The Sun.
London, England, 1848-07-31 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July 29.
THE STATE OF IRELAND - ADJOURNED

DEBATE.
(Continued from our Third Edition of Saturday.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE—He did not think it necessary
to allude in detail to any of the propositions which had
been made in the course of the debate for the modifica-
tion of the Act of Union, because he believed those
propositions to be visionary and impracticable, but he
felt himself called upon to make some reference to the
manner in which various Hon. Members had proposed
to deal with the Church Establishment in Ireland. The
Hon. Member for Middlesex (Mr. Osborne) had spoken
of that establishment as of a nuisance, and had declared
his willingness to go to the hustings on the question of
its abolition. He (Mr. Newdegate) was one of that
Honourable Member's constituents, and he could assure
the Honourable Gentleman that he would find it a some-
what more troublesome matter than he seemed to ap-
prehend to go to the hustings on any such question. He
for one felt it to be his duty solemnly and emphatically
to protest against the language which had been used
with reference to the Irish Church by the Members of
her Majesty's 'Government in the course of that debate.
The Right Hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Home
Department was cautious and circumspect in his selec-
tion of language when speaking on this question, but
nevertheless it was quite evident that what be meant and
intended was the suppression of the Irish Church.
Sir G. GREY explained. What he had said was
simply this, that he' concurred with the Hon. Member
for Limerick (Mr. Monsell) in hoping that the day was
not distant when it might be possible to propose some
measure which would put an end to the evil of having
the clergy of the great majority of the people depending
for their maintenance on sources such as those to which
the Hon. Member for Middletex referred.—(Hear.)
Mr. NEWDEGATE, amid vehement cries of " Di-
vide," continued to observe that although the members
of her Majesty's Government had treated the Church of
Ireland as the great grievance of Ireland, there were in.
dependent Irish Members in that House, even of the
Roman Catholic persuasion, who regarded it in a totally
different light. The Hon. Member for Longford had
acknowledged the utility of the Irish Church, and paid
a handsome tribute of praise to the piety, learning, and
acquirements of the Irish clergy ; and the Hon. Member
for Youghal, who was, as every one knew, an ardent
Roman Catholic, spoke in a similar strain, and declared
that he did not believe that the Irish Church was re-
garded as a grievance even by the Catholics of Ireland.
--(Shouts of " Divide, divide," and general indications
of impatience.) Let it go to the world that Irish Mem-
bers had so spoken of it, and that when an English
Member got up to defend it from the attack of another
English Member, the House endeavoured to put him
down by the force of clamour,—(Divide, divide.) The
Church was the key-stone of that arch which united the
two countries.—(Tremendous shouts of " Divide.") Ile
should be sorry to move the adjournment of the House,
but ho feared he should have to do so. Why should any
Member of that House, be he Minister or not, presume
to speak of the Irish Church as the upas tree of Parlia-
ment?—(Derisive cheers.) It was a blessing to Ireland,
and it had the strongest claims on the reverential regard
of the great majority of the English people.—(Uproar.)
To the majority of the English people he was content to
leave the issue.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord JOHN hUSSELL—I fear that the Hon. Mem-
ber has mistaken the members of the Government, and
me in particular, on a point on which it is very desirable
that we should not be misunderstood. He says that the
members of the Government have represented the Irish
Established Church as'a grievance, and went on to repre-
sent that we had even attacked the conduct of the clergy
of that Church.

Mr. NEWDEG ATE—Oh, no, I did not say so.
Lord J. RUSSELL—WeII, I am happy to find that I
misunderstood the llonotirable Member. With respect
to the conduct of the clergy, I havo only to offer unaf-
fectedly the tribute of my admiration to their virtues
and acquirements. Nor did I ever say that I looked
upon the Established Church as a grievance. What I
said was that I thought the endowment of the clergy
of the minority of the people, while there was no endow-
ment for the clergy of the majority, was a great subject
of complaint amongst the people of Ireland.—(Hear,
hear.) To this sentiment I have repeatedly given ut-
terance, and I adhere to it now as firmly as ever.—

