The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-13 00:00:00

LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, APRIL 13,

have been met, nnd most of them disposed of, by the op-
ponents of the motion themselves. The lion. Baronet
(Sir B. Hall) who spoke immediately after the amend-
ment of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, and
some others, said it was not a sufficient inquiry, because

it did not go beyond the three particular classes into
which the inquiry was to be confined. To that the
Honourable Member for Oxford (Mr. Henley) an-
swered, and I think very conclusively, that if all
offices were to be included, the inquiry would last
so long that we should not obtain any practical
result from the Committee. These are the grounds which
I think will be sufficient for the appointment of the
Committee. Therefore the lion. Member for Oxford
has disposed of one abjection. Then the lion. Member
for Montrose (slr. Hume), somewhat to my surprise—
(A laugh)—objectmd to a Committee for the first time
that I remember during a long period of years, and said
tha it would do no good; but in the course of his speech
he admitted he kal urged on the Government the ap-
pointment of a Committee on the army, navy, end ord-
nance, and that the Committees had sat for some time
with considerable advantage to the public. But thee the
Hon. Gentleman gows on and sa) s the effs-et is, if you
have a Coinraittt e a great many facts will become known
which other wiNe we should not have before us, Bud thus
the Hun. Gentleman has answered bis own objection. I
cannot accuse him of wishing to conceal the truth, but
we know there are many delusive ideas on the public
mind on this subj ct, and the lion. Gentleman seemed
to entertain some alarm as to certain facts becoming
known to them. But we find the Hon. Member always
inquiring—we find him always moving for returns, and
probably the expense of this information and of these
returns would be 1 qual to the salaries of two or three
Lords of the Treasury.—(" Hear, hear," and a laugh.)
Well, they have been exceedingly useful, and have
.thrown a great deal of light and information on many
questions, and for my part I think them well worth the
cost.—(Hear, hear.) But, if that is the case, lam the
more surprised that now, for the first time, he could
say the House of Commons should not inquire into those
facts by a Select Committee. But we have all heard

