The Sun.
London, England, 1850-06-22 00:00:00

THE (SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY 1 EVENING, JUNE,
r 22, ,1850.

no court of justice could restrain that-free expression of
public opinion which a public journalist had a right to
pronounce on the conduct of a public man. Why
it was obvious that in the whole of the article
reference was made to the refuge which had been
afforded by England to exiles of various characters
and positions, who came from time to time to our shores,
and fund' sufficient and ample protection under our

pia sent case bad been prepared with very great
adroitness and net of course by his Highness
himself, but rather, he (Sir F. Thesiger) might say, by
his " Lowness," t',e attorney who was advising him in
the present action.--(A. laugh.) The attorney had
thought proper is leave out of the present declaration
a mo,t important part cf that art,clc of which he com-
plained as a libel that day, and for a reason which he
(Sir F. Thesiger) thought would be obvious to
the jury. Now let the jury observe the passages which
had been carefully excluded from the complaint which
the Duke made before them that day, and which had
been read as part of the article in question. It said—
" After a lapse of 110 less than ninetf en years that article
is produced in a court of justice as sufficiently libellous
to enable the plaintiff to obtain compensation."
Now he came to that part of this article which it had
been thought proper to discard and omit from the pre-
sent declaration, which was as follows:
" As to the obstacle presented against such a decision
by the Statute of Limitations, it will be observed that
that was peremptorily overcome by the evidence given
by a witness named Casimir Reinhold, who swore dis-
tinctly to having purchased, in the March of 1848, a
copy of the paper printed in the September of 1830—
thereby asserting the fact of a recent publication. It
will scarcely cause any astonishment to learn that mea-
sures will be adopted by the defendant for the purpose
of setting aside the verdict, when it is known that not
only can the circumstance of a republication in 1848 be
disproved, but conclusive testimony can be afforded that
one of the most important witnesses on behalf of the
plaintiff on a former occasion tendered his services to
the defendant as one ready to appear in court against
the ex-Duke of Brunswick for a consideration. When
these things have been exposed there cannot remain a
moment's e'cloubt as to the ulterior decision of the judi-
cial authorities."
And so careful was any allusion to the Statute of Limita-
tions and perjured witness excluded upon the present oc-
casion, that almost towards the end, if the jury would
look at the article, there were these words—" His High-
ness has consequently but little reason to congratulate
himself upon his more than questionable success on
Tuesday." Now the words he should next read had
been omitted—" Especially seeing that the verdict is one
obtained through evidence so rotten and fraudulent as to
promise its ultimate reversal." Now let the jury just ob-
serve the consequence of excluding that portion of thearticle
from the complaint of the Duke of Brunswick before
you to-day, for if it had been inserted in the declara-
tion, as be thought it ought, as there was no reason why
it should be excluded, it would have been competent for
the defendant to-have pleaded in justification that the
Statute of Limitations was pleaded to that portion of the
libel which related to the 19th of September, 1830—that
there was a witness who did swear distinctly to having
purchased in the month of March, 1848, a' copy of the
paper which was printed and published in 1830, thereby
giving the libel the effect of a republication. Now, he
might have alleged on the part of the defendant that that
which was stated in the article was true. Indeed they
could not hesitate for a moment at believing that it
would have been proved, for an application had been
made to the Court on that subject.
The Duke of Bnuerswicx—You must prove that.
Sir F. THESIGER said his Highness need not be afraid
he would prove it; and be should have proved that the
verdict was obtained through evidence so rotten and
fraudulent, as to promise its ultimate reversal.
The Duke of Bnueswecie again protested against this
mode of argument.
Sir F. THESIGER insisted that he was clearly entitled
to observe upon the omission of this portion of the article.
Lord CAMPBELL said the Learned Counsel was ea-
titled to assume such a case, to show the jury what would
have been the effect of it.
The Duke of Brunswick said that would not contra-
dict him, nor explain the conduct of the defendant.
Sir F. THESIGER continued—Now, supposing as he
head a right to do, that in a case of this description the
libel complained of was published on the 19th of Sep-
tember, 1830, and the case was brought on for trial be-
fore the jury in the year 1849—suppose the Statute of
Limitations had been pleaded, and suppose, for the pur-
pose of obviating the effect of the Statute of Limitations,
false and perjured testimony had been produced in order
to prove a recent publication—suppose those circum-
stances—why, if the jury, under those circumstances,
had been deceived into giving and awarding damages
in respect of a publication of that description, namely,
at the recent period, instead of looking to the publica
don of the 19th September, 1830, which would have
been excluded under the issue between the parties, might
not persons, and particularly public journalists, who
were deeply interested in being protected against at-
tacks of this description in courts of justice, be naturally
alarmed and naturally indignant at the perversion of
justice which had been accomplished by mean of that
description? and were not some allowances to be made for
those who wore smarting under a sense of injustice
of, this nature, and were they to be required to
be particularly cautious and guarded" in the language
which . they apply to circumstances such as that which
he had just. described. But ,it was alleged by the
Duke of Brunswick that Mr. Harmer, whom he describes
as a worthy successor of Barnard Gregory, and whose
guilty soul was to be gratified by these attacks upon
him (the Duke) took the opportunity after that verdict
was pronounced of inserting this article against him
for the express purpose of gratifying his malignity.
Now he would show the jury that Mr. Harmer had no
