endeavouring to enrol the society in the first in-
stance. That was the amount of Mr. Roberts's bill. 1
Cross-examined by Mr. O'CONNOR—It had been ar-
ranged that the directors of the Land Company should
also be joint direetors of the Land and Labour Bank, but it
was found impracticable to carry out that arrangement.

The matter had been submitted to a barrister, and he was
of opinion that a bank could not be established in con-
nexion with the land scheme. He understood that the
directors were liable to reelection. Did not think that
the company could have been managed more econo-
mically than it had been. As to both the undertakings
being under the same roof, the witness, in answer to a
question of Mr. O'Connor, said he was aware that the
Houses of Lords and Commons were under one roof,
and believed there was very little communication be-
tween them. Had heard that Mr. O'Connor had offered
to put all the funds of the company into the hands of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and allow him to nomi-
nate trustees.
By the CHAIRMAN—AIthough Mr. O'Connor said he
wished to divest himself of the property, he was not
aware that he had taken any steps for the purpose of
doing so.
Sir BENJAIIIN HALL said, in reference to an observa-
tion made by Mr. O'Connor in the course of the exami-
nation, that Lord Ashley had told him that he would
not consent to be connected with the Land Company,
either directly or indirectly.
Mr. Philip M‘Grath, financial secretary of the Na-
tional Land Company, was then called and examined—
He said the London and Joint Stock Bank were the
bankers of the company. The balance-sheets of the
company were produced at the meetings of the share-
holders. He was also a director of the company,
and had been so since April. Witness handed in a
balance sheet, showing that up to :the 25th March last
the total receipts were 94,184/. 6s. lid., and the expendi-
ture 4,378/. 14s. 9d., leaving a balance of 89,8051. 10s. 2d.,
which consisted of cash in hand, houses, and land. He
had himself no part of that balance in band, as he paid
over every week to Mr. M'Gowan, printer and publisher
of Great Windmill-street, all the balance he had in his
possession as financial secretary. Mr. M‘Gowan was
an agent of Mr. O'Connor, and officially he did not know
what became of the money after he paid it into his
hands.

COMMITTEE-Mr. M‘Gowan is the printer and
publisher of the Northern Star.
Witness—The rules of the National Land Company
had not been strictly obeyed. The auditors were Mr.
Cuffay and Mr. James Knight.
Sir B. HALL—I see an item in one of the books of
751. 123. Bd. set forth as being paid to the Convention
on the 27th of April. Am I to understand that this
Convention is one of the objects of the association?—No.
Then was that sum paid to the Convention? Wit-
ness—lt was paid to the order of Mr. O'Connor, and
will be refunded by him; but, as far as my information
as financial secretary goes, that sum has not been re-
paid. Some of the delegates at that Convention were
deficient in funds to carry them to their homes, and Mr.
O'Connor agreed to supply them with money. There were
three lecturers employed for some time at the rate of 21.
a week, for the purpose of making known the objects of
the company. There was no rule of the society which
gave power to the directors to expend money either in
assisting the Convention or in keeping lecturers.
The witness was next examined by Mr. O'Connor and
other members of the Committee.
At four o'clock the Committee adjourned.

POLICE INTELLIGENCE.
WORSHIP-STREET.
TEE VICTIMS OF A CHARTIST MOB.—T. and F.
Woodward, the young men who were so brutally mal-
treated by a portion of the Chartist mob on Sunday
last, under the false assumption that they were special
constables, and the facts of whose case appeared in our
Wednesday's impression, applied to Mr. Arnold for
some pecuniary assistance from the poor-box.
It appeared from their statement that, in consequence
of the serious injuries they had sustained on the occa-
sion referred to, and from the effects of which both of
them were still suffering, they were incapacitated from
pursuing their ordinary avocations, and ,having been
robbed by the rabble of every farthing they possessed,
were reduced in consequence to a state of destitution.
Ono of the brothers, a printer, whose eyes were fright-
fully swollen and discoloured, and his person covered
with bruises, intimated that he had made a painful
effort two days previously to resume his employ-
ment at the office of iMr. Nicholls, in Hoxton-square,
where ho had been some time engaged, but
was almost immediately seized with such acute
pains and throbbings in the head, accompanied
by giddiness and dimness of sight, that he was
compelled to relinquish the attempt. The other appli-
cant, a working silversmith, stated that his position was
even more hopeless than that of his brother as he was
so terribly disfigured that he could not offer himself for
employment, if he were even in a condition to accept it,
which was so far from being the case, that on calling
that morning upon is dentist, who had humanely offered
to supply him with artificial teeth in the place of those
which had been knocked out by the mob, he was in-
formed by that gentleman, after an examination of his
mouth, that he had sustained a fracture of the jaw,
which would necessarily preclude the operation for seine
weeks, and how to subsist in the meantime he was at a
loss to conceive, as he was wholly without means or a
friend to assist him.