(Hear, hear.) In conclusion, I have only to remark,
that I. consented that this debate should be adjourned
until this day in order that the Irish Members might
have an opportunity of speaking, and I trust that they
will aid me in carrying out tne understanding with
which we originated the debate, by assenting to a divi-
sion with as little delay as possible.
Mr. REYNOLDS rose amid general calls for a divi-
sion. He wished to correct an error into which the Hon.
Member for the county of Warwick had fallen. That
gentleman had talked of the Hon. Member for Longford
(Mr. R. M. Fox) as though he were a Catholic Member,
and quoted from him accordingly. It was right, how-
ever, that the Honourable Member for Warwick should
know that the Honourable Member for Longford, so far
from being an orthodox Catholic, was a highly orthodox
Protestant.—(Laughter.) The Honourable Gentleman
had also fallen into an error in supposing that all persons
who were Repealers in Ireland were Catholics.
Mr. NEWDEGATE—I never said so.

Mr. REYNOLDS had thought that the Honourable
Member had said so, or at least said something tanta-
mount to it; but he supposed he had misunderstood him.
But the Hon. Member had, at all events, fallen into a
grievous error in supposing that the Honourable Member
for Longford was either a Catholic, or a high authority
as to the feelings of Catholics in Ireland, with respect
to the Church question. The Honourable Member had
referred to another Irish Member, who was not an Irish
Member at all—(Great laughter)—the Honourable and
Learned Member for Youghal (Mr. Anstey). It was
true that that Honourable and Learned Gentleman was
a Catholic, but he knew very little indeed about the
feelings of Catholics in Ireland. He was a convert.
He had very recently renounced what he now called
the errors of the Established Church; but whether his
conversion to the Church in which he (Mr. Reynolds)
had the blessing of being borne, was or was not an ac-
quisition, to that church, was a question which he would
not undertake to decide.—(Laughter.) It had often been
said that the House was ignorant of the real state of Ire-
land. He had always known it to be true, but he could
never have supposed that it could be true in so wholesale
a sense as that that House could for one moment seri-
ously believe that the Irish people did not regard the
Church Establishment as a grievance.—(Hear, hear.) If
they were to believe the Hon. and Learned Member for
Youghal, indeed, they would find it no difficult matter
to credit that the Irish people, so far from looking on it
as a grievance, regarded it as a national blessing.—
(Laughter.) But he entirely denied that the Hon. and
Learned Gentleman was a faithful interpreter of the Irish
people on the question. If the Irish people should ever
bring themselves to regard the Church Establishment
otherwise than as a grievance and an injustice, there
would be but little chance of that prediction being rea-
lised, which had been uttered some years ago by his im-
mortal fellow-countryman, Tommy Moore:—
" As long as Ireland shall pretend,
Like sugar-loaf turned upside down,
To stand upon the sharper end,
So long shall live great Rock's renown;
As long as Popish spade and scythe
Shall dig and cut the Sassenach's tithe,
And Popish purses pay the tolls
On heaven's road for Sassenach souls;
As long as millions shall kneel down
To ask of thousands for their own,
While thousands proudly turn away,
And to the millions answer, Nay;
So long the merry reign shall be
Of Captain Rock and his family."
—(Loud laughter.) He had no to his Protestant
fellow •subjects, not the least; but what he complained of
was that he should be compelled by law to support, for
their gratification, an establishment from which ho
entirely dissented, and from which he received no be-
nefit. Let them look at the vulgar arithmetic of
the argument. The population of Ireland was in
round numbers 8;500,000. Of these 7,000,000 were
Catholics, 700,000 were in communion with the Church
of England, 700,000 were Presbyterians, and 100,000
were Wesleyans, Quakers, and other Dissenters. The
clergy of the 7,000,000, who were 4,000 in number,
cost the state nothing, being supported by the voluntary
contributions of their flocks. The Presbyterians, who
in the days of their political purity indignantly rejected
aid from the State, now received 36,0001. a year in the
shape of a Regiuni Donut's, and the clergy of the 700,000
Episcopalians enjoyed a revenue of upwards of 700,0001.
a year, which was derived from a tax levied upon all
classes of religionists.—(Hear, hear.) Yet the Hon.
Member opposite was so innocent, which was a soft word
in Ireland for ignorant—(Laughter)—as to believe that
7,000,000 of Catholics, 700,000 Presbyterians, and
100,000 Wesleyans and Quakers, did not think it a
grievance (no, not the least in the world) to be compelled
to pay for a clergy from whom they entirely dissented.
So much for that part of the subject. There could
be no doubt but that the speech of the Honourable
and Gallant Member for Middlesex (Mr. Osborne)
contained many useful suggestions, which might be
made the foundation for good legislation, and which he
hoped would one day receive the serious consideration
of the House. He hoped to see the day when many of
those suggestions would be carried out ; and, above all,
he hoped to live to see the day when every man in the
community would pay his own clergyman as he paid his
own doctor.—(Laughter and cheers.) Honourable Mem-
bers might laugh, but he begged to call their attention
to that period of the Christian era when Christianity was
thought to be purest, and when its ministers were most
respected, In the apostolic times there was no connec-
tion between church and state, and so it ought to be now.
Religion ought to be sundered from all state connection,
and the clergy of every persuasion should be supported
by those who received the benefit of their services. He
should vote for the motion of the Honourable Member
for Rochdale, not because it would be productive of any
