The Sun.
London, England, 1844-06-01 00:00:00

COURT CIRCULAR.

The Queen Dowager visited the Queen yesterday, at
Buckingham Palace. Her Majesty, attended by the
Countess of Sheffield, Lady in Waiting, arrived from
Marlborough House shortly before two o'clock, and was
received by the Ladies and Gentlemen of the Hoasehold
in Waiting. The Queen Dowager partook of a dejeune
with her Majesty and his Royal Highness Prince
Albert, and afterwards returned to Marlborough House,
attended by the Countess of Sheffield.
The Queen and Prince Albert walked yesterday in the
royal gardens of Buckingham Palace.
llis Royal Highness Prince Albert rode out on horse-
back yesterday morning, attended by Colonel Wylde,
Equerry in Waiting.
The Royal Family were taken their accustomed air-
ings yesterday, in the royal gardens.
His Royal Highness Prince Albert presided, yester•
day, at a meeting of the Commission for promoting and
encouraging the Fine Arts in the re-building the Palace
of Westmi❑ster. His Royal Highness arrived at Gwydyr
Ilouse, at three o'clock, attended by Colenel Wylde.
The Commissioners present were the Duke of Suther-
land, the Marquis of Lansdowne, the Earl of Lincoln,
Viscount Palmerston, Lord Colborne, Sir Robert Harry
Inglis, Mr. Henry Gaily Knight, Mr. Henry Hallam,
Mr. George Vivian, Mr. Thomas Wyse, Lord Mahon.
and the Right Hon. T. B. Macaulay. The meeting
broke up at five o'clock when the Prince, attended by
Colonel Wylde, returned to Buckingham Palace.
His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge visaed,
her Majesty the Queen Dowager yesterday at Marl-
borough Ilouse.
Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cambridge visited
the Duchess of Gloucester yesterday at Gloucester
Ilouse.

The Duke of Cambridge attended by Baron Knese-
beck honoured the Marchioness of Aileshury with his
et liipany on Thursday evening at her residence in Gros-
venor-square.
The Earl of Delawarr arrived in town yesterday from
his seat, Buckhurst Park.
His Excellency M. Dedel returned to Wilton-crescent
Yesterday from Buckhurst Park.
Sir Henry Hardinge had an interview with Sir Robert
Peel yesterday, at his official residence in Downing.
strei t.
A messenger arrived at the Home-office yesterday,
with dispatches for Sir J. Graham from the Lord Lieu-
tenant of Ireland.

Alton Hall, in Suffolk, bra been for neatly a cen-
tury.in the possession of Mr. Dean's family, and it is only
by his lamented death that this famed property is brought
to public competition. The mansion is not one of great pre-
tensions; it is denominated a quiet, cozy habitation, full of
comfort, and where any one, so inclined, may domesticate
111)0111,000/. a year, and those whose ideas are more expanded
will not be puzzled or prohibited from adding 1,0001. or
2,000/. a year more to their disbursement ; and especially if
they intend to represent Harwich at the next elec-
tion. The situation of Alton Hall is not to be
surpassed throughout the country, and the lands con.
fleeted with it, and forming a separate lot, are called "The
Pet Farms" of this delightful vicinity.
TILE LATE FATAL ACCIDENT AT LONDON•BRIDGL.
—FINDING OF THE THIRD BODY.--Thursday afternoon Mr.
Baker, for the second time, resumed an inquiry at the Tows
of Whitby Tavern, Wapping-wall, touching the death of
Robert Harrison Thurlow, aged eight years and' a halt;
another of the unfortunate children who lost their lives by
the upsetting of a boat at London-bridge, on the evening of
Sunday, the 19th instant. The particulars of the occurrence
appeared in our journal on the following day. Tf:e bodies of
George Newton and Caroline Smith, who were also drowned
at the same time, have been recovered, and inquests held be-
fore Mr. Payne, the City Coroner within whose jurisdiction.
they had been found. That of the deceased was picked us,
floating off Pelican-stairs, Shadwell, on Tuesday morning
last. On the present occasion, George Clark deposed•tbatt
the deceased was the son of Mr. Edward Thurlow, a printer,.
residing in Shaftesbury-place, • Aldersgate-street. on the
evening in question he took the deceased to London-bridge,.
and entered the boat in which there were :thirteen other-
biPge9nveyedttoiTe7 than
particulars g
i n 3, persons,atone p refnoii
penny
ahe purpose
-hea
d
.The
witness hero detailed
ce n Watermanout
b that s Company,comp any
particulars of the occurrence, which have already been pub-
lished.
hire without being duly
e that a. eleenoftatkh
licensed, which wtbs to be heard bc .
Williainson, the owner of the boat, for plying for;
a. Cnnuatleanthnehbnedabd
"1
against.
fore the Lord Mayor the next day (Friday), when the ju xy
expressed a wish that the inquest should be adjourned, to oye
them an opportunity of knowing the decision of his Lordship
on the case before they delivered their verdict. The in-vest i-
gation will be resumed on Monday next.-.
DovEn, MAT 31.—Just before' the train left for
London with the holiday passengers, the General Steam Na-
vigation Company's favourite steamship Magician, Com-
mander Thomas ling, atrived With several passengers of
distinction,' and six carriages, from Boulogne. The pasifigs
was pQrformed as us* by this elegant ship in two hours.