more to do with this publication than one of themselves.
Mr. Harmer had nothing whatever to do with it, nor
had he any thing to do with the publication of the news-
paper in question, either directly or indirectly. He did
not interfere at all with it; and therefore to attribute to
the malignity of Mr. Harmer the publication which the
Duke had spoken of in such strong terms, in which he
had chosen to calumniate that gentleman by assuming
him to be the author of the article in question, was
wholly untrue and unjust. Mr. Harmer bad no sort of
interest whatever in it, and had been no party to the in-
sertion of that article. Then it might be said it would
be hard upon the Duke, who had fuucd Mr. Harmer to be
one of the registered proprietors of the newspaper, if
on the ground he had stated his claim was to be defeated.
Why, undoubtedly, if Mr. Harmer had been registered
as sole proprietor of this newspaper it would been very
differeat; but here was Mr. Murdo Young, who had
the actual and principal interest in the newspaper,
who was the registered proprietor, and who was answer-
able bylaw for the article iu question—although he him-
self might not have written it—for its being inserted in
the newspaper. Nay, the plaintiff has commenced an
action against Mr. Young, as he would prove, for this
very libel, and delivered a declaration against him in
the case. Now, wider these circumstances, how
can the Duke call upon them to award da-
mages against Mr. Harmer in respect of a libel
to which he ras no more a party, or no more privy, than
any one of yourselves. Now, under tbese circum-
stances, he did trust that be should find himself success-
ful in defending this case, if not in point of law, at all
events by the verdict of the jury, supposing they were
called upon to give one, and the smallness of the da-
mages which they would accord—because, if the de-
fendant was, as he should satisfy them, morally innocent
of any participation in the publication of this article,
when the Dube, of Brunswick thought proper to
assail another individual than the one really liable,
to obtain damages against him, for the identical
article, be apprehended they would take care, notwith-
standing he was the proper party to be
brought within the letter of the law under
,the Act of Parliament, which was a matter for
.his Lordship to decide, to observe that at all events he
stood before them in a totally different position from one,
who, to gratify some private malignity, or some feeling
of his own, had chosen to assail another in such an ar-
ticle as this. Now, under these circumstances, he did
not consider that it was necessary to detain the jury at
any length by adverting to the different passages of this
publication, of which the Duke of Brunswick complains,
because they would naturally remark, that inasmuch as
Mr.llarmer said he was morally innocent, if legally guilty
of the publication, it would be rather inconsistent perhaps
if he were to dwell at any length upon the effect of
this publication upon the character of the Duke of
Brunswick, but still it was necessary that he should ad-
dress a few remarks to them—and they should be but a
very few—in anse er to the observations which had been
prepared for the Duke of Brunswick to present to them
with respect to the grounds upon which an action of this
kind according to his view ought to be decided by the law.
Now the Duke of Brunswick, from his birth and
position, had become a public character, and had been
placed .high above other persons. He did not mean
to say, because a person was so situated—because he
reigned as sovereign over a great number of subjects—that
any public journalist had anyright to assail his private
character, unconnected with his political capacity; but
he did maintain, and always had maintained, the right of
every public journal, on every matter in which the
political and private character of an iudividual was
so mixed up and blended together, that his
private character, and acts done as a private man, re-
flected on his public and political character, to fairly and
truthfully and honestly, assail the conduct of such a
person so circumstanced—to express disapprobation of
his conduct, if it be deserving of disapprobation, and to
do so in most unmeasured and strong terms if necessary.
Now, with regard to the present libel, he would venture
to say, that if carefully considered not one word of it
could be construed into any attack on the private cha-
racter of the Duke of Brunswick unconnected .with his
public and political character. They would recollect
that he came to this country as an exile from
his native laud ; he had been removed from his throne,
and he now alleged that the Royal Family of England
had endeavoured in every possible way to prevent his
restoration to his kingdom, and to• deprive him of the
property to which he was entitled. It was perfectly
clear, therefore, from the feeling entertained by that
family, with regard to the character and conduct of the
Duke, that they considered he had no claim on them in
respect to the relation which existed between them.
The Duke of BRUNSWICK was understood to object to
the line of argument pursued by the Learned Counsel.
Sir FREDERICK THESIGER continued—That was an
exemplification of the difficulties in which an advocate
was sometimes placed. If any of his Learned Friends
had stip, ared as counsel for the plaintiff, they would
have abstained from making any reference to the sub-
ject, and therefore he (Sir F. Thesiger) would, in that
case, have had no right to make the observations which he
was then addressing to the Court; but the Duke of Bruns-
wick bad thought proper to introduce irrevelant matters
in order to make out a stronger case for compensation
in respect of the present libel, and would have all the
advantage to be derived from such matters, and yet
would deprtve him of an opportunity of entering into an
explanation of the circumstances on which he so relied.
The Learned Counsel then adverted to the different
passages of the libel most relied upon by the plaintiff,
and contended that they applied wholly and entitely to
the political and not to the private character of the
Duke. If, therefore, he had been expelled from
his throne, and a public journalist considered
that such expulsion resulted from the proceedings of his
outraged and insulted subjects, he had a right to desig-
nate the Duke of Brunswick as a political criminal; and

