The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-09 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, JULY 9, 1844.

that instance, sitting in the Court of Queen's Bernch.
There were a great number of other cases, which showed
that the Court of Queen's Bench was a court of assize.
Ile would only make a few observations upon what had
been said with regard to the counts of the indictment,
as his Learned Friend, the Attorney-General for Ire-
land, would deal more at large upon that point. Ho
would contend that it was immaterial even if there were,
bad counts in the indictment ; but he was prepared to
argue that all the counts in this indictment were good
and valid counts. He would contend that the offence'
was but one-, though it was laid in different ways. He
would first call the attention of their Lordships to that,
count which charged the defendants with con-
spiring to bring into contempt the tribunals esta-
blished for the administration of the law in Ire-
land, and to diminish the confidence of her Ma-.
jesty's liege subjects in them. The Hon. Gentleman
then referred to a case in page 678 of the 6th volume of
Term Reports, and to other cases, to show that there
was a distinction between an indictment for a conspi-
racy, and an indictment against an individual. He
asked. was, or was not, the charge laid in the eighth count,
namely, the conspiracy to bring into contempt the tri-
bunals of the country, an indictable offence? His Hon.
Friend said, that reform might be made in the law, that
persons might league together to make those re-
forms—to reform the. Ecclesiastical Courts for instance.
He (the Attorney-General) did not dispute that, but he
said it was an indictable offence for parties to conspire
and confederate to bring into contempt the tribunals of
the country as by law established. He begged on this
point to refer their Lordships to the observations made
by Mr. Justice Buller, in the case of the King v. Wat-
son, 3d Term Reports, p. 196. His Learned Friend,
put the case of a number of persons meeting
together, and agreeing to write down the Court
of Star Chamber, and he then put the case of the
abuses which prevailed in the Court of Queen's Bench
and the Court of Common Pleas, amongst the judges of
the land, in the time of the Stuarts, and he read a pas-
sage from a work of the Right Hon. Gentleman in the
other House, in which he, in strong terms of vitupera-
tion, attacked the'courts of justice of that time. But he
(the Attorney-General) would contend that, with re-
gard to the Conrt of Star Chamber, and with re-
gard to those bad times, it was not a mode of
trying what .persons were justified in doing at present.
His Learned Friend might just as well have said that
they were now indebted for the liberties they enjoyed to
the army of the Prince of Orange, and to the employ-
ment of that army by the gentry of England against the
King. If the abuses that prevailed were put down by
force of arms, yet it was a means beyond the law ; and
though we may feel that men were then justified in re-
sorting to them, transgressing the law and going beyond
it, for the purpose of redressing their grievances, yet it
did not follow that at the present day parties
were at liberty to take the same means of
bringing the constituted authorities of the coun-
try into contempt. Suppose a conspiracy was
,formed, of which the overt acts were publications of
a nature that would bring the Constitution into con-
tempt, would not that be an offence. This count of the
indictment charged a conspiracy to bring into hatred and
contempt the administration of justice. That count
could be proved if it should be established that the
parties had poured fourth a succession of libels having
that intention; beyond all doubt this would be an indis-
putable offence. But his Learned Friend said if persons
did honestly believe that the Court of Queen's Bench now
was in the same bad state as in the time which had been
mentioned, they were entitled to meet together, and
combine, in order to write it down. This
he wholly denied, and when his Learned Friend
said that if they honestly believed such to be the case
they had a right to meet for that purpose, let them ob-
serve what it would lead to. Where was the distinction
to be drawn ? In the same way, parties might honestly
believe that it would be for the benefit of the public to
conspire in the same manner against the Houses of Lords
and Commons ; for the same reasons they would be jus-
tified in writing them down. In the attempt to reform
the institutions of the country, persons were not jus-
tified in meeting together to conspire to bring into
hatred and contempt, above all with respect to an
authority which could not be brought into disrepute
s ithout sapping the foundations of the Constitution.
Were their Lordships prepared to say that this was no
crime, or that any number of persons might meet to-
gether for the purpose of writing down the tribunals of
the country, and bringing them into contempt and dis-
repute ?
Lord CAMPBELL—You should take the whole of the
count which lays the charge of bringing the tribunals
of the country into disrepute, for the purpose of having
others substituted for them. That is certainly much
like what we call law reform.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the-count did not state
certain of the tribunals of the country, but the tribunals,
Lord CAMPBELL—That others may be constituted ; it
may be that those others are to be constituted by Act
of Parliament.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that the statement in
the count was that parties unlawfully conspired, for the
purpose of inducing her Majesty's subjects to withdraw
their business from the tribunals of the country. It was
not that these tribunals were to be swept away and others
substituted. The existing tribunals in Ireland are to
remain ; but the conspiracy was to shake their founda-
tions, by
.bringing them into disrepute, and withdrawing
their business from them.