practical good, just at present, but because it would af-
ford a guarantee to his fellow-countrymen that they
should obtain relief at all events next session. For his
own part, he could wish that relief were afforded now,
for if ever within the last 48 years there was a period at
which it was desirable that the axe should be laid to the
root of bad legislation, it was the present.—(Hear, hear.)
It was said that Ireland was on the verge of rebellion.
He hoped it was not so ; but if it were so, those in that
House and out of it, who had contributed to irritate pub-
lic feeling in Ireland, were accountable.
Mr. STAFFORD rose amidst cries of divide to ad-
dress the House. He trusted the House would for a
short time permit him to occupy its attention while he
addressed himself to one, or at most two, of the topics—
all of them important, most of them urgent—which had
been submitted for their consideration by the Honour-
able Gentleman the Member for Rochdale. Before pro-
ceeding to do so, he must remark that, whatever charges
he had heard made against the Honourable Member for
Dublin, certainly it was not the charge of giving a fac-
tious opposition to her Majesty's Government—(Hear,
hear)—for his conduct since he came into that House
had been marked by a most elaborate and studious de-
sire to avoid any such charge.—(Hear, hear.) The
Hon. Gentleman the Member for Dublin had stated, as
he (Mr. Stafford) thought very fairly, that his wishes
were not hostile to the Church of Ireland, but merely to
the temporalities of that church. But the distinction
which the Honourable Gentleman drew between
the Church of Ireland and what the Right
Honourable Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland
called "the Ecclesiastical Establishment of Ire-
land," was, he (Mr. Stafford) presumed, of such a
nature that they had little reason to thank him for saying
he entertained no hostility towards it.—(Hear, hear.)
Ho could assure him that they who belonged• to that
Church, and adhered to its ritual, and believed in its
apostolical origin and immortal destiny, were not afraid
to stand up in that House to declare that it was stronger
than any combination of politicians arrayed against it.
—(Hear, hear.) It would be found that already there
had been two alienations of the property of the Church
of Ireland. The first took place when, by the abandon-
ment of the church cess, they fixed the charge for
repairs of churches upon the ecclesiastical fund. The
church cess might have been difficult of collection,
unjust in its incidents, and ill managed in its expendi-
ture, but at all events he apprehended no gentleman,
however hostile to the ecclesiastical establishments of
Ireland, would deny that in removing the church cess
from the property subject to that charge, and placing it
upon the ecclesiastical property of the country, they
simply transferred it to laymen, the owners of the pro-
perty on which it had been a charge. There was in the
next place a commutation of tithes, and by the arrange-
ment which was made they gave 75 per cent. to the
Church, but at the same time took 25 per cent. and
gave it to the landlords.—(Hear, hear.) And they had
this year under discussion the question of ministers'
money in Ireland, which was said to amount to about
11,0001. or 15,0001. a year, and he believed 5,0001. of it
was collected in the city which the lion. and Learned
Gentleman (Mr. Reynolds) represented.
Mr. REYNOLDS-11,0001.
Mr. STAFORD-11,0001. of which was collected in
the city of Dublin. The Hon. Gentleman who brought
forward the question of ministers' money, having talked,
of course, of liberty of conscience—the rights of tolera-
tion and respect for the feelings of others, ended by pro-
posing that this ministers' money should be defrayed out
of the ecclesiastical property.—(Cries of " Question.")
There could be nothing more germane to the question.
Honourable Gentlemen called " question," and that
plainly showed that they did not understand the ques-
tion before the House ; but it would not be his fault if
they did not understand it. A question was now raised
with respect to this ministers' money ; and if the propo-
sition made with regard to it was acceded to, they would
merely, by doing so, transfer 15,0001. a year to the hands
of the owners of the property in which it was at present
charged, and 11,000/. of that would be transferred, not
from the Protestant clergyman to the Roman Catholic
priest, but from the ecclesiastical establishment to
the owners of property in Dublin.—(Hear, hear.)
When the Honourable Member for the city of Dublin
declared that it was a hardship to be compelled to sup-
port a church to which he did not belong, he would re-
mind the Honourable Gentleman that he and those who
were anxious for ' ecclesiastical establishments were far
more nearly united in principle than those who were
opposed to establishments of that kind. The Protestants
of Ireland were, in fact, in the position which the Hon.
Member for Dublin wished himself to be ; but let them
once apply the principle which he contended for, and not
a single person in Ireland would be in that desirable
state.—(Hear, hear.) He would remind the Honourable
Gentleman that the position of the Roman Catholic
clergy in that country was this—they stood pledged by
the reiterated declarations of their Bishops, and of their
advocates in that House, to the voluntary system.
(Hear, hear.) They had no reason to assume that those
Rev. Gentlemen were insincere, and the Honourable
Gentleman the Member for the city of Limerick (Mr. J.
O'Connell) who was recognised in that House as the
I organ of the Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland, when the
question of religious endowment was raised, stood up in
his place, and, with a consistency to be admired, declared
again what he had previously affirmed, as to the advo-
cacy of the voluntary principle by the Roman Catholic
clergy, and stated that their opinions on the subject were
still unchanged.--(Hear, hear.) It was true it had been
said by some persons that the spirit of disaffection in