laws—
" The objects of execration find themselves as freely
admitted to participate in the advantages afforded by
our institutions as the men entitled to general sympathy
and reverence. Whether it be with a view to assuage
the griefs of the latter by commiseration, or to facilitate
the expiation of the guilt of the former by affording
them an opportunity of repentance, certain it is that
Great Britain is accessible .at all times to the political
victim and the political criminal, irrespective of all
creeds, of all countries, of all coluurr, of all politics,
of all antipathies. anti of all predilections. Red
Republicans and Conservative aristocrats, each find in
England refuge from the pursuit of difficulties."
Now, might he not venture to say that a sovereign who
neglected his duty, who aroused the indignation of his
subjects, and trampled on their liberties, and who was
hurled by them from his throve, was a person whom
they might justly style as object of execration ; because
the higher he was placed the more important and exten-
sive duties he had to discharge, and the greater the
crime if he neglected and violated those duties. The
Learned Counsel then read other portions of the
alleged libel, which stated that though the
Count de Neuilly and Don Miguel, and various
other political refugees in this country had been assailed
in strong terms by the public journals, they had never
thought proper to seek redress in a court of justice, and
then went ou to say that if a monarch was expelled by
his subjects over whom he had exercised an arbitrary
and tyrannical power, and sought a refuge on our shore,,
they (the jury) bad no right to fetter the expression of
public opinion in regard to his political conduct, or to
call on journalists to adopt precisely that language
which they might think the occasion demanded relative
to one who certainly had strong and just claims
on the sympathy of the public. It was the forbearing
conduct of those individuals to whom he alluded that
led to their not appearing before a jury for damages in re-
spect to the language used by the public journals, because
they knew perfectly well that the position in which they
were placed rendered them peculiarly objects of attack
and abuse. A city set on a high hill could not be hid.
They were placed out in bold relief on the face of so-
ciety by persons who had high and important functions to
perform, who had duties of equal extent and obligation
imposed upon them by the community; and the Duke
of Brunswick sought an occasion to bring an action
against the proprietor of a newspaper for an article
which merely assailed his public character, and had con-
trived, by means of evidence, the value of which had
been already alluded to, to obtain 5001. damages—most
startling* and enormous damages under the circum-
stances. He would, therefore, entreat them, for the
safety and protection of all persons who wielded the
pen in the service of the public, to take carefully into
their consideration the whole of the libel, and he had no
doubt, if they did so, that they would take the same view
of the case which be had endeavoured to present to them
—that public men were public property, and were objects
of fair, just, and strong comment on the part of those
whose duty it was to keep the public mind alive with
respect to the conduct and proceedings of persons in the
situation of the Duke of Brunswick, and who
were bound honestly and faithfully and fear-
lessly to discharge that duty. If Mr. Harmer
was to be considered as legally responsible
for the article in question, then he would
call on them to weigh candidly but guardedly every part
of that article, and only to award damages in the event
of their thinking that there had been some intention to
assail the private character of the Duke uncon-
nected with his political character, but even in
that case they would only give such nominal damages as
the law required under the circumstances. But if they
thought the public and private character of the Duke of
Brunswick were blended and mixed up together,
so that a public journalist could not well sepa-
rate them in alluding to his political character,
why then—though the language used might be strong
—the writer had not exceeded the fair limits of criticism
on a public character, and, therefore, under those cir-
cumstances, he submitted they could not award damages
against Mr. Harmer.
Mr. A. R. Steel, the solicitor of the defendant, who
proved that the plaintiff had an action of libel pending
against Mr. Young, the proprietor of this journal, whose
solicitor he (Mr. Steel) was, iu respect of the same
article for which he now sought damages from the
present defendant.
Mr. Young also proved that Mr. Harmer knew
nothing whatever of the article in question, and had
nothing whatever to do with the management of the
paper. Ile (Mr. Young) bad been proprietor of the
paper for a period of twenty-five years.
Lord CAMPBELL, in summing up the case to the jury