"evil communications corrupt good manners," and the
Hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Disraeli) told us
to-night, in the course of his speech; that some three
weeks ago he had held a cornmunition with the Hon.
Member.—(Loud laughter.) Ile certainly does seem
(the Noble Lord turned towards Mr. ,Hume) to have
deserted the opinions to which ho has so long adhered.
—(Hear. hoar, and a laugh.) :,The Hon Member for
Surrey (Mr. Drummond) observed, nothing had been
said un this subject of reduction by Government. I cer-
tainly said it would be useless to appoint any such Com-
mittee unless we believed that reduction and economy
will be the consequence. I declined to give any opinion
as to the salaries received by official persons being
Members of Parliament, but I stated that I proposed
some reductions, and that I saw the force of the objec-
tion that if we proposed the reduction of one
official office, it would be well to revise our es-
tablishments altogeteer. (Hear, hear.) Let me
show the practical effect of the proposed inquiry. We
ire told we are in possession of all the information that
can be had as far as our own salaries. are concerned.
Chat is no doubt the case with respect to our own
offices, but when I proposed a reduction in the salary of
he Chief Justice of the Common Pleas I was told it was
very insufficient. At that time Hon. Gentlemen opposite
seemed to think a Select Committee a very desirable
thing.—(A laugh.) For a whole night I was badgered
for not consenting to it. I was told the receipts of bar-
risters wore nothing like what they were 20 years ago,
and that therefore a great reduction should take place
in the judges' salaries. Well, then, it is right we
should know something of the facts, because it had been
always stated, and stated truly, that if you wish to have
good and efficient judges—men who will command the
respect of the public, and insure confidence for the ad-
ministration of the laws—you had better not place
them at a salary much below that which persons at the
bar might expect to receive for their exertions. If that
is to be the test it becomes of importance to know what
aro the usual receipts of men in considerable practice, and
that is a fact on which Government, as well as Mem-
bers of the House, might form an opinion. It appears
to me the proposition I put is a fair practical proposition
for an inquiry by a Select Committee. It is supported
by precedent from 1798, when Mr. Pitt thought it neces-
sary to refer the question of official salaries to a Select
Committee; and I have not heard any sufficient objec-
tion to the proposal, or to this particular mode of pro-
ceeding. I certainly must thank the Right Hon. Mem-
ber for Stamford, and the Hon. Member for Bucking-
hamshire, for proposing a vote of confidence in Govern-
ment.—(Laughter.) It would be a very strong Govern-
ment that could repudiate such a mark of approbation
from their political opponents—(Laughter)—but I think
it will be the better course, and more for the public
service, to appoint the Select Committee of Inquiry.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. Disraeli's amendment ... 159
Against it ... 250
Majority against it --91
The original motion for the appointment of the Com-
mittee was then agreed to.
Mr. HORSMAN then moved, as an addition to Lord
J. Russell's motion on salaries, that the inquiry be ex-
tended to the incomes of ecclesiastical dignitaries. He
thought he could in a few words show the propriety of
his motion, by comparing the incomes of the dignitaries
with the incomes received in our other great establish-
ments. Lot him compare the case of the Lord Chief
Justice with that of a dignitary of the Church. The
former was selected from the most eminent of his pro-
fession, for an office of great toil and responsibility, and
when he ceased to be efficient he ceased to bo a judge.
But in the Church the faculties of a dignitary might
desert him and yet his office remained, and he was
also the dispenser of large patronage. The Chief Jus-
tice had 8,0001. a year, and had to provide himself
with a residence. The Archbishop of Canterbury bad
15,000/. and a palace provided for him—(Hear, hear)—
and yet they would in the former case institute an
inquiry because they thought 8,000/. too high, but
would pass by the 15,0001. of the Archbishop with-
out a word of comment.—(Hear, hear,) Let him
take the case of the Ministers of State, of the Prime
Minister. Was his office one of less state or dignity than
that of a prelate? He held his office at the sacrifice of
health and strength, and sometimes of life, and yet his
official income was only one-third that of the Arch-
bishop, one-half that of the Bishop of London, and con-
siderably below that of the Bishop of Durham or Bishop
of Winchester. The Hon. Member for Oxfurdshire
last year proposed to take off ten per cent. of the income
of the Prime Minister, but would he not touch that of
the ecclesiastical dignitaries ? The enormous dispro-
portion between those incomes justified inquiry. Now
let them take the Board of Admiralty; it consisted of a
First Lord and five junior Lords; they were charged with
the administration of one of our most important depart-
ments, and yet their united salaries did not equal the
official income of a single primate. Let them also take
the Customs and Excise. They had two beards ; one
with a chairman and eight commissioners, and yet the
united salaries of both boards did not equal the income
of two prelates. He would take another branch
into which the Noble Lord proposed inquiry—
that of foreign ambassadors and ministers. They
represented our Sovereign in all courts and coun-
tries with which we had to deal. There were 33, and
commencing with the highest in Paris, who received
10,0001. a year, to the lowest Charge 'Affaires, their
salaries together did not come within 50 per cent. of that
amount, which was annually divided amongst the Bench
of Bishops. H. would take another service—the go-
vernors of colonies; they were 43 in number, and from
the highest in Canada, who received 7,0001. a year, t
the lowest, the governor of the Falkland Isles, who re-
ceived 400/., the whole expense did not come near the
amount annually divided amongst the bishops. He now
took the salaries of the judges—an establishment upon
which they looked every day as that upon which the in-
stitutions and government of the country depended, and
he
e
w believed
ere
he might say, that of all our functionaries
bone
more reverenced than the judges.—(Hear.)
i
In the Court of Queen's Bench there were a chief jus-
tice and four judges; there was a similar number in the
Common Pleas, and also in the Exchequer. In
Chancery there were the Lord Chancellor, three
Vice-Chancellors, and the Master of the Rolls;
and yet the united salaries of all those judges
were under the Parliainentary salaries of one
class of our ecclesiastical dignitaries. With the judges
in Scotland the whole number was 33; and yet their
united salaries did not equal the incomes of the 27 pre-
lates. The highest Scotch judge had a salary below the
Parliamentary income of a Welsh prelate, and the whole
of the Scotch judges had not salaries equal to the amount
of income of four prelates. Then he came to Members
of that and the other House holding office during plea-
sure. The number was 48; their time and strength
were devoted to the public, and yet their united salaries
did not equal the amount of income of the 27 prelates.
—(Hear.) They, like the judges, were paid for work
which they could not evade, and yet, except the Lord
Chancellor, not one had a salary exceeding the income
of the Bishop of London, or two-thirds that of the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury. He would not detain the House
—(Hear, hear)—except to mention one further fact. It
was said the other night there were few instances of
public men becoming richer by public life. An instance
of a Minister of State becoming richer from office of
late years way, he believed, unknown, and the reason
assigned for it was that the duties of their office obliged
them to neglect their private affairs. That was not
the case with the prelates. He had a rehire of the
personal property left by 29 prelates since 1828. It
amounted to I,soo,oool.—(Hear, hear.) Prelates were
generally advanced in life when theywere consecrated;
they were generally poor men before, and vet in what
other profession or country in the world could they find
29 members of a profession leaving fortunes averaging
50,0001. a piece. accumulated after they had passed
middle age?—(Hear, heir.) The prelates certainly had
duties to perform, but the deans and canons had none;
and yet at that moment they divided amongst them
annually a greater amount of income than the salaries
of the functionaries in all the departments of the public
service included in the motion of the Noble Lord. A
Bill had been proposed to reduce the incomes of deans
to 1,0001. a year ; but the Noble Lord stated, on a
former evening, that the Bishop of Salisbury had said
that if the income of the Dean of Salisbury were re-
duced to that amount, no one could be found to take it.
Lord J. RUSSELL explained—The Bishop said that
the person taking it must have a private fortune.
Mr. HORSMAN continued—So that of the hard-
worked, underpaid clergymen of England, with their
prolific families, there WAS not one man to be found to
take 1,0001. a-year fur doing nothing—(A laugh)—to
sell himself to a sinecure under 1,500/.l—(Laughter.)
The Noble Lord said ho should make the experiment,
and perhaps in the Committee he would tell them
whether the experiment had succeeded, and perhaps the
Bishop of Salisbury would also expound the reason that
would prevent a poor man from accepting an office with
1,0004 a year. Was it right that a prelate should re-