Mr. Henley, the chief usher, who had rescued one of
the young men, at great personal: risk, after ho had been
besieged by the mob for nearly two hours in a house
where he had fled for refuge, said he had been at some
pains to ascertain the correctness of their representa-
tions, and was enabled thereby fully to substantiate
them.

Mr. ARNOLD said that it certainly appeared a case de-
serving commiseration, but regretted that the funds at
his disposal would not enable him to afford more than
I us. for their immediate wants, which the applicants re-
ceived with a grateful acknowledgment.
WANDS WORTH.
Henry Caswell, a butcher in the Borough-road, South-
wark, was charged before Mr. Beadon with stealing an
ewe sheep, the property of some person unknown, from
off Clapham-common.
In consequence of several butchers at Clapham having
recently lost sheep which they had turned on the Com-
mon, and complained to the police, Sergeant Emmer-
son, 16 V, two constables were ;ordered to keep watch
in plain clothes. On Tuesday night, between ten and
eleven o'olock, Police-constable Collins, 108 V, saw a
cart drive past a small flock of sheep; it returned again
in a few minutes, and the prisoner alighting, instantly
caught hold of a sheep, tied its hind legs together, and
threw it into his cart. He had mounted, and was going
to drive off, when Collins immediately caught
hold of the horse's head and told the prisoner to
step. The latter threw the sheep out of the fore part
of his cart, where the sergeant secured it. The
prisoner then struck Collins and the other constable
such desperate blows with the butt-end of his whip, that
they were compelled, in self-defence, to strike him with
their staves (the prisoner's heid was bandaged up and
he was covared with blood), and it was not until a most
determined resistance had been persevered in by the
prisoner that he was taken. A cord was found in the
prisoner's pocket similar to the one round the sheep's
hind legs. _ _

wouldet only whobe necessary
wasessa the
yte
owner ofto
remandthe
this sheep,pEnime
rinerr
butn said
if possible it
to
easeerteio a
to connect the pri-
soner with other cases of sheep-stealing. Within a very
short space of time Mr. Neale, of Clapham, had lost
three sheep off the Common, Mr. Arnold two, and Mr.
Sergeant
Terry one.
Mr. BEADON said he would remand the case, but
would hear anything the prisoner had to say.
The prisoner said he went out for a ride and to collect
in some money, and as he was returning home, there
were a lot of sheep lying in the road, and he ran over
this one; he thought it a pity the sheep should die, and
believing its back to be broken, he tied its legs that it
might be quiet, and he intended to take it to Clapham
and find out what butcher it belonged to, when as he
was driving off, the policemen rushed out on him, and
hit him on the head with their truncheons. He asked
for mercy, but they showed him none. He thought it
was very wrong for them to take him up, and lock him
up all night..
Sergeant Emmerson said there was nothing the matter
with the sheep, they had brought it and the horse and
cart to the Court.
Tne father of the prisoner asked for the horse and
cart to be given into his keeping.
Inspector Husain raid it was most important that the
horse and cart should nut go out of the possession of the
police.

- Mr. BEADON remanded the prisoner, and refused to
accept any amount of bail.