said this was an action against Mr. James Harmer for an
alleged libel states to have been inserted upon his au-
thority in The Sun newspaper on the 28th June, 1849.
That article alleged to be libellous purported to be a
commentary on a trial which took place in this court
on the 26th June, 1849, when an action was
tried, in which the Duke of Brunswick was pliantiff
and Mr. James Harmer was defendant, for certain
libels alleged to have been published in a newspaper
called the Weekly Dispatch, the principal of which ap-
pearel first on the 19th September, 1830, which was
nineteen years be fore the time of the trial.
Now, certainly, by the laws of England, it was
open to all persons to comment honestly and fairly on
the proceedings of courts of justice. It was alleged
that tact verdict against the lireekly Dispatch had been
obtained by perjured testimony. He (Lord Campbell)
thought the better course would have been
to abstain from any charge of that sort until
the proper period came for applying to the
Court of Queen's Bench to set: the verdict aside.
The question, however, which he should leave to the
jury was, whether they thought the article in question
in The Evening Sun was a fair and honest commentary
on what took place at the trial to which reference had
been made, or whether they thought it was unjustifiable
and libellous? The Duke of Brunswick had thrown
out some insinuation of Mr. Harmer, the defendant,
being guilty of extortion, and wishing to receive
" hush money." He (Lord Campbell) must say
that that was libellous on the part of the Duke of Bruns-
wick, for there was not the slightest ground or pretence
for saying that there was any such wish or intention on
the part of Mr. Harmer. If he bad belonged to that de-
scription of persons he would have belonged to a descrip-
tion of persons the most infamous in society, who
sought to extort money from persons of a weak
and nervous temperament, by trading on their
fears through means characterised by wickedness
and infamy. He believed that the legislation of late
years had had a tendency to put down thole miscreants,
and to add greatly to the respectability of the
press. He (Lord Campbell) repeated there was net
the slightest colour for saying that there was
any wish on the part of Mr. Harmer to obtain
hush money, or to be guilty of extortion. The Learned
Judge then proceeded to read the whole of the article
alleged to be libellous, commenting upon it as he pro-
ceeded. Adverting to the passage which stated the cir-
cumstancesof the Duke, along with other notable persons,
having found an asylum in this country, his Lordship
said there was no libel in that; it only stated what was
highly commendable to this kingdom, to which he and
all pree•ent in court had the happiness to belong.
The jury would remember that .a witness was called on
the part of the plaintiff to speak to the intepretatinn be
would put upon the concluding sentence of the article in
question. In his (Lord Campbell's) opinion it was for
the jury, and not for any witness, to say what was the
meaning of that passage, fur such a witness could be
in no better situation to form a right opinion
upon the subject than the jury. He (Lord
Campbell) confessed, if he had been reading
the last sentence in the article, it would never have en-
tered into his mind that there was any such imputation
contained in it as had been hinted at by the plaintiff.
He (Lord Campbell) should have read it without having
the slightest notion of any such imputation. If
such was the meaning of it, certainly it con-
tained a very serious charge, and would require serious
damages; but before they could award such damages the
jury would be fully convinced in their own minds that
such was the meaning of the passage. His Lordship
said in conclusion, with strongly marked emphasis—
" Gentlemen, you will take the paper into your hands,
and you will say what is the fair meaning of the sen-
tences charged as libels. I must again say that you can
form an opinion quite as welt as I can on this sub-
ject, but I certainly never should have dreamt of
their intending any such imputation as has been hinted
at by the plaintiff. With respect to the language
used, it certainly is severe; and it is for you to say
whether it can be considered as a fair and honest com-
mentary upon the trial. If you come to the conclusion
that it is not, then it will be for you to find a verdict for
the plaintiff, with such damages as you may think pro-
per to give. But I mast say, in justice to the defendant,
that the imputation which the plaintiff himself delibe-
rately cast on, the defendant of being guilty of extortion,
and of dealing in hush money, ought to go, in my mind,
to diminish the amount of damages."
The jury after scarcely a minute's consultation gave a
verdict for the plaintiff—Damages, ONE SHILLING.
The verdict was received with audible expressions of
dense throughout the crowded court.