Ireland would be quieted and removed if the Government
paid the priests, but he asked them, indepeadently.of-
other considerations, whether the advocates of the pilests,"l"
could think so meanly of them.—(Hear, hear.) He
might also add, with reference to this subject, that there
were a great number of their fellow-subjects, not the
least loyal, not the least peaceable and industrious,' who
held that on a question of this kind, to add,a national
endowment to that particular creed would be to com-
mit' a great national sin, and call down the judgment of
Heaven.—(Cries of " Divide.") With regard to any
interference with the Established Church, if he under-
stood
Irish Members rightly, they would not hail with
any satisfaction the result of an agitation to knock off
the expenditure in their country of a sum of 700,000/. a
year; and instead of this grant coming from the oonao-
lidated fund, and being sent over every year from the
Imperial Treasury to Ireland, the result of the agita-
tion would be that 700,0001. a year less would be spent
in Ireland, the odious church would be destroyed, and
the country would be the poorer.—(Cries of " Divide.")
Mr. GRAC2 would not at that late hour of the day
occupy the time of the House, but as an Irish Member,
he thought it right to come forward and declare his
anxiety to see his country happy and prosperous, and
the redress of her wrongs effected. He felt extremely
unhappy at the present state of the country, and re-
gretted that the promises of relief which had been held '
out were not realised.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. GRATTAN rose amidst loud cries of divide.
When silence was restored, the Hon. Gentleman said—
I merely rise to make an apology to my countrymen for
not speaking.—(Loud laughter.)
The House then divided, when there appeared--
For the amendment 24
Against it
Majority. —76
POOR-LAW UNION CHARGES (No. 2) BILL.
On the motion of Mr. C. BULLER, the House went
into Committee pro forma on this Bill. The Right Hog. •
Gentleman stated that his object in moving that the Bill
should go into Committee was, to propose the omission
of the clause which had been inserted declaratory of the
right of Irish pnupers to parochial relief in this country,
after an industrial residence of five years. Since the in-
sertion of the clause he had ascertained that it was un-
necessary.

Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL;said he should object to the
clause being struck out.

