The Sun.
London, England, 1850-07-17 00:00:00

APPOINTMENTS.

WOOLWICH, JULY 16.—Lieutenant Montagu B. Dunn
to the Niger steam-sloop. commissioned at Portsmouth.
Lieutenant George William Rice (1848), from the
Arrogant, 46, steam•frigate, to the Hastings, 72, flag-
.ship on the East Indies stmtion.
Midshipman Hon. Walter Talbot, from the Prince
Regent, 92, at Lisbon, to the Phaeton, 50, at Lisbon.
Naval Cadets—Percy Rosenburg, to the Vengeance,
84, at Portsmouth; C. W. Evans, from the Fisgard flag-
ship at Woolwich, to the Inflexible steam-frigate, com-
missioned on Saturday last at that port; Charles Murphy,
to the Thetis, 50, at Devonport.
The following engineers have been appointed to the
Niger steam-sloop at Portsmouth:—
James Steil, chief engineer of the Ist class.
A. M. Cirregor, assistant engineer of the Ist class.
George Rock, assistant engineer of the 2d class.
R. Williamson, assistant engineer of the 2d class.
S. P. Allen, assistant engineer of the 3d class.
The Retribution steam-frigate will leave Woolwich on
Thursday morning for Greenhithe to have her com-
passes aejusted by Captain Johnson, and on the follow-
ing day will leave Greenhithe for Portsmouth.
The Polyphemus steam-vessel arrived at Woolwich at
nine o'clock on Sunday evening from Portsmouth, to be
fitted at this port for service.
The Right Hon. Sir Francis T. Baring, Bart., held a
levee at three o'clock P.M. to-day, having postponed it
until that late hour, owing to his having to attend a
Committee of the House of Commons in the earlier part
of the day. The following officers attended the levee:—
Captains—Richard Crozier (1839), Edward H. But-
tprtieid (1841), Jefferys W. Noble (1846), and Robert
Harris (1849).
Commanders—Daniel Weld (1825), Charles J. F.
Newton (1838), Francis T. Brown (1840), Benjamin
Baynton (1841), Gustavus Evans (1841), Thomas Wil-
son (1843), and J. W. Tarleton (1846).
Lieutenants—Charles G. Butler (1822), Charles T.
Hill (1833), William A. Fellows (1840), Robert C.
Whyte (1840), William Horton (1842), Shute B. Piers
(1849), and J. G. Brickford (1850).

COURT CIRCULAR.
His Royal Highness Prince Albert presided yes-
terday afternoon at a meeting of the Royal Commis.
sion for the promotion of the Exhibition of the Works
of Industry of all Nations, to be held in the year
1851. His Royal highness arrived at the new Pa-
lace of Westminster Soon after three o'clock, attended
by Lieut.-Colonel the Hon. Alexander Gordon. The
Commissioners present were the Earl of Rosso, Earl
Granville, Lord Stanley, Lord Overstone, the Right
Hon. W. E. Gladstone, Sir Richard Westmacott,
Sir Charles Lyell, Mr. Barry, Mr. T. Bazley, Mr.
Cobden, M.P., Mr. Cubitt, Mr. Eastlake, Mr. T. F.
Gibson, Mr. John Gott, Mr. Posey, M.P., and Mr.
R. Stephenson.
Mr. Scott Russell, secretary 'to the Royal Com-
mission, attended. Colonel Reid and Dr. Lyon Play-
fair were present.
The Building Committee had a meeting in the
morning, which was attended by Mr. Cubitt (chair-
man), Mr. Barry, Mr. R. Stephenson, Mr. T. L.
Donaldson, and Mr. Brunel. Mr. Digby Wyatt,
Mr. H. Wyld, and Me. Owen Jones, were present.
The Building Committee had an interview with
the Royal Commissioners.
The meeting of the Royal Commisssion broke up
about seven o'clock.
A Cabinet Council was held yesterday afternoon at
the Foreign-office, at which the Lord Chancellor at-
tended. Lord John Russell, the Marquis of Lans-
downe, the Earl of Minto, Sir George Grey, Viscount
Palmerston, Earl Grey, the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer, the Earl of Carlisle, the Right Hon. H.