The following elegant impromptu, addressed by
M. Scribe to Count Rossi, has appeared in the Gazette des
Theatres, in an article which records the unprecedented suc•
cess of La Tempests :-
A MONSIEUR LE COMTE ROSSI.
" C'est toi sera qui pouvais enchainer dans son vol
Ce Rossignol divin qui nous charme i l'entendre,
Car de tout temps Rossi, chacun doit le comprendre,
Fat la moitie de Rossignol.
EUGENE SCRIBE."
Of course it is impossible really to translate this, as the
Calembourg will not be torn from the language, which is its
native soil, but a semi-Gallic attempt may be admissible.
"Thou in her flight could'st fetter—thou alone,—
That nightingale which charms the inmost soul ;
Rossi has ever been—to all 'tis known—
The half of Rossignol."
Hal6vy- having requested the great basso's autograph for his
album, Lablache immediately wrote the following :
" Quanto dalle altre varia
I)' Alevy la Tempesta' •
Quelle van plover grancline,
Oro fa pioverquesta.

L. LAILACILE

" The thunders of Halevy are
From other tempests different far—
Hail only threatens us from those :
From his the gold in torrent Rowe."

I,itton

FRANCE.

We find the following in the Saint Public of Lyons
of the lfjth :—" M. de Lamartine passed through our
city yesterday en route for Smyrna. In order,
doubtless, to avoid any demonstration, he had in-
formed no one of his arrival, except some privileged
friends. About eleven o'clock he left the hotel by a
door which opens on to the Quei du Rhone, and em
barked on board a steam-boat which was to convey him
to the South. The delicate state of his health and his
appearance of suffering made a deep impression on all
who had an opportunity of speaking to him. The
permanent confusion of political affairs, those inces-
santly renewed turns of fortune through which he has
passed, have effected a' great change in him ; never-
theless his eyes retain all their usual fire and even
vivacity."

PORTSMOUTH, JUNE 21.—The Birkenhead steam-
troop friga...e, Commander .1. A. Stevens, arrived from
Lisbon, whence she sailed on the 16th after revictual-
ling Commodore Martin's squadron.
The Thetis, 40, Captain Uodrington, is coming home
to be paid off at Devonporr.
The Royal yacht Victoria and Albert, Captain Lord
Adolphus Fitzclarence, G.C.H., goes out of harbour
to-morrow prior to starting for Gibraltar.
The Retribution steam-frigate is daily expected here
to accompany the yacht in her foreign trip.
The Birkenhead came into harbour to-day.

PLYMOUTH, JUNE 21.—A Government express
reached Devonport on Wednesday evening, and on
Thursday morning Commodore Lord John Hay, Super-
int':ndent of the dockyard, left for London by the fast
train. Lord John was member of the Board of Admi-
ralty p:eviuus to entering upon his present duties in
January.
The steam ship Salamander was on Wednesday towed
by the Contiance to the shear hulk to take on board jury
gear fur the Bacchus lazaret, at Liverpool, for which
port she sails to-morrow with Mr. Davey, second.
master attendant, and a party of seamen and riggers,
who take the Bacchus to Pembroke.

The Diligence transport sailed on Wednesday for
Deptford.
The Wizard 10-gun brig will bu taken out of dock
on Monday.
The packet brig Penguin, Lieutenant-Commander W.
Leslie, will go out of harbour to-morrow.
The Polyphemus steam-vessel is ordered hero from
Woolwich to take the July mails to Africa, touching at
Madeira. _ _ _

In honour of her Majesty's accession all the ships in
port were yesterday decorated with fisgs, the Royal
Standard was hoisted at the public departments, and
colours exhibited at a great number of private esta-
blishments, and at 12 o'clock a royal salute was fired.
Mr. Edye, master shipwright, and Mr. Henderson,
master attendant, aro in London, consulting on the dis-
position of the new basin and docks in the yard.
Letters have been received here from the Herald and
Plover, exploring ships, sent in search of Sir John
Franklin, but they contain no accounts of the missing
navigator. The Herald left Callao on the 25th of March
for the Sandwich Islands.
Wind Westerly; light.