ceive more than three times the salary of a Minister of
State, while poor clergymen were receiving not more
than the wages of the prelate's coachman.? Was it wise,
or safe, or seemly, that when they were instituting a
general inquiry into all other high offices of state they
should make this odious and. unpopular distinction in
favour of oue particular establishment, of which no one
could say the duties were more onerous than, those of
some of those offices into which they were abut to insti-
tute an inquiry ? The Hon. Member for Oxfordshire
made his motion because the people were overtaxed.
He (Mr. Horsman) made this because they were un-
dertaught. He appealed to those who felt the great-
est attachment for the Church Establishment, and
asked how, when we endeavoured to bring all other
publio institutions into harmony with the public
feeling, we could reconcile it with our sense of
duty to act on an opposite principle with respect to the
Church ? Why should we cherish in our ecclesiastical
establishment alone an eyesore and a reproach ? What
did we gain by that course ? Did we exalt religion or
strengthen the episcopate? His proposition was so rea-
sonable that he trusted the House would not reject it,
for all history atAl experience told us that by rejecting
reasonable propositions wo rendered the success of the
unreasonable ones more certain and more epeedy .
(Cheers.) The Hon Member concluded by making his
motion.

air G. GREY remarked that the Hon. Member was
not doing justice to the object which he had in view by
mixing it ul► with the inquiry proposed by his Noble
Friend.-(hear, hear.) It was not his intention to deny
the rictlit of the House to inquire into the episcopal re-
venues. That course was taken in 1835, and at a sub-
sequent period. Neither did he mean to contend that
the question was to be looked upon as finally settled by
what was done on those occasions. If a case could be
made out to justify it, there might be fresh inquiry and
fresh legislation. The incomes attached to the
offices which were to be inquired into by his No-
ble Friend's Committee were derived from taxation,
but the incomes of pers.:ins holding episcopal and
capitular offices stood upon a different footing, and
were derived from a different source.—(Hear, hear.)
The Honourable Member had called upon the House
not to appoint a suspected Committee, and he (Sir
George Grey) asked them not to appoint an impractic-
able one.--(Hear, hear.) If the House should adopt the
Hon. Member's amendment, it would be impossible for
the Committee to conclude their labours during the pre-
sent session.