Labouchere, Right Hon. Fox Maule, and other Minis-
ters, were also present. The Council sat two hours.
The Earl of Arundel and Surrey and Dr. Tancred
had an interview with Earl Grey yesterday, at the
Colonial-office.
.

-______
------------,---.
MANSION HOUSE.—The Lordmayor yesterday
entertained at dinner the Deputy a nd Common C
biii ward, with the trusteee of Dale Aim BliC9il'A clouncil of
arity.

DEATH OF MRS. GLOVER. the perfection of her dramatic art; and it was a silent bui
But a few, a very few, days have elapsed since we an emphatic tribute to her talent that, after having been
briefly recorded a tribute of respect paid by the public as child and woman above sixty years on the stage, her
to the professional and private merits of Mrs. Glover, departure should at last have been looked upon as
on the occasion of her benefit at Drury-lane Theatre. sudden and unexpected. She was so fine, so perfect,
The enthusiasm then manifested by an audience even in her advanced years, that you could not bring
crowding that immense area from floor to ceiling yourself to think her removal so near at hand. She
proved that the talents of the distinguished artist, has departed from among us covered with the honours
who was about to bid farewell to her friends and awarded to art in this country ; and when we consider
patrons, had been appreciated, and her moral worth her long public life, the pleasure she has given to
understood, by a public, who are apathetic in ap- hundreds of thousands, and the moral examples she
pearance only, and whose manifestations of feeling, has enforced by her admirable delineations of charac-
therefore, when they do occur, are the more valuable, ter—delineations implying a knowledge of life, and a
because so rare and so emphatic. To the poignant sympathy with human nature, not enough counted in
pleasure afforded by that noble exhibition of public our estimates of histrionic performers, we are almost
sympathy there was but one drawback—but one tempted to regret that the customs of society restrain
alloy. In our capacity of spectators we did not then and modify the expression of a regret at her decease,
see occasion to mention what had otherwise come to which, we are sure, is participated in by all who are
our knowledge—that the evidences of extreme suffer- cognisant of her professional ability, and by those who
ing manifested by Mrs. Glover on that evening— only thus receive the assurance of her private worth.
her inability to go through her part, except
as a mere shadow of her former self, and
the substitution of an apologetic speech from Mr.
Leigh Murray for the address which had been written
for her by a well-known and talented amateur of the
drama—arose not merely from the emotion natural
on a farewell night after more than half a century of
active public service, but also from extreme phy-
sical debility, the result of an attack of illness or
a wasting character, which had already confined that
venerable lady to her bed for many days. In fact,
it was only the determination of Mrs. Glover herseit
not to disappoint the audience, who had been invited
and attracted for many weeks before, that overruled
the remonstrances of her friends and family against
her appearing at all. She was then utterly unfit to
appear on the stage in her professional character, and
the most serious alarm was felt lest there should be
some sudden and fatal catastrophe. The result of
the struggle of feeling she then underwent, super-
added as it was to the physical causes which had un-
dermined her strength, was, that Mrs. Glover sank
under the disease which bad been consuming her,
and quitted this life on Monday night. Although in
the ordinary course the death of a public performer,
however suggestive of a public loss, does not call
forth an expression of sympathy through the recog-
nised organs of public feeling and opinion, the case of
Mrs. Glover may fairly be regarded as an exception ;
for she had outlived, not in her tenure of existence
alone, but also in her professional talent, at least one
generation of admirers ; and she was as much a study
to the younger members of her profession, and a
living monument of past forms of histrionic expres-
sion to the public at large, as in her youth and ma-
turer age she had, in her admirable impersonations,
presented a type of living manners. Whatever may
have been the tendency of custom in such matters,
there can be but little doubt that in the case of Mrs.
Glover it ought to be disregarded. Art has not too
much honour in this country; and Mrs. Glover was
an artist in the most emphatic sense of the word.