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

From the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Co►nmons.)

FRIDAY, JUN! 21.
SUPPLY.

Order for Committee read; Motion made, and Question
proposed, " That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair :"
Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word " That"
to the end of the Question, is order to add the words " an
humble Address be presented .to her Majesty, praying that
she will be graciously pleased to direct that such a modifica-
tion of the system of National Education in Ireland may be
made as may remove the conscientious objections which a
large proportion of the Clergy and Laity of the Established
Church entertain to that system as at present carried into
operation ; or otherwise, that means may be taken to enable
those of the Clergy and Laity of the Established Church,
who entertain such conscientious objections, to extend the
blessings of Scriptural Education in Ireland," instead
thereof : Question put, " That the words proposed to be
left out stand part of the Question." The House divided :

MAJORITY—AYES, 225.
Abdy, Sir Thomas Freestun, Colonel Ord, William
Acland, Sir T. D. Glyn, George Carr Osborne,llialph
Adair, Hugh E. Goddard, A. L. Paget,;Lord A.
Adair, R. A. Grace, 0. D. 77' Palmerston, Vis.
Aglionby, H. A. , Graham, Sir James Parker, John
Armstrong, Sir A. Granger, T. C. Patten, W.
Baines, M. T. Greene, John Pearson, Charles
Baring. Sir F. Grenfell, C. Pascoe Pechell, Sir G.
Barnard, Edward G. Grenfell, Charles W. Peel, Sir Robert
Bass, Thomas Grey, Sir G. Peel, Frederick
Berkeley, Admiral Grey, it, W. Pelham, lion. D. A.
Berkeley, Henry F. Grosvenor, Lord R. Perfect, R.
Berkeley, C. L. G. Guest, Sir John Peto, Samuel
Bernal, Ralph Hall, Sir B. Pigott, Francis
Birch, Sir T. Hanmer, Sir J. Pilkington, James
Blackall, S. W. Harris, Richard Pugh. David'
Blake, M. J. nestle, Archibald Pusey, Philip
Bouverie, E. P. Hatchell, John Rawdon, Colonel
Boyle, Colonel Hawes, Benjamin Repton, G. W.
Brand, Thomas Hayter, W. G. Reynolds, John
Bright, John Headlam, Thomas Ricardo, J. L.
Brockman, E. D. Heneage, G. H. W. Ricardo, Osman
Brotherton, J. Heneage, E. Rich, Henry
Brown, W. Herbert, Sydney Robartes, T. J. A.
Browne. R. D. Heywood, James Rocke, E. B.
Burke, Sir T. J. Hobhouse, Sir John Romilly, Colonel
Campbell, W. F. Hobhouse, T. B. Romilly, Sir John
Cardwell, E. Hollond, Robert Russell, Lord John
Carter, J. B. Howard, Lord E. Russell, E.
Caulfeild, J.M. Howard, C. W. Russell, F. C.
Cavendish, G. H. Howard, E. G. Salwey, Colonel
Cayley, E. S. Howard, P. 11. Sandars, Joseph
Childers, J. W. lioward, Sir R. Seymour; Lord
Cholmeley, Sir 3r. Hutchins, E. J. Shafto, R. D.
Clay, James Jackson, William Shell, R. L.
Clay, Sir W. Jervis, Sir John Shelburne, Earl of
Clements, Charles Johnstone, Sir J. Sheridan, R. B.
Clerk, Sir G. Keating, Robert ; Slaney, Robert A.
Clifford, H. M. Kershaw, James Smith, ,Vernon
Cobden, Richard Kildare, Marquis Smith, M. Tucker
Colebrooke, Sir T. King, P. J. Smith, J. Benjamin
Cowper, W. F. Labouchere, Henry Somers, J. P.
Craig, Sir W. G. Lascclles, W. S. Somerville, Sir W.
Crawford, W. S. Lemon, Sir C. Spearman, 11. J.
Crowder, R. B. Lennard, T. B. Stanley, E. H.
Da.rymple, Captain Lewis, Sir T. Stansfield, W. R, C.
Hamer, Celonel Lewis, G. C. Stanton, W. 11.
Davie, Sir Ii Littleton, E. R. Strickland, Sir G.
Dawson, T. V. Locke, Joseph Stuart, Lord D.
Denison, J. E. Lushington, CharleS Stuart, Lord J.
D'Eyncourt, T. Mackie, John Sullivan, Michael
Douglas, Sir C. M'Gregor, John Sutton, II M
Duff, George Mahon, Lord Talbot, C. R.
Duke, Sir James Marshall, William Talbot, J. 11.
Duncan, Lord Martin, Samuel Tenison, E. K.
Duncan, George Matheson, James Thicknesse, R.:A..
Dinidas, Admiral Matheson, Colonel Thompson, Colonel
Dundas, Sir David Manic, Fox Thornely, Thomas
Dunne, Colonel Melgund. Viscount Townley, John
Ebrington, Lord Milner, W. M. Townshend. Captain
Ellis, John Milton, Viscount Tufnell, Henry
Elliot, J. E. Mitchell, T. A. Vivian, J. 11.
Enfield, Lord Moffatt, George Wahnsley, Sir J.
Euston, Earl Molesworth, Sir W. Wellesley, Lord C.
Evans, J. Monsell, William Westhead, J. B.
Ew.art, William Morris, David Willcox, Brodie
Fagan, William Mostyn, E. M. Williams, John
Ferguson, Colonel Mowatt, Francis Wilson, James
Ferguson, Sir R. Mulgrave, Earl Wodehouse, E.
Fitzwilliam, G. W. Muntz, G. F. Wood, Sir Charles
Foley, J. 11. Norreys, Lord Wood, W. P.
Forster, Mathew O'Connell, Maurice Wrightson, W.B.
Fortescue, Chichester O'Connell, M. J. Wyvill, Marrnaduke
Fortescue, J. W. O'Connor, Feargus TELLERS.
Fox, R. M. O'Flaherty, Anthony Hill, Lord M.
Fox, W. J. Ogle, S. C. Bellew, K. M.