Mr. C. BULLER regretted exceedingly that it had
ever been inserted. Its introduction into the Bill might
tend to produce an impression that he had doubts u to
the law as it at present stood,- whereas, in truth, he did
not entertain any; and he believed that legal opinions
to the effect that you might deny relief to
Irish paupers who had been resident the
same parish five years would be found to be ex-
ceedingly rare. He should be exceedingly grieved
if any discussion were to create in that House
the disposition upon which some boards of guardians
seemed inclined to act, namely, a disposition to deprive
the Irish poor of benefits which the law had undoubtedly
intended for them; benefits which he would do his best
to secure for them without legislation, in the next ses-
sion, and with legislation if he should find it necessary
for the object. He believed that all the advantages of
the law were as much intended for the Irish poor as for
the English poor.

Mr. S'ADLEIR said, that as very great doubts existed,
and, as it was probable that during the next two or
three years questions would frequently be raised, the
sooner all doubts were removed as to the real state of
the law, the better would it be for all concerned.
Mr. GROGAN said he understood the Right Hon.
Gentleman to intimate that this clause, originally intro-
duced by himself, was unnecessary, because having
taken the best legal opinion on the subject, he felt satis-
fied that Irish paupers were irremovable after five years'
residence.—(Hear, hear.) In this state of things the.
Right Hon. Gentleman proposed to withdraw the clause;
but, seeing that the Right Hon. Gentleman himself ad-
mitted that doubts had arisen, would it not be judicious
to have an explanatory statement of the law which
would make it impossible for boards of guardians here-
after to act on the supposition that they had the power
of removal?

Mr. C. BULLER did not believe that serious doubts
were entertained upon the point. Certainly the opinion
of one counsel, a gentleman of eminence, though not of
the first authority in the law, had been given against the
right of the Irish and Scotch to relief; and he under-
stood that in two or three cases that opinion had been
acted upon. ,As regarded the opposition made to his
proposal to withdraw the clause, he must say that the
result of perseverance would be that a clause which he
had almost despaired of carrying with the aid of Irish
Members, those Members would have to carry with their
own force, not only without assistance, but against his
opposition. He could assure the House that he had not
withdrawn the clause lightly. He believed that discus-
sion would do infinitely more harm than non-interfe-
rence with the law during the present session, and he
did trust that, for the sake of those whose interest they
wished to promote, Honourable Members would not raise
a useless—a worse than useless discussion.

Mr. MONSELL thought that Irish Members would
best promote their object by not offering any direct op-
position to the course proposed. As both the Govern-
ment and the English Members generally would vote
against it, it was perfectly clear that the clause would be
negatived, and he feared that that might produce an in-
jurious effect upon boards of guardians, affording them
a loophole for getting rid of the very onerous duty of
supporting the Irish poor.
Mr. CLE NIENTS did not understand how the Govern-
ment could oppose a clause which they had themselves
introduced, whatever might be said of the anticipated
opposition of English Members.—(Llean)
Mr. GROGAN thought the position of Irish Members
a most unfortunate one.—(Hear.) The clause had
emanated, not from them, but from the Government,
and the viestion was forced upon their consideration by
the Right Hon. Gentleman himself. Yet the Right
Hon. Gentleman then told the House that if this clause
were brought forward by Irish Members he must oppose
it. The clause was simply declaratory of the state of
the law, and it was admitted that some boards of guar-
dians had acted upon an erroneous impression. Under
the circumstances, considering that doubts had arisen,
he could not imagine that the Government would offer
any opposition to the clause.
Mr. CHARLES BULLER said, that though the
clause was introduced with good intentions, there
had been a want of foresight in proposing it.
As it had been said that he was pursuing his present
course on account of the expected opposition of
English Members, he must observe that he had
received several complaints respecting the clause from
variuus parts of the country, and that none of those com-
plaints were legitimate; the words of the clause being
supposed to have an operation larger than he had in-
tended, or the words themselves would bear. It was
not, perhaps, a legitimate objection to the clause, but
still it was an objection that it would have given rise to
a very painful discussion respecting the removal of Irish
paupers, and he thought it undesirable that such a dis-
cussion should take place. He did not wish to with-
draw the clause on account of any opposition which he
anticipated; but one of the best friends of the Poor
Removal Aet—one of those whose opinion upon, and
interest in, that Act were least open to doubt—had
come to him and said that it would be very unwise
to raise the question by proposing a declaratory enact-
ment, when there were no such serious doubts as w
render an enactment necessary ; adding, that as a
friend to Irish paupers, he begged that the clause
might be dropped, rather than there should be ant
discussion upon it. He (Mr. C. Buller) assured the
House that he proposed the withdrawal much more fro°
a regard to the interest of those who had complained of
the Poor Removal Act than from any fear of opposition;
but if Hon. Gentlemen persevered in their opposition W
what he proposed, the only course open was to move that
the Charman do report progress.
Mr. CLEMENTS was very anxious, as far as possible,
to meet the views of the Right Hon. Gentleman, but be
really thought that by consenting to the withdrawal of
the clause he should-place himself in a false position.
Mr. S. CRAWFORD said that Irish Members would
certainly be placed in a very false position if they con'
seated to the withdrawal of the clause on that occasion'
and afterwards proposed to re-insert it. He thought it
was right that the point should be further considered.
Mr. C. BULLER having intimated that he should zios
persevere in his proposal,
The House resumed and the Cbairnaan reported pro'
gross, the clause discussed still remaining in the Bill.
The House adjourned at half-past Seven.