Mr. HENLEY acknowledged himself unable to per-
ceive the drift of the Honourable Member for Cocker-
mouth's amendment, or of the arguments by which it
had been supported. The Honourable Member had
acted somewhat unfairly in leading the House to sup-
pose that bishops could accumulate the same amount of
property now of which some of their predecessors bad
died possessed. The changes which had been made of
late years rendered that impossible, and that the
Honourable Member knew perfectly well. The Hon.
Member ought to rest his proposition on its own grounds
instead of bringing it forward in the invidious way be
had done, as if his object was merely to raise a cry
against the Church.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that whenever a Member pro-
posed the reform of an abuse in that House he was sure
to be told that he had selected the wrong time for effect-
ing his object. It was not correct to assert that the
bishops derived their incomes from their own property;
they derived them from the property of the country,
which was vested in them for the performance ol certain
duties.—(Hear, hear.) Ho called upon his Hon. Col-
league not to withdraw his motion unless Ministers would
pledge themselves to support a separate motion for in-
quiry into the subject.
Mr. NEWDEGATF complained that the Hon. Mem-
ber for Cockermouth had made a most 'unfair attack on
the Church.—(Hear, and No.) Though the Honourable
Member was conqsntly bonsting of his attachment to
the Church, he lost no opportunity of vilifying it. The
tone of his speech showed that the Hon. Member was in
spirit hostile to the Church of England.—(Hear, and Oh.)
Mr. WOOD denied that the Hon. Member for Cocker-
mouth was obnoxious to the censure which had just
been passed upon him. Although he could not sympa-
thise with all that Hon. Member's observations, he en-
tirely concurred in the substance of them—namely, that
it was desirable for the Church of England herself that
this grave question should some time or other be looked
seriously in the face.—(Hear, hear.) No doubt could
be entertsined as to the right of the House to inquire
into the distribution of church property. Indeed, Par-
liament had a right to inquire into the property of any
private individual in the country if a public good could
be shown fur doing it.—( Murmurs.) Parliament ,inter-
fered with private property by every railway Bill which
it passed. The Committee best fitted for inquiry into
judicial and diplomatic salaries would not be the best
fitted for the inquiry now proposed. The time would
come, and that speedily, when it would be necessary to
have a revision of the incomes paid to the dignitaries of
the Church; and, when an inquiry did take place, it
would be desirable to consider whether provision ought
not to be made for further episcopal superintendence,
though with a different scale of salaries.
Mr. HORSMAN stated that he had made no allu-
sion to the tenure of the property in question. He had
given no opinion on the point whether it was of a public
or a private character. The incomes of the bishops had
been regulated by Act of Parliament, and he only asked
Parliament to do what it did in 1836. He meant to
reflect no more on the manner in which the bishops per-
formed their duties than on the manner in which other
functionaries discharged theirs.

Mr. GOULBURIsr observed that the Hon. Gentleman
had only walked in the course he had taken on former
occasions. He had distinctly recorded the opinion that
capitular bodies were altogether useless. He had taken
every occasion in that House to disparage in public es-
timation the office ( f bishop.—(flear. hear.) He prc-
leased to be a member of the Church of England, an
essential element of which was the episcopal authority
controlling the inferior clergy. When he drew invidious
comparisons which had no just application, it was im-
possible not to suppose that his views as to the episco-
pacy were low indeed. The arguments of the Hon.
Gentleman who described the bishops as receiving
salaries for doing nothing, were of the class at all times
addressed to those at the bottom of the scale against
those who were at the top of it. This was not an oc-
casion on which it was necessary to enter on the ques-
tion whether the arrangements made with the consent
of the Church itself had been carried to the extent
which might be expedient for the welfare of the Church.
Mr. HORSNIAN assured the Right lion. Gentleman
that he did not say the bishops had nothing to do. He
had said the bishops had duties to perform, and the deans
had none.

Mr. GOULBURN reminded the Hon. Gentleman that
he had compared bishops with judges, intimating that
the former were appointed without and the other with
qualifications—that the latter worked, and the former
did not.

Mr. HORSMAN begged to assure the Hon. Gentle-
man that he was wrong.