--
Lord CAMPBELL—The courts are to remain ; but
a concurrent jurisdiction is to be given to new ones, and
there is an incitement to the people to leave the old ones
and come to the new.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said it was not for him to
argue with his Lordship ; but he supposed, if the exist-
ing tribunals were to continue, they were, at the same
time, to be brought into disrepute and contempt.
Lord BROUGHAM said it would have made the count
quite clear, if it had said these new tribunals were to
have been constituted by other means than by Act of
Parliament.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL continued. There was only
other count to which he wished to call their attention.
It was the sixth, which charged the meeting in large
numbers, and, by demonstrations of great physi-
cal force, to make changes in the law. It
was objected that the count did not distinctly state
who was to be intimidated, or how the intimidation was
to be effected. He submitted that that was not neces-
sary. The allegation was that the parties conspired
together to cause a large number of persons to meet toge-
ther, with a view of procuring a change in the law. The
Learned Counsel then referred to the case of The Queen
v. Eccles. In that case certain persons conspired toge-
ther by divers indirect means to prevent a certain person
from carrying on the business of a tailor. The Court was
of opinion that it was not necessary that the means
should be set out. In the case of the King v. Gill, Ist
Barnewall and Alderson, the parties were charged with
combining and conspiring together, by divers means,
unlawfully to obtain possession of large sums of
Money. Lord Tenterden said that the indictment was
sufficient, as the gist of the offence was the conspiracy.
The Learned Counsel mentioned another case, in which
certain persons were indicted for a conspiracy to de-
fraud divers of her Majesty's subjects. The Court of
Queen's Bench were of opinion that the count was good
without stating who the persons to be defrauded were.
So with regard to the persons to be intimidated. Here
was a conspiracy to collect together great
masses of the people, with a view to pro.
cure a change in the law ; and the inti-
midation was used against all persons and all bodies who
might oppose and resist a. change in the law. It was not
necessary that the count should state against whom the
intimidation was to be directed.
Lord CAMPBELL—It is said, on the other side, that
the intimidation might be that of a highwayman, or of
persons seeking to intimidate the Legislature.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that would not aliply.
to a count which referred to an attempt to change the law
Lord BROUGHAM—Mr. Kelly argued in this way..
There is a body of people coming down to prevent the
Legislature from doing what it is minded to do. Then
would very loyal people take part with the Legislature, and
preserve to them free liberty of action, by intimidating
the intimidators.

The ArroRNEY-GENERAL said he did not suppose for
a moment that their Lordships would adopt that view. I
He would now leave this case after referring to the form I
of the recognisances. His Learned Friend said that if a
person remained six years in prison, he might then
come out of prison without entering into recognisances.
The object of recognisance was, that the person so
imprisoned, should not be let out of prison until he
had entered into recognisance to keep the peace—no
matter what length of tide he had been imprisoned.
He would not trouble the House by further reference to
precedents. He submitted that he had shown that this
appeal in error must be rejected.
Mr. Justice GURNEY suggested that the. Attorney-
General had said nothing about the indorsement.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said that there were other
points upon which his Learned Friend, the Attorney-
General for Ireland, would presently address their Lord-
ships. With respect to the indorsement, he would only
say that there was only one error assigned on that point,
and that was by Mr. Steele. The indictment could not
be affected by that, for the indictment was found before
the endorsement could be made.
The LORD CHANCELLOR—There is nPo time fixed at
all for the endorsement.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL—Certainly not. The-error
in fact admitted that the witnesses were all sworn
properly before the grand jury, and that the Bill
was founded upon that evidence. In conclusion, be sub-
mitted that he had shown to their Lordships that the
verdict was not at variance with the indictment—that it
did not find the defendants guilty of more-offences than
they were charged with—that there were no grounds for
the challenge of the array—and that there was no ground
for impeaching the judgment of the court below, because
the witnesses were sworn by the grand jury. He sub-
mitted that their Lordships must decide that there were
no grounds whatever for reversing the judgment of the
court below. The Hon. and _Learned Gentleman, who
was heard for the last few minutes with great difficulty,
then withdrew, apparently much exhausted.
The Lord. Chancellor and the Judges then retired for
a short time.
On the return of their Lordships,
Mr T. B. C. SMITH (the Attorney-General for Ire-
land) then proceeded to address their Lordships. He
appeared also on the part of the Crown, and he thought
it would not be consistent with his duty to occupy their
Lordships at any great length, as the case bad been so
fully argued by his Learned Friend theAttorney-General.
He would endeavour to compress his observations into
narrow a compass as possible. Now he would first
"t;Pply-"4f to the challenge of the array, and he
r *hei Lordships came to consider the
thought that when .._
I,Z unsupported either by
challenge it would be found to ~ _ -
"r misconduct
substance or form. There was no defau,..... • 164,
attributed to the sheriff. The challenge was only to ...-
array empannelled by that officer. Now by the 9th
section of the Jury Act, to which their Lord-
' ships had been referred, the clerk of the peace
L having made out the jurors' book, was to de-