To what a remote period we must cast back our
glance in recording the commencement of Mrs.
Glover's career ! She herself formed a sort of histo-
rical link in the succession of the heroes and heroines
of the drama. She inherited the blood of Betterton,
and she was the contemporary of George Frederick
Cooke, the Kembles, Siddons, Miss O'Neil, and Ed-
mund Kean. She outlived them all ; and such was
the vitality of her talent that even in her last per-
formances at the Strand Theatre, prior to her retire-
ment, there was a vigour and a verve, a vivid reflex
of pristine comic strength and humour, that afforded
pleasure to a young, uncongenial, and exacting race
of play-goers, almost equal to that which she had
given to her own proper contemporaries in her prime.
Mrs. Glover (Julia Betterton) was the daughter of
an actor named Betterton, who was descended from
the great actor of that name. She was born on the Bth
of January, 1781. Her father held a good position
as an actor on the London stage, as the
play-bills of the period sufficiently testify,
and the child was brought up (as most of
our great actors and actresses have been) "at the
wings." She was even in infancy sent on the stage
in such parts as children are used to fill. At a very
early age her father's position obtained for her an en-
gagement. She became attached to the company of
Tate Wilkinson, for whom she played, at York, the
part of the page in The Orphan, and she also ex-
ercised her juvenile talents in the part of Torralumb,
for the benefit of George Frederick Cooke, who on
the occasion doffed his tragic garb and appeared in
the character of Glutndalcar. Another character
which she played successfully with Cooke was that of
the little Duke of York in Richard the Third, into
which, it is recorded, she threw a degree of spirit and
childish roguishness that acted as a spur on the great
tragedian himself, who never performed better
than when seconded by his childish asso-
ciate. As the young lady advanced a little
in years she undertook parts suited to her sex ; but her
earlier successes were in purely tragic parts—a fact
which may be surprising to the superficial observer,
but which is not so extraordinary if we remember how
much the success of her best characters in later life
depended on the touches of pathos she threw into
them. At the time to which we refer the provincial
theatres were a school of acting. To have secured a
high position in one of the dramatic " Circuiss" was a
passport to the London theatres. In the year 1796
Miss Betterton had reached such a point of eminence
that she was employed to fill the first parts both in
tragedy and comedy at Bath, then one of the chief
preparatory schools. Her success led to an offer of
10/. a week from Covent-garden, the engagement to
be for three years, with an increase of 1/. each year.
Ultimately, she was engaged for five years, com-
mencing at 15/. a week, and rising to 20/. a week. In
these days, when actors of the first class ask and re-
ceive twice or thrice as much per night as Miss Bet-
terton then received per week, it may not be unin-
structive to recall the fact that the above terms were
then considered as something extraordinary and even
exorbitant.
Mrs. Glover, still Miss Betterton, first appeared in
London on the 12th of October, 1797, tifty-three
years ago, as Elvira, in Hannah More's tragedy of
Percy. She was decidedly successful. Her next
character was that of Charlotte, in the West Indian,
and on the 23d of November she played the part of a
heroine in a new piece by the same author, Cumber-
land, celled First Impressions. She was again most
successful ; and she had so advanced in public favour
that when, shortly after, Mrs. Abington returned for
a brief period to the stage, she was able to hold her
ground against that counter attraction ; it being fur-
ther recorded that Mrs. Abington herself was among
her admirers. Miss Betterton then married Mr.
Glover, and continued on the staff of Covent-garden
until the year 1801.
Two years afterwards Mrs. Glover transferred her
services to Drury-lane, and at the close of the season
she was engaged by Bannister, the then manager, for
three years. His death prevented the completion of
the contract, and Mrs. Glover returned tosCovent-
garden. In 1813 she again appeared at Drury-lane,
afterwards at Covent-garden, and subsequently she
made an engagement at the Ilaymarket, of which
theatre she continued, we need scarcely remind our
readers, the most distinguished ornament for many
years. We need not enter into the causes which led
to her secession from Mr. Webster's company, be-
cause we are inclined to believe that it arose from
misunderstanding on both sides. She was engaged
by Mr. Anderson, when that gentleman commenced
his brief and inauspicious management of Drury-lane
Theatre; but she left the company under circum-
stances in nowise discreditable to herself, and enlisted
under the banner of Mr. W. Farrell, at the Strand
Theatre, whither she attracted choice audiences, when
it was known that she was about to play for the last
time in all her great characters. Ilere she took, a
short time since, her professional farewell, followed
soon after by her personal farewell and benefit at
Drury-lane Theatre.