BIRTB.S.
On the 26th inst., at Benningbrough-hall, the Viscountegi
Down,of a son.

On the 24th inst., at Bury St. Edmund's, Suffolk, Mrs.
Rodwell, of a son.

On the 26th inst., at Denmark-hill, Mrs. John Bouch, of
daughter.

On the 26th inst., at Little Oakley Rectory, Essex, the wire
of the Rev. G. Burmester, of a daughter.
On the 26th inst., at the Vicarage, Wartling, Sufaix, the
wife of the Rev. 1. Turner, of a daughter.
On the 26th inst., at Kensington-garden-terrace, IlYcle‘
park, the wife of Dr. Markham, of a son.
At Hythe Villa, New Finchley-road, St. John's-wood, °Li
the 27th inst., the wife of Captain Vetch, of a dauglteeri
On the 28th inst., at Cadogan-place, the wife of Rcuc'
Synnot, Esq.; M.D., of a son.
On the 26th inst., at Clifton, the lady of the Rev. G. AO-
strong, of a daughter.

MAXIMO.
Oa the 21st inst., at Christchurch, St. Marylebene, Jan
Simpson, Lieutenant R.N., to Mary Anne, youngest dangin.'"
of T. Bradshaw, Esq., of Connaught-terrace, Hyde-paric,%„
On the 26th inst., at St. Chad, Frederick H. Herbert, lA/
of the Bengal Artillery, to Emma, eldest daughter of •
James, Esq., of Highfield, Warwickshire. o'
On the 27th inst., at St. Margaret's Church; Nathaniel
Robbins, Esq.. late of the 2d Dragoon Guards, to 10_,4
youngest daughter of the Rev. Edward Repton, Prebend'
of Westminster.
On the 27th inst., at Christ Church, Marylebons, Mr-
Simpson, of Portman-place, Edgeware-road, to Eliza, seoco
daughter of Mr. Selby, of York-row, Kennington.

DIED.
At the Vicarage, Seighford, Staffordshire, on the 21st i 134.4
Rebecca Dorothy, wife of the Rev. J. Thompson. j,
At Ardrossan, on the 25th inst:, Mrs. Mary Legge, or ivel,‘
wife of Captain Charles H. Reid, R.N., of Grange-hill, 4.•
shire, aged 60.
On the 26th inst., at Exeter. aged 71, John Gandy, Een-
second son of the late Rev. John Gandy, vicar of St. '—
drew's, Plymouth.
On the 26th inst., at St. John's-wood, Mrs. Curry, wider
of the late J. Curry, Esq., aged 76. od
At Hampstead, on the 27th inst., aged 84, Elizabeth, WI
of the late W. Kilburn, Esq., of Wallington, Surrey -” of
On the 27th inst., in London, Mrs. Tomlinson, sis'e
the Lord Bishop of ibraltar.
On the 27th inst., Rebecca, the wife of Mr. J. j;g.ohins°ll'
of East Hoathly, SusZex, aged 51.
On the 28th inst., in Cambridge-street, Hyde-park, at 41°
advanced age, Miss Thesiger.

a at
London : Printed and Published by MURDO Yo
No-
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The San Office, .-0
Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the 'W:4lll'
Middlesex, Monday, July 31, 1848.

~;'~L~7~N ~ ~

~~

_

.~,
Y

,:.