Colonel SIBTHORP remarked that the censure of one
man was the best praise fir another.
Mr. MANGLES had never heard a more unjust at-
tack than that made by the Right Hon. Member for the
University of Cambridge. When the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman charged the Hon. Member for Cockermouth with
stirring up the inferior members of the Church against
the superior, he might be reminded that the parties to
whom he alluded required no stirring up; and whoever
had conversed much with beneficed clergymen even, not
to speak of poor curates, must be aware that they largely
shared that feeling.
The House divided, when there appeared--
For Mr. Horsman's addition ... 95
Against it ... ... 208
Majority against it ... ... -113
PUBLIC HEALTH (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The LORD•ADVOCATE moved that this Bill be
read a second time.

After one or two ineffectual attempts on the part a
Mr. C. BRUCE and Mr. Score to have the second read

ing postponed on account of the lateness of the hour,
Mr. OSWALD said one of the changes made in the
Bill by the Select Committee of last year was, that all
preliminary inquiries should be submitted to the con-
sideration and direction of the sheriffs of the counties;
he therefore could not see the slightest use of appointing
a secretary under the Bill, or of subjecting it to the gene-
ral control of a board in England.
Mr. FORBES, end other Hon. Gentlemen, renewed
their efforts to have the Bill postponed, but ultithately
it was read a second time, on the understanding that
the future stages should be taken at an earlier hour.
The Police and Improvement (Scotland) Bill was also
read a second time on the same terms.

The Process and Practice (Ireland) Bill was recom-
mitted, and certain amendments, proposed by the
Solicitor-General, were inserted.
The Fees (Court of Common Pleas) Bill went through
Committee.
The Estate Leasing (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Indemnity Bill was read a second time; and
The House adjourned at a quarter-past Twelve o'clock
until Monday next.

Mr. C. P. VILLIERS paired off in favour of Lord
John Russell's motion for a Committee on salaries, &e.
with the Marquis of BLANDFORD, against.

RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.
BRISTOL, APRIL 12.
STOCK EXCIIANGE.—Our share market was better to-day,
but the only deviations from last quotations were—Great
Western, Quarters, 1214—Taff Vale, p.
LIVERPOOL, APRIL 12.
STOCK EXCIIANOIL—Business on our Stock Exchange
was dull to-day, and prices had a tendency downwards,
except for North Unions. The transactions were as follow :
Lancashire and Yorkshire, Consol., 314—Ditto, Fifths, 10%
dis.—Ditto' 321. Shares, 12dis. London and North-
Western, 1021,( c.—Ditto, New Quarters, dis.—Midland,
344—Ditto, Halves, 27% dis.—North Union (A), guaran-
teed jointly by London and North-Western and Lancashire
and Yorkshire, 235 Ditto (B), 1643—Shrewsbury, Os-
westry, and Chester,_ls 7:South-Eastern and Dover, 12X.

MANCHESTER, Arun, 19.
STOCK EXCHANOE.—The share market was rather better
tr,-day, but the amount of business done was limited. The
transactions were as follow :—East Lancashire. 6% —Lan-
cashire and Yorkshire, Fifths, 10 9-16 dis.—Ditto, 321. (late
Extension), 12% dis.—Ditto, West Riding Union (201), 9
dis.—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference,
6 13-16—North Staffordshire, 10 11-16 dis.—South-Eastern
and Doter, Old (No. 1), 123—Ditto, (101.), Thirds (No.
4), 43/4.
BIRMINGHAM, APRIL 12.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The share market continues ex-
tremely dull. The only transactions to-day were—Shrews
bury and Birmingham (13), 6/. 18s. 9d. dis.—South Stafford-
shire, 44 dis.
YORK, APRIL 11.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The transactions to-day were as fol.
low :—York, Newcastle, and Berwick, 121 A—Midland, 35
York and North Midland, 15%.

In the Insolvent Court yesterday, Major Richard
Henry Tolson was discharged by order of Mr. Conimissioner
Law, after having been eighteen years in prison.

1850.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
EPSOM STEEPLECHASES.- FRIDAY.