It has been too often the fate of female dra-
matic artists of the first rank to be unfortunate in
their domestic relations. Beyond recording the fact
that the domestic life of Mrs. Glover was long embit-
tered from no cause depending on herself, we do nut
consider ourselves justified in referring to her private
misfortunes. They were made the subject at one
time of judicial interference ; and those who seek
for such details can easily find them. In all that de-
pended upon herself, she was an exemplary member
of society, discharging her duties as a wife and a
mother in a manner to re-enforce with those who
knew her the respect commanded by her professional
talent. Her sons and daughters have appeared be-
fore the public in various ways, and always in a
manner to do credit to their parent.
Mrs. Glover's early professional life was spent as
a tragic actress. In this capacity she was always
more than respectable : in fact it was here that she
laid the foundation of her professional position. But
nature had marked her out for comedy, in which she
trod the highest walks, with a talent so unique as to
leave but little hope that her place will be sup-
plied. The best proof of her genius is, that al-
though we refer to her performances within the
memory of the most youthful of playgoers, we can
speak, not so much in the way of retrospect, as of
the vivid examples which must be fresh in the
memory of all. Her Mrs. 'Candour, her Nurse in
Romeo and Juliet, her Mrs. Heidelberg, her Widow
Green, her Old Lady Lambert, were models of the
'V • —One of her Majeste's
highest order of comic acting, combining breadth of THE LARO
e afternoon at. Woolwich Dock-
humour with refinement of detail unexampled end servdanttos
tarrivedae ch
arn
se
ge of the'y
large land tortoise, known to be
unapproached among contemporary actresses. Mrs. -
Glover also possessed the merit of being able to cleva•
the ephemeral creations of the farcical dramatists by Queen, and returned to town with it at four o'clock.
;a-it'otrol;kstfrloim9 ehaersol
Caped, brought utfohotd. homeope ina
s the
a o'clock.
endowing steam-
J'
Glover
them with an individuality worthy of more CAPTURE or Poerosses AT MONTROSE.—On Sitt-
permanent productions. It was an extraordinary in- turday a rather miusuearles!ieeecntaeceerNcNisaisn wtihtenierss
admibnol
st
e
stance of the vitality and perpetual self-renewal of Basin.a
in
true dramatic talent, that she was thus able to holdand bouStixthpeoNTsoefsaL river; some persgon, who' happened
to be there, got a boat and gave chase. One person took
her place, and satisfy the demands of a younger and
off his clothes and followed them with a boat-hook, with
less critical age, and
yet ever suggest the desire to which he destroyed the whole half dozen. They were large
see her over and over again in her own proper crea-
animals, three of them measuring from 9 to 11 feet in
tions. Even during her last series of performances length. The other three were only about half that size,—
she showed no abatement of her pristine vigour or of IL1:4
4dilihr94 MOHO,

WESTMINSTER. BRIDGE.
(From the Daily News.)
It is exactly a hundred years since Westminstet-
bridge was opened. It occupied twelve years in
building, and cost 218,0001., with 170,7001. additional
expended on approaches. It is pretty generally known
that the bottom courses of the piers of this bridge
were laid or built upon floating chests, or caissons,
which when loaded were sunk into the bed of the
river. These caissons form the sole foundation for
the superincumbent masonry which is unsustained by
underpiling, or any other support than that of the
shifting sand or gravel upon which it rests. The de-
tects and dangers of this mode of building were dis-
covered even prior to the opening of the bridge.