MINORITY-NOES, 142.
Fellowes, E. Miles, William
Floyer, John Moody, C. A.
Forbes, W. Mullins, J. R.
Fox, S. L. Mundy, William
Frew en, C. H. Naas, Lord
Galway, Viscount Napier, Joseph
Gooch, E. S. Neeld, John
Gore, W. 0. Newdegate, C. N.
Gore, W. ii. 0. Newport, Visct.
Granby, Marquis of Newry, Viscount
Greenall, Gilbert Noel, G. J.
Gwyn„liowel O'Brien, Sir Ludas
Hale, R. B. Parke, C. W.
Halsey, T. P. Plumptre, J. P.
Hamilton, J. H. Richards. Richard
Hamilton, Lord C. Seymer, H. K.
Harris, Captain Sibthorp, Colonel
Heald, James Smyth, Ji hn George
Hervey, Lord A. Smollett, A.
Hildyard, T. B. T. Somerset, Captain
Hill, Lord E. Sotheron, T.
Hood, Sir Alexand Spooner, Richard
Hope, A. Stafford, A.
Ilotham,'Lord Stanford, J. F.
Hughes, W. B. Stanley, Edward
Inglis, Sir R. Stephenson, Robert
Jolliffe, Sir W. H. Stuart, It.
Jones, Captain Stuart, J.
Ker, Richard Sturt, Henry G.
Knightley, Sir C. Taylor, T.E.
Knox, Colonel Thompson, Ald.
Lacy, Henry C. Thoz hill,
G.
Law, C. E. Tollemache, John
Lennox, Lord A. Trollope, Sir:J.
Lennox, Lord G. H. Turner, G. J.
Leslie, C. P. Verner, Sir, W.
Lewisham, Vie. Vesey, T.
Lindsay, Colonel Villiers, F. W.
Lockhart, W. Vyse, R. 11.
Lowther, Colonel Waddington, H. S.
Lowther, Henry Walpole, Spencer
Lygon, General Welby, G. E.
Mackenzie, W. F. Williams, T. P.
Manners, Lord J. Yorke, E. T.
March, Earl of
Masterman, John TELLERS.
Maxwell, Hon. J. P. Hamilton, Geo. A.
Meux, Sir H. Beresford, William
Miles, P. W.

Alexander, N.
Archdall, Captain
Ashley, Lord
Baldock, E. 11.