A. I p T.
141ktIt.
HO USE. LtiLais,Mky 31,
Their Lorlshipi'asertibled at Five i) elude;
!ihe Dull° eft WELLINGTON, preteate:fa petition
from Newbury, praying for an extension of the Great
Western Reel:v.ly to the-town of.Newleary:
On the motion el.e.he,Earl of RIPON,-the Courts--
martial (East Judie;) Bill was read a first time. •
Lerd LURGAN presented petitions from Ireland
against the Dissent; rs' Chapels • Bill; also petitions
pea) ing their Lordships_ to legalise Presbyterian mar-
riages in Ireland.
Lord 'CAMPBELL' presented tweliCi petitions from
Ireland to elle same effect ; also • a petition ..from
Cole-
r,tife against the Dissenters' Chapels 8if1... -
THE LATE MONAGHAN ASSIZES... .
• Theitlargais of NORMAN BY rose to call their Lord-.
ships' attention to the circumstances which had occurred
at the last Monaghan assizes.. A general impression existed
hi that part of the country that there bad been a want of
sincerity in the ititentions of.. the ' Government in
carrying out the directions .which were 'contained
in a circular to • the Attorney-General Brady, with
respect:. t ► the custom of challenging jurors.
His Nole Friend opposite on that occasion. had read a
letter from the Crown solicitor, Mr. Hamilton, stating
his reasons for striking those persons off the jury. He
stated that he had. struck off John Hughes because he
had been servant to a ribbonman.
Lord WII AR NCLIFFE--Son-in-law to a ribbonman.
The Marquis of NORMANBY had understood his
Noble Friend to say servant. The fact was that Hughes
had eloped with the daughter of his father-in-law,•
many years since, but he had bedew communication with
her family since. With respect to. Colfield, it was said
that he had attended. a faction meeting, and Edward
Mackinlay had been struck off for the same offence.
Now, with respect to Mackinlay, he was a person or
considerable property, who had never •been charged
with ribbonism, or indicted, or- convicted for
any offence. Colfield, also, was a respectable person,
who had never been . convicted of any offence.
and who had frequently before served on juries. Mr.
Hamilton ehduld have taken' pains to have informed.
himself accurately, before he had brought such charges
against these respectable .persons. He- was anxious to'
hear what information his
_Noble Friend could give of
these circumstances.
Lord WHARNCLIFFB considered that no imputa-
tion had been cast by his Noble Friend upon the cha-
racter of Mr. Hamilton. The seven persons why,
hadebeeit isteeidlenff the jury were Roman Catholics, but
then It'should beTecolleeted that the offence of
• of which the priseiner had been acetisettVwas confined
almest exclusively to Roman Catholics. If Mr. Ha-
milton belieVed those statements to , be true, he
was perfectly justified in striking those persons off.
The verdict or the jury wes. a- discriminating one.
—convicting some and acquitting others.
Earl FITZWILLIAM—And, therefore, because it
was exclusively confined to. Catholics, it -•oaght to be
tried exclusively by •Pretestants! Such was the reasoning
of his Noble Friend. According to. his (Lord Fits-
william's)' understanding of the theory of trial by jury
that was a reason why Catholics should be on the jury.
Would his Noble' Friend reverse the case, and have
offenCes committed eXelnsively by Protestants tried by
an exclusively Catholic jury ?---(Cheers.) .
Lord WHARNCLIFFE denied that he had said that
all Catholics should be excluded from...juries empanelled-
fur the trial of ribbonism ; he had only said that under.'
the circumstances Mr. Hamilton was-justified -in. chal-
lenging these parties.
.The Marquis of NORMANBY said he had heard '
-nothing that induced him to believe that ribbonism was
confined to Catholics. He believed that the Roman
,
Catholic priesthood were among the most active in pat-
ting it down. ne had thrown no ,imputation on the
jury; on the contrary, he had said that they had done
their duty. Iletherefore regretted that the moral effect
of the prosecution had been lost by the exclusion of Ca—
tholics from the jury. -
Lord WHARNCLIFFE referred the Noble Marquis.'
to the evidence taken on the Committee he had referred'
to, where it was stated' that ribliohism was confined al-'.
most exclusively to Roman Catholics. .
The subject then dropped..
FACTORIES BILL.
Their Lordships then_ went into Committee on this
Bill.