" In the months a May and June, 1747, the western
pier was perceived to settle very gently at first, but so
much faster towards the end of July, that it was thought
absolutely necessary to take off . the balustrades, paving,
and part of the ballast that lay over the said pier and
tha two arches adjoining. By the continuation of the
settling, these arches lost their regular semicircular
figure; considerable openings in the joints showed the
arches to be in danger, and some of the atones both in
the fronts and soffits were split and broken—one of them
actually fell out, and another was taken out to prevent
its telling."
Such was the report of the architect, M. Charles La-
belye; and thus we see that even before the bridge
was nished, it became necessary to rebuild two of its
arches. At different periods since, the whole of the
structure has more or less settled or given way.
Costly works have from time to time been under-
taken to secure it, without advantage. From 1810 to
1838, 83,0001. was expended on the bridge; and be-
tween 1838 and 1844 it cost no less than 82,000/.
additional, and proved then to be in worse repair
than ever. In 1846, it will be recollected, it was
necessary to close the bridge entirely. Extensive
operations were undertaken in order to secure it.
Rows of piles were driven into the bed of the river
at very great expense to prevent the materials about
the caissons from being underwashed by the cur-
rents ; 30,000 tons weight of stone and material was
taken off the bridge, and the roadway was lowered
very considerably. All without avail. The bridge
has continued to settle ever since. It is at the
present time in a perilous, if not an insecure con-
dition : condemned by the engineers, and aban-
doned by everybody. The question now appears to
be what is to be done ? The Westminster-bridge
Commissioners possess property of the clear value of
6,8801. a year. Their accumulated stock amounts at
the present time to about 22,0001. It is obvious that
22,0001. will go a very little way to build a new
bridge. It is obvious, also, that if a new bridge is to
be built on the site of the old one, it would be neces-
sary to erect a temporary bridge in order not to stop
the important line of communication between West-
minster and Lambeth, whilst the new bridge was
constructing. But even a temporary bridge would
cost more money than the Commissioners appear to
have in hand. It is the duty of the Westminster-
bridge Commissioners to maintain the communieation
undisturbed. They appear to feel this responsibility.
After looking at the question in all its bearings, they
thought it right to consult the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer. They proposed to the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer to surrender their property to the Govern-
ment or Parliament, if either of those authorities
would relieve them of responsibility. Sir Charles
Wood declined. The Commissioners have, therefore,
done the next best thing which the circumstances en-
abled them. They have caused a Bill to be laid be-
fore the House of Commons authorizing them to
build a temporary bridge parallel with and immedi-
ately adjacent to the present structure. This tempo-
rary bridge is proposed to be of wood : a contractor
will undertake its erection for 25,000/., the materials
being reserved as his property when
.it is removed.
Upon the temporary bridge being opened, and the
communication secured, the present stone structure
will be entirely demolished. The question will then
arise as to its rebuilding. Money must be provided for
the purpose, and there will probably then be some
discussion as to the site. The House of Commons
appears to doubt whether this arrangement is
the best that can be made. The Westminster-
bridge Bill has been referred to a Select Committee,
and, from all we hear, the- Select Committee is not
entirely disposed to report favourably of this
temporary plan. The public will probably agree
with them in thinking that something better might
be done. For some years past different plans have
been before the public, and these are some of them.