Notwithstanding the discouragieg sate of the wea-
ther during the whole of the day, there was an immense
assemblage yesterday on Epeon-common to witness the
first essay of a steeplechase meeting in that part < f the
county, an essay which, to a certain extent, must be al-
lowed to have been eminently successful. That it failed
to realise our notions of steeplechasing must be attri-
buted as much to the country as to a want of experi-
ence in the parties concerned in the "getting up." For
the accommodation of those to whom ss. was "no ob-
ject," Barnard's stands were erected iu a position com-
mending a good view of the running, and extra pains
taken to prevent the possibility of an accident; owing,
perhaps, more to the frequent showers and the muddy
state of the ground then to a forgetfulness of the melan-
choly occurrence of the preceding day, and which we
regret to find has terminated fatally in one instance;
both were crowded to excess; so also was the enclo-
sure, in which we observed nearly all the " operatives"
of the ring. If we repeat that the issue of the experi-
ment a: a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence, was
favourable, and add thet the sport, of its kind, nas
excellent, we shall say no more than is literally true;
but it is not less true that the line run over was not et
all adapted for steeplechasing; it might, in fact, from the
charac•er of the fences—mostly artificial ones—have been
properly called a hurdlo race-course. We subjoin a brief
recur❑ of the sport:— . _ _

The Surrey Hunt Steeplechase of 5 sous. each, with 25
added, 12st, each; the winner to be sold for 200 sovc.
if demanded; if entered to be sold for 150 sovs.

lowed 31b; for 100 sovs., 716; for 80 says., 10Ih; for
60 soya.. 14lb; for 40 sem., 201 b; and for 20 sovs.,
281 b. Once round and a distance, about two miles.
(10 Subs.)
Mr. H. Bird's The Hero, Bst 71b (Archer) 1
Mr. Carew's Grimaldi, 10st (W. Butler) 2
Mr. Tait's Guinan., lOst 81b (J. Mason) 0
Mr. Follitt's Zanga, llst (Ablest) 0
Mr. Johnson's Sarah Sykes, llst (Frisby) 0
Mr. Miller's Neapolitan, 10A (Buckley) 0
Mr. Boyton's Rowena, list
Mr. Rowth'is Recruit, Ilst 41b . (Reid) 0
Betting-7 to 4 agat Gulnare, Bto 1 agst Sarah Sykes,
and 4 to 1 agst Recruit.
A remarkably fine race from the distance between
The Hero and Grimaldi, ending in favour of The Hero
by a very short head; Gulnare a bad third; and Recruit
fourth; Sarah Sykes fell.
The Aristocratic Steeplechase of 10 sovs. each, with
25 added, list 71b each; winners once in 1849 or 1850
to carry 71b; twice or more, 101 b extra. Three miles.
(4 Subs.)
Mr. Anson's Johnny Oaks, 12st, 71b extra (Barlow) 1
Mr. Carew's b g by Laurel, 12st, including 71b
extra (Butler) 2
Captain Green's The Treasurer, 12st ...(W Morris) 0
Betting-5 to 4 agst Treasurer, 6to 4 agst Johnny
Oaks, and 5 to 2 agst Laurel gelding.
Won in a common canter, the Laurel gelding, who
made most of the running, having tired about halt a mile
from home. The Treasurer refused the fence above the
stand, and was not persevered with.
The Great Metropolitan Steeplechase of 15 soya. each,
10 ft, and 5 only if declared, &c., with 100 added. A
winner of 100 sovs. clear, after the publication of the
weights, to carry 71b; twice, 121 b extra; the second to
save his stake; the winner to pay 20 sovs. towards ex-
penses. Twice round and a distance, about four miles.
(25 Subs., 7 of whom declared.)
Mr. Stafford's Fugitive, aged, lost 81b...(H. Bradley) 1
Mr. Treadgold's Maria Day, aged, lOst. --(Frisby) 2
Mr. Skipworth's Rachel, 6 yrs, lOst (Taylor) 3
Mr. Elmore's The British Yeoman, aged (Archer) 0
Mr. H. Bird's Sir Peter Laurie, aged (W. Goodman) 0
Mr. T. Mason's Proceed, 10st 101 b ... (Mason) 0
Mr. Hughes's Miss Collingwood, aged (Tanker) 0
Mr. Cartwright's Thurgarton (h• b) aged (711) ex.) 0
Captain Knight's Leo, aged 9st 101 b (Boxail) 0
Mr. Dixon's Falcon, aged, 9st 10lb . (Bretton) 0
Mr. Pettifor's The Last Forrester, 9st 6lb (Backley) 0
Mr. Symonds' Ploughboy, 9st 61b (Boyce) 0
Mr. M. Stubbs' Skim, 9st 61b, carried 9st 91b (Webster) 0
Mr. Molony's Molly, 6 yrs, 9st 41b (Molony) 0
Betting-3 to 1 agst British Yeoman, 4to 1 apt Sir
Peter Laurie, 5 to 1 agst Proceed, 7 to 1 agst Maria
Day, 10 to 1 agst Thurgarton, 12 to 1 agst Fugitive,
and 12 to 1 agst Rachel.
An extraordinary fine race between the first three ended
in favour of Fugitive by half a length, Maria Day
beating Rachel by nearly two lengths. Everything else
beaten off. An objection was made against Fugitive by
the rider of Maria Day on the ground of a cross, but
was afterwards withdrawn.