Lord KINNAIIIn said though he was opposed on.
principle to all legislative interference with labour, either
with the produce of labour, or with labour itself,
yet, as the principle of this Bill had been the
law of the land for years, he shotild not oppose its pass-
ing. But there was one clause in the Bill which intro-
' duced en entirely new principle. The clause would
certainly be quite. inoperative,
_and he. wished therefore
to know why it bad been introduced into the Bill at all'?
When. they came to the 32d clause he should move that._
it be expunged.
The clause was then agreed to.
s Clauses 2to 8 inclusive were also agreed to.
Oii clause 9 being proposed,
Lord TEYNHAM said he thought some provision
ought to be made in this Bill, with respect to children
who had been absent from a factory in consequence of
ill health. He thought a clause ought to be introduced'
into the Bill, requiring that no child who had been ab
sent, in consequence of ill health, should be allowed to
go back to the factory until a certificate had been ob-
tained from a surgeon that the child was in a fit state to•
go back.
Lord WIIARNCLIFFE thought the Bill already pro-
vided for this.
The clause was then agreed to.
Clauses 10 and 11. were agreed to. • -
Op clause 12 being' proposed,
Lord I-tEAUgQ.NT moved that that part of the clause
which provided that the coat of the surgeon's certificate
should-be defrayed out of the wages of the children, be
•strue`k out.
Lord AVIAIINCLIFFE said the certificates were for
the-benefit of the children, and it was but right that they-
shnuld bear a portion of the expense.
The amendment was nee•atived without a division, and
the clans& was then agreed to.
Clauses 13 'to 17 inclusive were agreed to.
On clause 18 being proposed; • . -
*Lord BROUGHAM said he had carefully gone over,
this Bilcand he must say that he was not much pre:
toasesaed in- its •favour: - One clause- provided that :a
factory record office should be established, and that
a suitable building should be erected ,for that purpose.
He protested against such meddling, officious dabbling
legislation. If any foreigner was to look at this legis,
lation, he would think it was an Act of the year 844,
, end not of the year 1844. But in the 18th clause of
this pill, thsy had exceeded themselves. This clause
enacted the', in all cases in which the tepsand sides of
rOomi were not painted with • oil they should be lime-,
isailiedat'leastoncedin fourteen months, wherever chit-
esen and young persons were_ employed in those rooms,
sow, young persons meantwomen of from sixty to.
seventy years of age--most interesting ypung persons
they were—and where the walls were painted with oil;
they Should be every 14 months washed with soap and
renter_ It. aeatainly, was a., great omission that. the Bill
said not state the*exact degree. of- the heat. of the water
that was to .be uSed.7—(at langh.) ,N4w.he, hoped that
Lefore.long, equal care would be taken of the comfort of
the peasantry. He expected to see a Bill. ordering
the cottages of the peasantry to be whitewashed, and
enacting that-all chiuks through which draughts of wind.
. or snow, or rain, 'erhail, might pass, should be Stopped
alp with chopped hay, or straw, or plaster; and that -the
persons living in cottages should be provided with a suffi-
ciency of warm clothing,: of course at. the expense of
their landlords and employers—(Laughter)s--and that a
sufficiency of fuel shpeicl baprovitled for them, and that
lisedunghills or pigstyes.'shoula,-be allowed near their
dwelling% fir nothing could rhiorpije64 itjarii,us to health
than dunghills, and pigstyes. They *gill have a sche-
- dole_ relating to. eases in which cows houses might be Or
mitted.—(A laugh.) He was perfectly disgu.tel with
this meddling,,"officious, dabbling, syitem of legislation.
• —(The Noble and Learned j.ord then threw the Bill
across the table, and resumed his seat, amidst cheers and
laughter.) -•' • . •
Lord WHARNCLIFFE said that the clause was only
a renewal of the one in the tiLd. Bill..
The clause was then passed.
• Clauses from 19.4.02 a were,-pa.iiedmithout discussion.
elause 29 being proposed, • .•
Earl AtztyyjLlAANt said it:appeared- that evi I.) -
body wag i.z favour of this Bill—(" No, no," from Lord
Kinnaird)—that was, speaking abstractedly. '.l:lt
Government was for it.-411e: Tories, w. re for it—the
Whigs were for it—the political economists were for it ;
,• but these were not quite.• satisfied with it,-they were
dispotied to carry. it. a Jittleferther. The clatise under
consid,ration proved that ther.' was some. little return of
common saw's.. beginning. to_be shown on the subject.
Theel*.use subsilteleal. :" eight years" instead of nine! as
the tlf*Tat. which, chitilieeeotild 'go- to Ark .in factories.
il?v1)4411 to srg a, sunatar .return of, good sense to the
ifemplOyealiiu minesa but he could not cOmpre-
hendwhy all. this.eNtraordinary philanthropy exhibited
for those employed in 'factories should not, he carried a
little furthera amid' why there 'was-asuch 'neglect of the
inonil and 'phyaielil evils lit the socfal condition of other
classes of'the cornmunity.• The•landed'interest had taken
this Bill especially under its protection, catild not
cfeenPrehend wily it' neglected the interest Pf those with
whom it was partieularlys'etinne'etech Those employed
in mince and aetoriee enjoyed, at all event's,awarm
seed;
u equal- temperature,, which was. not. so injurious as •
asApoeurc au ,a-cold open,field for many hours during the
saity,,which.wai the case with children in the, agrieultu
rat. districts. who were employed in ‘,,searing", biltds,„
and , other field occupations. ne thought that
. the only oases 'of itterferenee with labour should be
in those whertt the morals of the people were affected..
bey were interfering with the rights of the working
ewes,- an& preventing them frPm earning as much as
tbey could, If they did, thiS, they o
at the same
time, togiVe them the means of obtaining food.-
- ,(Cheers.) If they erainr
,ed industry,. they ought to feed
ttbe people .:• If the Legislature, were to do this, it would
act. consistently. 'He wondered ow Partia_n_aent would
. receive a Bill which provided that aload :of h(ay should
• slot„he carried after six o'clock in the: evaung,e— Hear,
teat%) Yet this would not be worse .titan the present
Big, 801. was one-sided'legislatioh, • and he could
not, 'therefore, give it his support. •• - . .•
The.Maiquis of NORMANBY denied that there was
any ratrogressionin thii Bill: lie thdught.llo eemParlL
1 Am.:, could be instituted 'between ~the condition of the
' liericultural and manufacturing labourer. :The force "Om
nature protected the agricultural labourer, but:the factory
laboiwer had no such protection. Ile svisheti•tomminatin),
Ste Bill in' its present integrity. ,Witiu. regard AD L1,4).--
(4 ~..
argument that the last hour was the maeufactureeit only
profit, why, the same thing had been stated. twenty'
• years ago,when the late Sir Robert feel had proposed
, reduce the hours of labour from sixteen hours. With
wegardao the provisions for enforcing cleanliness, Tthere`
l
could be no,doubt of the necessity for those provisions',
"where large numbers of pe-
rsons were tonegated
.044rOutri 414 I, •
_a...-. ki,4 •r (1:4-a
The Bishop of y, rejoiceu at' the Yimitation of