Mr. Barry, when first he commenced the new palace,
was inclined to think that it would be disfigured and
obscured by the existing structure. He accordingly
proposed a plan for a new bridge to harmonise with
the House of Lords and Commons. We remember
the plan at the National Gallery some years ago, and
very beautiful it looked on paper. But the public
faith in Mr. Barry and his estimates has been, like
the Westminster-bridge piers, a good deal shaken ;
and however it might harmonise with the new Houses
of Parliament, it is doubtful whether a gorgeous
gothic bridge, with Pugin-istic panellings and
narrow-shouldered warders, would harmonise with
the present current of the public taste. If all we
hear, too, is true, Mr. Barry's own faith is not quite
so firm in the effect of his building as it was. He
has become aware that its beauties are best unfolded
by close and microscopical examination, and he is
consequently not so particular about its general
effect being hidden by the bridge which he formerly,
considered so terrible an eyesore. 'We shall, there-
fore, probably be saved the " gothic bridge." Another
plan, which was mooted in 1846 or 1847, was a plan
for a bridge from the end of Whitehall-place to an en-
tirely new street on the shore directly opposite. Under
the auspices of Mr. Hawes, this plan made consider-
able way untilthis Lambeth constituents took serious
objection to it. They resolved, first, that the pro-
jected bridge would be much too close to the Hun-
gerford Suspension Bridge; second, that it would se-
riously interfere with the rights of property in the
Westminster Bridge-road, which at the present
moment is one of our busiest thoroughfares. After
making some noise, this project was abandoned with-
out reference to Parliament. Another plan, pro-
posed, we believe, by Sir Howard Douglas, late
M.P., for Liverpool, was to transfer the site
of Westminster-bridge to Lambeth•stairs, and
to form a new line of communication between
Milbank and Pimlico, a project which, as our Lon-
don readers know, is being partially adopted now.
There seem several considerations in favour of this
plan • the most serious objection to it is inconvenience
tq the direct traffic between Charing-cross and Sur-
rey. It cannot be doubted that the larger number of
the vehicles which pass from the west-end to the
other side of the river, or vice versa, come from above
the neighbourhood of Charing-cross. There would
be, no doubt, additional inconvenience in obliging
these vehicles to go half a mile further down the
river before an opportunity was offered them of cross-
ing it. Another proposed site for the new bridge is
from the end of the little street cared Derby•street,
which runs out of Parliament-street into Cannon-
row. This would be an excellent site as regards the
traffic, and a very short communication would open a
way from the Lambeth side into that present great
artery of Lambeth, the Westminster Bridge-road.
But it is objected that the curve in the river adds
considerably to its breadth at this particular point, and
that the cost of the bridge if placed there would conse-
quently be considerably enhanced. Thereis, we believe,
validity in this objection, though on other grounds
the position would be most desirable. Whatever
course is taken—whether it is determined to waste
50,000/. in building a temporary bridge, or whether
a new bridge shall be built in another situation, the
line of communication being maintained by the old
one whilst the new bridge is erecting—whichever of
these courses is pursued, the one great essential,
money, is absolutely necessary. We shall be anxious
to learn the result of the Committee's deliberations
upon this point—whether they consider the work so
far a national one that Parliament ought to make a
grant towards it, or whether they intend that the
construction of the new bridge shall abide the distant
period when the Westminster Bridge Commissioners
may have funds enough to set at,out it. We only
hope the report will be forthcoming sufficiently early
to enable Parliament to consider the question this
session, for this seems to be a matter which ought not
to be delayed.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS, July 16.
The LORD CHANCELLOR tack his seat on the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.

PETITIONS.
Lord EGLINTON presented several petitions from
places in Scotland against the Marriage Affinity Bill.
Lord LONSDALE presented a petition from West-
moreland against the Coal Inspectors Bill.
Lord BEAUMONT presented a petition from the
Liveool Guardian Society for the Protection of
Trade, in favour of the County Courts Extension Bill,
and praying their Lordships to pass it as it passed the
House of Commons. The petitioners were opposed to
the concurrent jurisdiction clause.
The Earl of CARLISLE presented a petition from
Carlisle in favour of an extension of the jurisdiction of
county courts.
THE KHYBER PASS. _ .

The Earl of ELLENBORUUGH, seeing the Noble
Marquis the Lord President in his place, wished to ask
him if Government had received any dispatch from India
on the su'eject of the late expedition to the Khyber Pass ?
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE replied that such a
dispatch had been received, but there were portions of it
which he did not think it would be advisable to lay be-
fore the House.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH ob'ected to its being
produced in a mutilated form ?as such a course was cal-
culated to produce much misapprehension.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE'S answer was in-
audible in the gallery.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH hoped the Noble
Marquis would read th. dispatch himself, and decide.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE would read the dis-
patch himself.