THE CHARTIST DISTURBANCES.
DANGEROUS ORGANIZATION FOR MONDAY NEXT.--
Notwithstanding the intention of the Government to put
down all processions or open air meetings which are cal-
culated to cause terror and alarm in the metropolis, the
Chartists last night gave notice that it was their inten-
tion to meet in a body on Monday next, at Bishop Bon-
ner's- fields. Circulars were sent by the Executive to the
secretaries of the Chartist body, and they have deter-
mined, in spite of all resistance on the part of the au-
thorities, to meet at half-past two o'clock, and conclude
by six o'clock, if possible.
A few days since an address was sent by the Chartists
to Sir George Grey to be laid before her Majesty, the
receipt of which was acknowledged by the Home Secre-
tary, and the Right Hon. Baronet stated that he had
laid the document before the Queen.
Dr. M'Douall, to whom the answer was sent, has since
seat a very impertinent letter to Sir George Grey, in
which he stated that he was instructed to inquire whe-
ther her Majesty was graciously pleased to receive that
address—whether any command had been issued con-
cerning it, and whether it was the intention of the Mi-
nisters to advise the Queen to consider the same, with a
view of complying with the prayer of the address. Let-
ters have also been sent to Lord John Russell, the Prime
Minister, by the Chartist body. In one they state that
his Lordship has thrown down the gauntlet, and they
had accepted the challenge. They intended, at all
hazards, to hold peaceful demonstrations. They wished
to ascertain his Lordship's intentions, they had reason
to do so, they stated, after the experience the people had
had in this metropolis of the murderous acts of the
po
letltiecres. h
alrte isn
ente ebdeleens sa
lttoogs
et at
ht ee
rt
rhealti s thheed
bayn stwherees
htaorttihset
executive.

The organizing of the Chartist members, which has
been so long talked about, has most signally failed on
the Surrey side of the water. In the extensive parish of
Lambeth not more than 130 persons have, up to last
night, enrolled themselves. It is therefore very ques-
tionable whether one tithe of the 200,000 men announced
to walk in procession and upset the present Govern-
ment will meet on Monday next.
A meeting, of a most disgraceful character, took place
last night, in the South-London Chartist Hall, Webber-
street, Blackfriars-road. After an address from the
chairman, a number of persons surrounded another
party, who entered the room apparently out of curiosity,
when the rabble gave vent to the most violent epithets.
One fellow cried out, " Here is a Government spy."
Another said, " Then turn him out." The chairman

here interposed, and said he felt highly honoured
that he had a Government spy present.
—(Cries of " Oh!" and "No, no.") Another fellow spoke
to the party in question, and inquired his name; and
upon being told, was answered that it was a lie, he know
better, he knew perfectly well who he was, he was the
scoundrel who had given evidence against some of their
brave patriots at Bow-street.—(Cries of "Then break
his neck, turn him down stairs., kill the The
chairman having obtained silence, the speaker was again
addressing the meeting, when another howl was set up,
"Turn the Government spies out, throw them down
stairs." The party not altogether liking the company
he had got into, was in the act of departing, when some
fellows cried out at the top of their voices, " He is going."
They had no sooner done so, than a number of other
persons cried out, "Don't let him, pin him, stab him,
or break his neck." In the midst of the confusion the
party made off; accompanied by a friend. Mr. Inspector
Rogers, of the L division, on being made acquainted
with the violent character of the parties composing the
meeting, had the whole of the reserve men belonging to
that division placed on duty in case their services should
be required.

The only meeting announced to take place on Mon-
day by the Chartists is in Bonner's Fields; but, from
private information, the Government is in possession of
the fact that monster meetings aro to take place at
Croydon and other parts. Every provision has been
made by the authorities to meet any emergency, either
in the metropolis or suburbs; and we can confidently
assert that it any procession is attempted in the metro-
litan district, the most stringent measures will be adopted
to break it up.
Information has been sent, to the effect that it is the
intention of the mob to liberate all the prisoners taken
in connexion with the Chartist disturbances. If such
was attempted, it must have as great a failure as any
of their previous attempts. Last night 800 soldiers
were marched into the Penitentiary, and are there to
remain until after Monday, in case any attack should be
made on that prison. The whole of the turnkeys and
wardens were at the same time placed under arms,
and similar precautions have been adopted at all the
other prisons.
Mr. Feargus O'Connor, M.P., last night announced
that after the busy day of Monday next, he should leave
London by mail train for Birmingham, in order to be in
good time for Sheffield on Tuesday, where a grand pro-
cession is to take place. He also stated that he had
given directions for employing the best counsel for Ernest
Jones, &c., and he requested that every man would sond
a post-office order directed to him, which will be placed
to the defence fund.
The several districts where riotous meeting have been
held (except Lambeth) were perfectly quiet last night at
half-past ten o'clock.
MR