the hours of labour bythis Bill, and only regretted that
the limitation had not been carried further. It was im-
possible to irnarov. the sugial,_mural, and religious con-
dition of the population of the manufacturing districts,
without limiting the hcurs of labour. Commercial
.prosperity niighthtpurchased at too great a price,, and
it Was going to great expene,for it to satrifice to it the
moral and religious iiithare of our .populatioa.
Lord WHARNCLIFFE clefendeil the clause.
The Earl of WINCHILSEA regretted that a ten
hours' clause had not been adopted ; but be admitted
that the present Bill was an improvement on the oldlaw,
The clause was agree'] to.
Clauses 30 and 31 wore agreed to.
'Oa clause 32, which provides that women shall be con-
sidered as young persons, being pr,posed,
LOrd Ii_INNAIRD moved that the clause be' ex-
punged, as he considered the clause to be an attempt to
establish an interference with adult labour.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, but no division
took place. On our return to the gallery we found
Lord \VIIARNCLIFFE defending the clause.
Lord BROUGHAM concurred with his Noble Friend
at the table (Lord Kinnaird); in thinking that the clause
ought to be struck out. Duchesses and Countesses were
permitted to dance about their children from eleven at
night to five in the morning in rooms the atmosphere of
which was, quite pestiferous, and yet the Legislature
never attempted to interrere withthetn. Why, the ope-
ratives saw through this, and petitioned the Legislature
not to listen to such nonsense as this Bill, because they
were convinced that they could never get twelve hours'
wages for ten hours' work. Coachmen were kept out all
night, sitting on their boxes,, waiting; for parties coming
from routes, but nobody attempted to interfere for them,
althOugh numbers of them annually fell victims to the
inclemency of the weather to which they were exposed.
The Marquis of NORMANBY contended that twelve
hours was quite as great a length of time as any woman
ought to labour in a factory. The peasantry in the agri-
cultural districts were better educated than the labourers
in the manufacturing districts, as was -proved by the re-
turns of the registrar. .