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH would be perfectly
satisfied if the Noble Marquis would do se.
TEE RETRENCHMENT MOVEMENT.
Lord BROUGHAM said he rose to ask the Noble
Marquis whether the office filled by the late Sir Thomas
Mariable, and the salary of which was 1,000/.
a year, had been filled up. He understood that
great reductions were in contemplation in several
important branches of the public service. It was, he
understood, in contemplation to reduce the salaries of our
Foreign Ambassadors to such an extent as was abso-
lutely imcompatible with a due regard to the interests
of the country. At the same time he understood
that it was in contemplation to reduce the salaries
of all persons connected with the judicial establishments
of the country, in order, he supposed, to bring the same
ruin upon our domestic affairs which the first-named
reduction would bring upon our foreign affairs. It was
desirable if ill-judged retrenchment was the order of the
day, that it should take place throughout—that
it should commence at the top, and that no rank in the
country should be exempt from retrenchment. Ire would
give notice that he should, on Thursday, move that a
humble address be presented to her Majesty, praying
her Majesty that she will be graciously pleased
to be caused to be laid before the House
an account stating the amount of savings made
in the civil list since 1838, distinguishing each year, and
the savings made in each year. He knew that there was
a bargain made with the Crown at the commencement
of each reign; but that bargain was made upon the
supposition that things would remain nearly in
their then position, and if retrenchment took place
in any department of the public service, why
should it not take place in all? It was painful to him to
add another observation, which, however, he felt himself
compelled to make. If any person should say, as bad
been said to the late Duke of Cambridge. and been by
him repudiated with indignation—if any one should dare
to say that the time had arrived for lowering the English
aristocracy, then he would say that the person so speak-
ing was guilty of the greatest imaginable folly, for that
Parliament had resolved that the English aristocracy
should not be lowered—(Hear, hear)—but the English
aristocracy could be lowered it suca things were per-
mitted to pass as were now passing. A lady of the
♦ery highest rank, who was nearly and intimately con-
nected with Dukes and Marquises, had been rednced to
the humiliating necessity of advertising for employment.
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the
office alluded to had been filled np by the at,-
po►utment of a most meritorious functionary,
but from the low tone in which the Noble Marquis
spoke it was impossible to catch the name of the
person su appointed, neither can we be certain whether
or not the name was mentioned. _

The Marquis of WESTMINSTER, who spoke in a
very inaudible tote, was understood to say that the
lady alluded to had been appointed to some situation.
Lord BltOlitiliAsl had understood that the appoint-
ment had la( en made, but not confirmed.
LANDLORD AND TENANr BILL.

Lord PORTMAN, in moving the second reading of
this Bill, which came from the House of Commons.
observed that it had been introduced for the purpwe of
improving the relations between landlord and tenant.
The only difference between' this Bill and the one
which was proposed last session consisted in its being
extended to Ireland. The object of the Bill was to
permit tenants for lire to make agreements which would
b' binding on their heirs and successors; and though
permissi, e in ono stnse it was not so in another.
Lord BiI:AU-MONT observed that though this was
called a permicsive measure, it was only so in regard to
those who would profit by it, while it was compulsory
on those who succeeded the tenant, who made an ar-
ran,,,,,ement under the Bill. There was not a single pro-
vision in it which could be commended, and believing
that it would b" injurious to the interests it was pro-
pos,d to benefit ho would move that it be read a second
time this day six months.
Lord BROUGIIAM opposed the second reading of
the Bill.
Lord NIONTEAGLE said whatever legislation it
pl-alc'd their Lordships to introduce on this subject in
relation to England, the people of Ireland were willing

and ready to accept in relation to tte latter country.
He objected. however, to the power given in a Bill on
their Lorthhii,'s table, which enabled a tuant for life to
grant lea es for ninety-nine years of the estate which
was settled upon him.
Afi,er a word or two in explanation from Lord
BROUGHAM',
The Bill was thrown out.
LIVERPOOL WATER-WORKS BILL.—BREACII