FEARGUS O'CONNOR AND
THE CHARTIST LEADERS.
Yesterday, Mr. F. O'Connor, M.P., waited on Mr.
Jardine, the sitting magistrate at Bow-street Police-
court, to ascertain if he could not be admitted as one of
the sureties for Mr. ,Ernest Jones, the Chartist leader,
who has been committed for trial, without being obliged
to remain in town twenty-four hours, the time specified
to give the Government authorities the required notices
for that purpose. Ile considered that such a time was
named by the Court to ascertain the respectability of
the party offering himself, and such being the case, he
presumed there could be no objection to accept of his
recognizances without further delay, as he obliged
to leave town on important business ; still, if sWfs
uch an
order was imperative, he would remain, however incon-
venient it might be, that he might be accepted as one of
the sureties.
Mr. Jardine said lie was not the magistrate' who
heard the charges against any of the persons alluded to,
and consequently could not be aware of any order that
had been made upon the subject ; but he concluded that
the notice should be given to the Solicitor of the Trea-
sury, by whom the prosecution was conducted, and who
would sanction the bail to be accepted.
Mr. O'Connor said that he had sent in his name at the
solicitor's office on Thursday evening, but the office hap-
pened to be closed, and he could obtain no information to
his inquiries, and he would repeat his visit if there was a
prospect of success.

Mr. Jardine thought there was every probability.
Mr. O'Brien, the second clerk, said that four names
had been sent into the solicitor's office for selection.
Mr. O'Connor said he would at once proceed there;
and, having left in a cab for that purpose, on his return
the magistrate had gone, it being then after five o'clock;
but it was understood that he had been accepted as one
of the sureties.

THE SPECIALS.—On entering the court the llon.
Member was asked if he wished to be sworn in as a
special constable—there being a vast quantity sworn in
during the day—and he replied, "God forbid!"

FROM THE LONDON GAZETTE
OF FRIDAY.
CROWN-OFFICE, JUNE 9, 1848.
MEMBER RETURNED TO SERVE IN THIS PRESENT
PARLIAMENT.
County of Chester (Northern Division)—George Corn-
wall Legh, of High Legh, in the said county, Esq., in
the room of the Light Hon. Edward John Stanley, now
Baron Eddisbury.
TREASURY-CHAMBERS, WHITEHALL, JUNE G.
The Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury
have been pleased to appoint Richard Madox Bromley,
Esq., to be Secretary to the Commissioners for Auditing
the Public Accounts, vice John Lewis Mallet, Esq.,
retired.

WAR-OFFICE, JUNE 9.
2d Dragoons—Captain Samuel Tooscy Williams, from
47th Foot, to be Captain, vice Grant, who exchanges,
June 9.