The Scramble Steeplechase of 3 sovs. each, with 25
added, list 71b each; the winner to be sold for 100
sovs. if demanded, &c. If entered to be seld for 80
soya., allowed 31b; for GO soya., 71b; for 40 soya., 121 b;

for 30 sous, 171 b; and for 20 so' vs., 241 b. Once round

and a distance.
Mr. O'Key's Morris Daley, aged, list (Boyce) 1
Mr. Sait's Refugee, aged, lost 41b (Suit) 2
Mr. Bain's Frank, lOst 91b (Rains) 3
Mr. Parker's My Precious Betsy, 5 yrs...(Lowcock) 0
Mr. Knowles' Outcast, aged, Ilst (J. Mason) 0
Mr. Thrift's Wireworm, 9st 111 b (Thrift) 0
Mr. llargreave na Chintz Prints aged, I Ost 41b (Brook) 0
Mr. C4rew's Herbert Lacy, 9st 11 lb ...(Archer) 0
Captain Gambier's Stilts, aged, gat 111 b ...(Rackley) 0
Captain Thomas's Southdown, 11st (Wix) 0
Mr. Mytton's The Unlucky One, 9st 111 b, carried
9st 121 b (Reed) 0
Mr. Bishop's The Clipper, 9st Ilb
Mr. Clark's Cerberus, 9st 1 llb
Bating-2 to 1 agst Outcast, and 4 to 1 azst Herbert
Lacy. Won by a length ; Frank a bad third.
BETTING AT MANCHESTER.—FRIDAY.

NEWMARKET HANDICAP.-4 to 1 agst Chteerful (t),
7 to 1 mi' st Chantry (t), 8 to 1 apt Strongbow (taken
freely), 12 to 1 agst Herbert (t). Very little done, ex-
cept on Strongbow, who was bucked fur all the money
that could be got, at 7 and 8 to 1.
CuEsma Cur.-12 to 1 al;st Cossack (offers to take),
12 to 1 agst Peep o' Day Boy (offers to take)), 12 to 1
ugst Miss Ann, 15 to 1 agst Glauca, 20 to 1 agst Ro-
land (t), 20 to 1 agst Ellerdale (t), 10 to 1 egbt Moun-
seer, 20 to 1 agst Chantry, 50 to 1 agst The Knout.
DERBY.-6 to 1 agst Bolingbroke, 7 to 1 agst
Ghillie Callum, 9 to 1 agst Mayors (oilers to take), 12
to 1 agstThe Nigger (t), 14 to 1 agst Voltigeur (t), 15
to 1 agst The Italian, 20 to 1 agst Cyprus (t), 20 to 1
agst Clincher, 25 to 1 agst Mildew, 1,000 to 20 agst Sir
Charles (t), I,oooeto 10 agst Charley (t).
lIUNTING APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. Farquharson's hds, Mon., Short Wood; Tues.,
Knuyle.
8.V.11., Tues., Houghton Wood (roe deer).
Tiverton hds., Mon., Dulverton town; Thurs., King's-
brompton
Worcestershire hds., Mon., Ham-bridge; Wed., Hami-
ton Court; Fri., Radford-gate.
Durham County hds., Mon., Wilton Gilbert.