Lord BROUGHAM said education, was known by its
fruits; and he would ask if Mr. Thom, whe, four or five
years ago, had, by his delusions, given rise to such diS-
graceful scenes in the agricultural districts of Kent,
would have had ten followers in Barnsley, Manchester,
or any manufacturing district.
Lard.CAMPBELL would support the amendment of
his Noble Friend (Lord Kinnaird). This clause applied
to the whole female sex. There might be a case of a
woman of forty years of age in robust health, who
rather than suffer her children to go into the workhouse
would vldrk without injury to her health for more than
twelve hours aday, yet the law interfered to prevent her,
and to force her children into the workhouse. This
was an unjust interference with adult labour, and there-
fore he should oppose it.
Lord BROUGHAM said that as this had been dis-
cussed as a question of morals between the agricultural'
and' the manufacturing districts he would be content to
put it upon that issue. He held in his hand a return of
the number of bastards born in the different counties in
England in the year 1843. In Bedfordshire, an agri7
cultural district, they were five and three-tenths in the
thoUsand in proportion to , the whole population ; in
Dorsetshire they, were three in the thousand; and in
Herefordshire four and ono-tenth in the thousand ; in
the North Riding of Yorkshire three and three-tenths
in the thousand in proportion to the population. These
were-purely.agricultural districts. In the West Riding
of Yorkshire, a manufacturing district, they were only
one and five-sixths in the thousand; and in Lancashire
they were only one and two-tentha in the 'thousand in
proportion to the population. That was the proportion
of immorality of the manufacturing districts. Now let
them come to .Wales ; there they would find that in
Angleses,theproportion ,of illegitimate children to the
population was seventy in the thousand! And in Radnor
it was 105 in the thousand !—(Laughter.) He was con-.
tent to put the vote on this issue.. • .•
Earl WINCIIILSEA said it was a notorious fact that
where large numbers of people were congregated to-
gether, there were not so many children born in pro-
' portion to the POpulation as in places where the numbers
were smaller. •
Lord REDESDALE.COntended that the return which
had been quoted did not shoW the number of illegitimate
children born in the whole population, but the number
of Children relieved, which were, of course, pauper
children. A return of the whole number born it would
be impossible to procure. He had beets accused of igno-
rance, but he was quite correct.
The Marquis of CLANRICARDE did. not believe
that the greater immorality of, the manufacturing dis-
triCts had been proved.,
After a few words' from the Marquis of NOR-
MAtBY, •
Lord KINNAIRD said the principle on Which he
reeved the rejection of the clause was, on the ground that
it was an interference with all female adult labour.
The .Committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause, Contents
Against it, Non-contents
Majority for the clause
The clause was then agreed to, as were clauses 33,
'34, and.3s.
Clauies 36 to 66 incluiive were then severally put
and agreed to withont discussion, and the Bill having
been reported to the House without amendthents, was
ordered to be read a third time on Monday next..
POACHING PREVENTION BILL.