3d Light Dragoons—Lieutenant James Cowell to
by
be Captain, by purchase, vice Martin, wi
Cornet George Thomas Gough to be Lieutenant, E
rotirr:..n ;
purchase, vice Cowell, June 9; Lieutenant GeorgeE.
ICauntze to be Adjutant, vice Sullivan, who resigns the
Adjutancy only, March 30.
2d Foot—John Charles Weir, Gent., to be Ensign, by
purchase, vice Mathias, promoted, June 9. l2th Foot—Lieut. Samuel Fairtlough, from half-pay
63d Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Storey, promoted,
June 9.
17th Foot—Ensign William Pollard, from 57th Foot,
to be Ensign, vice Pilmer, who exchanges, June 9.
27th Foot—Lieutenant Francis William Johnstone to
be Captain, by purchase, vice Cole, who retires; Ensign
Edward Barnes to be Lieutenant, by purchase, vice
Johnstone; William Douglas Phelips, Gent., to be En-
sign, by purchase, vice Barnes, June 9.
47th Foot—Captain Walter Colquhoun G-rant, from
2d Dragoons, to be Captain, vice Williams, who ex-
changes, June 9.
57th Foot—Ensign Richard Pilmer, from 17th Foot,
to be Ensign, vice Pollard, who exchanges, June 9.
68th Foot—Lieutenant Thomas de Courcy Hamilton,
from 90th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Stephouson, who
exchanges, June 9.
90th Foot—Lieutenant William George St evenson,
from 68th Foot, to be Lieutenant, vice Hamilt on, who
exchanges, June 9.
95th Foot—Lieutenant George Cornwall to be Cap-
tain, without purchase, vice David Dickson, who re-
tires upon full pay; Ensign Henry Foster to lie Lieu-
tenant, vice Cornwall; Gentleman Cadet John. Coltman
Davenport, from Royal Military College, to be. Ensign,
vice Foster, June 9.
Rifle Brigade—Lieutenant Julius Richard Glyn to be
Captain, by purchase, vice the Hon. J. A. Keane, who
retires; Second Lieutenant Arthur William Godfrey to
bo First Lieutenant, by purchase, vice Glyn; Charles
William Doherty, Gent., to be Second Lieutent ,nt, by
purchase, vice Godfrey; Second Lieutenant VI Tilliam
Bagenall Brewster, to be Adjutant, vice Glyn, pro-
moted, June 9.
Unattached—Lieutenant Charles Robert Store:, 7, from
12th Foot, to be Captain, without purchase, Jima! 9.
MENORANDUAL—The Christian names of I,7aptaia
Mitchell, on half-pay Unattached, are Thomas lenry.
The Christian names of Ensign Gosling, of tl.l 49th
Foot, are Fanshawo
ERRATUM in the Gazette of the 6th inst.—Roy; ii'. Regi-
ment of Artillery.—The date of the promotion c,f Cap-
tain Ellis, Second Captain Wragge, and First Lie t tenant
Farmer, should be 30th of May, instead of 13th f May.
Commissions by the Lord-Lieutenant of Dorseta hire.
tenants Ca Gerard Sturt, Esq., ALP., to be Deputy Lieu-
tenant, June 5. ;Captain Henry Periu Steele to be Deputy Lieu-
Commission by the Lord-Lieutenant of Kincardin eshire.
105th Regiment of North British Militia—Davi d Wil-
liam Balfour Ogilvy, Esq., to be Captain, May 26.
BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED.
Stephen Davis and Adolphus Troeger, furriers, York.
BANKRUPTS.
Robert Wilson, surgeon, Slough, Buckinghan tshire.
to surrender June 17, at two, and July 29, at a Leven,
at the Court of Bankruptcy. Follett, official ass ignee,
Sambrook-court, Basinghall-street; Smith, Bedford i-row;
Bowles, Windsor.
George Payne, wholesale clothier, Minories, Ji me 21,
at twelve, and July 21, at eleven, at the Court o f Bank-
ruptcy. Stansfeld
wood, , official assignee; Shield an it Har-
William
Queen-street, Cheapside.
16, at two, and July
Bignell, tailor, Codicote, Hertfordshi re, June
18, at twelve, at the Court a Bank-
ruptcy. Groom, official assignee, Abchurch-lan e,a Lem-
rd-street ; Taylor, Guildhall-chambers, Bas inghall-
street.

Samuel Carroll, broker, Mincing-lane, City, J 2
17
at two, and July 24, at twelve, at the Court of ;Ban ruptcy. Green, official assignee, Aldermanbury;, Kirk-
man, Laurence Yountney-lane. ne
Ik7,
William Henry llyde, printer, Newcastle-under ;Lyme,
June 20, and July Is, at eleven, at the Birmingh; vat Dis-
trict Court. Whitmore, official assignee, Birmi ugham;
Harding, Newcastle-under-Lyme.
William Sutcliffe, worsted stuff manufacturer , Brad-
ford, Yorkshire, Juno 23 and August 4, at ten, at the
Leeds District Court. Freeman, official assignee, Leeds;
Gregory and Sons, Clement's Inn ; Pickup, Bra I ford ;
Bond and Barwick, Leeds.
John Redman, coach proprietor, Liverpool, Ju 1 to 26
and July 14, at eleven, at the Liverpool District a )urt.
Morgan, official assignee, Liverpool ; Vincent, Temi )1e ;
Minshull, Liverpool.
Edwin Phillips, baker, Shrewsbury, June 17, and
July 15, at half-past ten, at the Birmingham Dis trict
Court. Val past
official assignee, Birmingham; '..4.'4 :ere,
Shrewsbury; Reece, Birmingham,
Sarah Whitehouse, Edwin Whitehouse, and ~ N .Ifred
Whitehouse, tin plate manufacturers, Newland, C4l, ) uces-
tershire, June 20, at twelve, and July 21, at elev, t. 1, at
the Bristol District Court. Hutton, official assi? nee,
Bristol; Philpotts, Blackfriars.
(Dividends, &c., in our next.)
PRICE OF SUGAR.
The average price of Brown or Muscovado Sugar, comp
uteri
from the returns made in the week ending Juni : 6,
1848, is 255. 2%d. per cwt.

Dispatches were received yesterday at the Colon ial-
office, from the Governor of the Cape of Good 119 IN