Baldwin, Barry
Bankes, G.
Bateson, T.
Best, John
Blackstone, W.
Blair, Stephen
Boldero, H. George
Booth, Sir R. G.
Boyd, John
Bremridge, Richard
Brisco, M.
Broadwood, H.
Brooke, Lord
Brooke, Sir Al
Bruce, C. L. C.
Buck, Lewis W.
Buller, Sir J. Y.
Bunbury, W.
Burghley, Lord
Burrell, Sir C.
Burroughes, H. N.
Buxton, Sir E.
Castlereagh, Vie.
Chatterton, Colons
Chichester, Lord J.
Christopher, R. A.
Clive, 11. B.
Cobbold, John C.
Cole, H. A.
Colvile, C. R.
Conolly, Thomas
Cubitt, William
Davies, D. A. S.
Disraeli, B.
Dod, J. W.
Dodd, George
Duckworth, Sir J.
Duncombe, 0.
Duncuft, John
Edwards, Henry
Egerton, Sir P.
Egerton, W. T.
Evelyn, W. J.
Farnham, E. B.
Farrer, James

_ COURT-MARTIAL, ROYAL MARINES.-A___ Court, 'Abe sale ofiiis _cemmission,bein-Ang a settler in Canada,
martial is about to be assembled at tha head-quarters I June 21
of the Woolwich Division, for the trial of First-Lieu-
tenant E. P. Usher, for having, in the Royal Marine
Barracks at that place, repeatedly struck with his fist
and otherwise personally assaulted Second Lieutenant
F. R. Newton.

BANKRUPTCY SUPERSEDED.

William Harris and Henry Harris, paper manufle-
,urers, Wrexham, Denbighshire.
John Moody, stock manufieturer, Aldersgate-street.

BANKRUPTS,

Richard Copland, linendraper, Union street, White-
chapel, to surrender JuaLe 28, at two, and Aug. 12, at
twelve, at the Court of 13ankruptcy. Graham, official
assignee; Surr and Gribble, Lombard-street.
The General Commission, Ship, Loan, and Insurance
Company, July 4, at twelve, and Aug. 14, at eleven, at
the Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official asssignee,
Guildhall-chambers, Basiughall-street; Maples, Maples,
and Pearse, Frederick-place, Old Jewry.
Henry Williams and James Welch, builders, Great
Distaff-lane, City, June 26, at twelve, and August 1,
at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official
assignee, Basinghall-street ; Brewer, Gray's Inn-square.
Benjamin Brunton Blackwell, coffee-house keeper,
Verulain buildings., Gray's Inn, June 28, and Aug. 1, at
eleven, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official
assignee, Basiughall-strect; White, Chancery-lane.
Julia Bernard, baker, Stanford Rivers, Essex, June
28, at eleven, and Aug. 1, at twelve, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Bell, official assignee, Coleman-street-
buildings Bawling, John-street, Bedford-row. .
Samuel Gillatt, builder Chapel-street, Grosvenor-
square, June 28, at twelve, and Aug. 1, at halt-past
twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Johnson, official
assignee, Basinghall-street; Strong, Jeein-street, Crip-
plegate.

Murdoch, draper, Bristol, July 2 and August
6, at eleven, al; the Bristol District Court. Hutton,
official assignee, Bristol; Bale, Staplc-iun; Whitting-
ton and Grebble, Bristol.
William Henry Griffiths, ironmonger, Newtown,
Montgomery, July 4 and August 2, at eleven, at the
Liverpool District Court. Bird, official assignee, Liver-
pool; Jones, Newtown.
Walter James, provision dealer, Beaufort, Breconahire,
July 3 and 31, at twelve, at the Bristol District Court.
Acrainan, official assignee, Bristol; Hassell, Bristol.
John Murray, shipchandler, Sunderland, June 28, at
eleven, and August 2, at twelve, at the Newcastle-upon-
Tyne District Court. Wakley, official assignee, New-
castle-upon-Tyne; Chater, Newcastle-upon-Tyne; Bell,
Broderick, and Bell, Bow Church-yard.

Indulging i❑ dangerous pleasures is like licking
honey from a knife and cutting the tongue with the edge.
Eliza Cook's Journal.;
ANNE DYSART ; OR, THE SCOTCH MINISTER'S
DAUGHTEIL—The Examiner, in its notice of this remarkable
fiction, justly entitles it " a fascinating work of art. Anne
Dysart is, indeed, as its title tells us, a tale of every-day life.
The events, the characters, are such as we come into daily
contact with. But the author brings to their contemplation
that delightful freshness of the heart and mind to which no-
thing can ever grow stale or uninteresting; and a power of
inspiring her readers hardly less with the same undying in-
terest and sense of novelty. The principal charm of the
book consists in its numerous sketches of character, executed
with a minute delicacy of touch, which yet has nothing of
littleness in it. Every person of the drama is introduced
with an unobtrusive delineation of his or her peculiarities,
evincing a great power in the writer of seeing through
character."
IMPERIAL • PARLIAMENT.