The Earl of STRADBROKE moved the third read-
ing of the Poaching Prevention Bill, in which he wished
to prepot e some amendments.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that the proper
time.to propose the amendments would be on the ques-
tion that the Bill do pass*
The Duke of RICHMOND hoped. the further con-
.
sideration.of the Bill would: be postponed in order to
give. their. Lordships an opportunity of .considering the
amendments. He objected to giving gamekeepers the
power of arresting persons On the high road. -1 •
After a few- words from the Earl of Radnor,-from Lord
Campbell h.- 4514)01i of the views of the Duke of Rich-
.mold, and from Eaxl Fitzharkliw in sttppOrt of, the Bill,
it Was 'read a third,•time, the ainerrdinelfts. were propoied.
theßill as amended. was orderedtO be 'Anted, and the
debate on the qtte:stien that. the Bill .do pass Was, ad-
journetttill Moaday.
CUSTOMS BILL*. . .
The Customs Bill passed through Committee.. .
The other pills onthe table were forwarded- a stage,
and the House adjoUrned. • •

, .
HOUSE 'OF COMMONS, May 31.
The SPEAsEK•took the Chair at the usual hour.
• NEW MEMBER. .

Mr: BaitVintiP..- took the oaths and his seat for Kit-
tuarnock. The Hon: -Member was introduced by Mr.
Ellice, jun., tutid'Afr.-ord.- • • ' :
p..ISSESTERS' E CHAPLS BlLL.Petitions against this Bill were preented by Colonel
P0w441, by' Mr.. Broadley .from Yorks,hiee, Sir•J. Y.
Buller. from Devon, Mr. B. Cresswell float N'orthuiriber-
land, Major Beresf,,rd from Ilarwich, ,Lord Pollington
from Pontefract, Mr. Brotherton. frpm Salford, Mr, B.
Hughes frotu Carnarvon and Bangor, Lord Rendlesham
from Sufftilk,l4e: Barnard front. Greenwich, Mr. Boyd
from places in Irejand, and Colonel Fox from Limehtinse.
Petitions in faTOtre of the Bill were pr,esented by
.Mr. A.
Chaptitan' foim Whi i by, ,and- 51% stet front DerhY:.
Mr. W. O. STIIkEY pri•sented, a pention frora a
. .
Wesleyan contkrega 9pin Holyliclai against the DlsSex-
ters' C 144148, BilL •
Lord ASllLEY'presitnte4.,several, tiops to the some
eff et. .ro -' oft •

Captain ROUSpre,ented.a petition from Westminster
:o the same effect. .• • •

Sir W. JAMES presented !Petitions' -fro& several
Wesleyan congregations.to• the same effect.
Mr. ClintSCONIElt 'pre 'it petition'frOm the
clergy and'adtilt inhabit tots of Andover to the Paine effect.
Sir It. 11. I NG LlSt,r,sented it petition from the wardens
and gttiecollicers: of Winchester College, against, the
Ecclesiastical Court's Bill; Jas.) 'from Cromer, in Nor 7
folk, against t he Dissenters' Chapels Bill.
Anllo,N.,•MEzanEn,presented several.-petitions to the
dame effect. 7 _ • .

tiir THOMAS. TROWBRIDGE presented •tyl votition
to the satneJefrect.
Mr. MURPHY presented a petition from Ireland to
the same eftvet.
V4NE- presented,a.p4itien frorn nearer&
shire in favour orthe .„; , • •
11.BERKF.LE.V presented several pt•titions from
G lotteustershire• and soatersetshite- against the pis-4e nt -
ers' Chapels Bill.
ble-,iCAnTWUIGII-T presented several -petitions to
the same effect._ • : •• •- •

Lortf-NE‘VlttpreAnted's6veral'petitions to tlio Same
•
eff..ct
Sir C. LtMON presented tt petitiOn; frosnlrelawd to
the smile. effett': • - • .
Mr:-CSRTER 'presentea -a petition from ,Clitheroe,
and other places, to the same,effeet. . •
Sir W. WYNN presented a.petition from Devo- n.;thire,
..to.thbsamii effret . ;
Mr. VILLIERS presented a petition from Stafford-
shire to the stone; effect.
Mr. G. presented a petition to the same
effect. • • . 'I • •
Mr. CIITITSTIE presented a petitionfrom Wales in
favour of the Bill: -2 • ,
• rMr...-,11. MMUS' presented a petition„frona- Mae-
glesfteld thy mime effePt,'" :• . . '
Mr. bp/Err -presented a petition from Uoniton in
favoity anft• arid 'one from.-Huntingdon against, the Dis-
senters' Chapelaßill. • • ,
BRIOHT presented a petitiowagainst the Bill.
• ' PROTECTIOI..4 TO AOR Icuvr LIRE.
Sir J. Y. BULLER presented sO.eral petitions from
Delon` in favour of 'further protectli3n tO•agritulttire.
lord RENDLESHA presented
M preseed similar petitions
from'Sutitilk. . .
Mr:HUME Presented's petition from an agricultural
society in India, praying for,the.admission of corn from
Elaa:. on the ssme terms as corn coming front Canada.
The lion. Member gavenotice of his. intqntion.. to call
the attention of the Housntothet deject naneltrly day.

. • ....t-};bU N CATIO: IN IRIIAND.
Mr. LEFItOar-p- resente'd pet4loris` from Cork against
the flittiolia,l,,s,..s.teln.of education in Ireland.
. . DlsSl;slrtktitS7 .6
. ' . ' .
, 11411'F L 'BILL
Mr. I(EMBLE resented ptstiti"94na'fro. in e.OlVgre'g.;tions
of I)issenterhinSurrey against die Dis,3enters Chapels
Bill. , .
~. . .
.nte:liP:etitions
.sh•iCeetiptotaltrilioTsAaleLptfritetptr.ese froniilier eford-
, 1)90R-LAWS. . •• i,..,7! :... -..
•
'''i,fr: FERPAND moved lbr jaliti bt" tlid'dn'ir •
tn" between" ityder, a ' ineils- r
T. ,
e, ev.ind-
,enciMr. , , kieg.p iti lard
of
guardians,c,fChelsea, .and the ;Poor-law COinnal*lsioners.
--Ordgredo
~._ !.! • . • - •'• ic - ...
Mr. HUME gave notice that, in Committee upnil the
Bank .Charter Bill; he should -.1110!te. •11.CIAISO !fur, the le-
peal °Nile legal tenderielattie: : i ... , Tlsri 1., ,e ?„..,L
ADJOURNMENT OF ,TllE,.(l•lstEizil, .
6 '6lli•V• 111!Akii of,Bir G;optia,it?,,si *XVI- that
the liouiCa 'lts rising hdttiliril a oncia7. 4

COURTS-MARTIAL.
The Courts-martial Bill (East Indies) was read a third
time and passed.

INDIAN ARMY.

Mr. HUAIE called the attention of the Government to
the indications of a mutinous spirit among the Sepoys of
the Indian army. He considered it a most alarming symp-
tom, and it was of the greatest importance that the in-
justice that had caused it should not be continued. He
was consoled by the thought that Sir H. Hardinge would
do all in his power to prevent it.
TRADE WITH PRUSSIA.

Lord J. RUSSELL gave'notice, that an Tuesday
next, he should move for the production of the corres-
pondence relative to the commercial relations between
this country and Prussia.