7 liver it to the sheriff, and-by the 24th section of the
same Act, the sheritZ within ten days after the
' jurors' book had been delivered to him, was to make out
a special jury list, arranging the persons according to
•i their rank, property, and so on; and that the jurylist.
so made out by the sheriff was to be the special jury list_
for that year; and there was a special rule in the 11th
section, by which the sheriff was not to return the names
of any persons not contained in the jurors' book
for the then current year, and by the 25th
section, where an order was made for a special jury,
there was a provision that the officer of the court, who
was to strike the special jury, was to appoint a time and
place fur that purpose and the statute then provided
that the sheriff and under-sheriff should be' required to
bring on that day their special jury-list. Now there
was no pretence whatever that the provisions he had
mentioned had not been properly complied with, and
there was nothing to show that the twenty-four jurors,
had not been properly selected. In this case there was
no default, partiality, or misconduct attributed to the
sheriff, and he could not believe that their
Lordships would uphold the novel doctrine, that-
a challenge to' the array was 'to be considered
as good when there was no default,partiality, or mis-
conduct attributed to the sheriff. The law, as laid down
in Coke upon Lyttleton, 156 B, is clear and precise upon
this subject, and in the same work, 158 A, it was stated that
if the array was quashed process should be awarded
to the coroners, and if the coroners were indifferent then
to persons appointed by the court. This proved clearly
that the cause of challenging the array must be some
fault in the sheriff, and he would ask the Learned
Counsel 'on the other side what would be the nature of
the award which he would have entered upon the record
if the panel were quashed without fault of the sheriff,
and to whom under those circumstances they would have
it directed ? This was not an unfair test, for if they set
aside the panel returned by the sheriff, the law pointed
out the offieer to whom they were to apply. But in this case
everything that had been done by the sheriff had been
right and correct throughout; and he would ask what
award was to be entered on the record? Were they to
call on the coroners to return a new panel? Why, they
would return the same, and there would be the challenge
to the array again. The statute expressly stated that
the sheriff was to return no name except he found it in
the jurors' book. How was the sheriff then to take
upon himself to say, of his own mere motion, that al-
though he had a jurors book in his possession,
returned to him by, the proper officer, he
would cancel the jurors' list of 1844, without any
order of the court? Why they were .calling upon the
sheriff to violate -the Act of Parliament. He must be
justified, when he had no jurors' book for
1844, to go to the one for 1843. But how
could he take upon himself to decide that the
jurors' book de facto for 1844, was not the jurors' book
de jure in the case of the, Queen v. O'Connell, although
it might be in other cases? In a case of this kind, if
there were any fraud in the jurors' book for 1844, ofany
ground for saying so, it was a nullity in point of law.
The defendants should make application to the Queen's
Bench, founded on a proper case, and supported by
proper affidavits, and no doubt the court would inter-
fere. He could not admit that the court would inter-'
fere in every case ; but, where it saw a proper case' it
would interfere. He submitted that the chal-
lenge was' bad ; but if it were capable of being
entertained, and they wished to establish the invalidity
of the jurors' book, they were bound to raise distinct
issues, so as to raise the question of validity or inva-
lidity. He submitted, as in the present case, there
was no pretext for saying- there had been
any fault on the part of the sheriff; there was
no ground for challenging the array. The Right
Honourable and Learned Gentleman then re-
ferred to the provisions of the Jurors' Act, and the
mode in which the Act prescribed that the general list
was 'to be made out. The challenge of Mr. O'Connell
had admitted that the provisions of this Act had been
complied with, except in one particular, namely, that
the names were not arranged according to rank and pro-
perty, and that a list containing all the names arranged
according to rank and property was not delivered to
the clerk of the peace. Would their Lordships hold that
such an averment could be supported if even
there was a single name placed out of its proper order?
He did not believe their Lordships would hold any such
thing. The challenger went on to state that " a paper
writing, purporting to be a general list, had been
illegally and fraudulently made out by some person or
persons unknown." That was the averment in the chal-
lenge of Mr. O'Connell, but there was a slight variation
in the challenges of the other traversers which had been
alluded to by his Learned Friend the Attorney-General.
[The Learned Gentleman was proceeding when our
report left.]

MPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
(THIS DAY.)

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

The SPEAKER took the Chair at Twelve o'clock.
The Colonial Postage Bill, the Three- and •a-Half per
Cents. Exemption Bill, and the Assessed Taxes Compen-
sation Bill, passed through Committee and were reported.
The Militia Ballot Suspension Bill, the Stock in
Trade Bill, and the Turnpike Acts Continuance Bill,
were severally read a third time and passed.
VAGRANTS' REMOVAL BILL.

On the motion that the report on this Bill be brought
up,
Colonel RAWDON said that, under the operations of
this Bill, many cases of hardship would occur. He
thought it would be a hardship for an Irishman who had
lived in this country for a number of years, and had con-
tributed to the prosperity of the country, to be sent to
Ireland in case of his becoming destitute. •

Sir J. GRAHAM said this Bill was merely to con-
tinue for one year more an annual Bill. With respect
to the case of hardship instanced by the Hon. and Gal-
lant Gentleman, he could only say that such hardship
might occur to an Englishman residing in Ireland. The
subject, however, would be taken into consideration by
the Government next year.
After a few words from Mr. Palmer, Col. Rawdon,
and Mr. Brotherton, the report was brought up.
SUDBURY DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL moved the second
reading of this Bill.
The Bill having been read a second time,
Mr. BLACKSTONE moved that counsel be heard at
the bar against the Bill.
Mr. M. D. Hill, Q.C., was then called in, and addiessed
the House on the part of the mayor, aldermen, and bur-
gesses of Sudbury against the passing of this Bill.
He contended that the present Bill wholly differed in
principle from any former Disfranchisement Bill. It
proceeded on the assumption that certain facts which were
set forth in a report of some Commission were true, and
acting upon this assumption, and without any examina-
tion of witnesses, it was intended to punish a whole con-
stituency for offences which were charged upon a portion
only of that constituency. This, he contended, was
case of peculiar hardship and injustice.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said that, in his opi-
nion, the Learned Counsel who had just addressed the
House had failed to make out a case to justify the House
in refusing the second reading of this BilL He (the So-
licitor-General) freely admitted that the extreme step of
disfranchisement should not he taken but upon very
strong and just grounds. But it bad been clearly and
indisputably proved that a majority of the electors
of the borough of Sudbury were tainted by corrup-
tion. He admitted that if this strong fact had not
been made clear and indisputable, he would not be enti-
tled to claim the support of the House to the second
reading of the Bill. He (the Solicitor-General) had at
that time nothing whatever to do with other cases, how-
ever analogous. He had singly to do with Sudbury and
its corruption, as those corruptions had beer. proved.
And if the Bill :passed, as he trusted it would—as he
was sure it would—it would undoubtedly act as a warn-
ing and an example to other places ; and this was one of
the greatest advantages that might be expected to accrue
from the Bill. It should be particularly impressed upon
the recollection of the House, that the Bill
which he now proposed was the third Bill for the dis
franchisement of this borough that had been brought
before that House. Two other Bills of disfranchisement
had upon previous occasions passed that House, and been
sent thence to the House of Lords, where unfortunately,
from one circumstance or another, they had been stopped
in their course. And yet. after all. these warnings, there
had at the very last election been practices of the most
gross and profligate character—thus showing the pre-
determination of the voters in this borough that their
elections should be carried by bribery and
bribery alone. No less than three thousand pounds
in gold had been received by a clerk and agent
of Mr. Dyce Sombre, one only of the candidates, and the
whole of this large sum had been expended in the most
disgusting mode of bribery, by parties utter strangers to
the borough. And yet the just and legitimate expenses
attendant upon the election—such as the printers', and
other necessary bills, were to this day absolutely un-
settled. There was a system in Sudbury of the most
atrocious character, which it was well-known had ex-
isted for years and years, and which was this :—When
an election was likely to take place every publican
opened his house to the world at large. At• each
house a large debt was owing for expenses incurred
at the last previous election, and which debts always
remained unpaid from the close of that election to the
time when another was about to take place. These debts
were called "fixtures," and they were paid thus. When
candidates came down at an election time to offer them-
selves as candidates for Sudbury ; the first thing they
were presented with was a statement of these " fixtures.'
If the candidates paid these "fixtures" or debts due
from the last election, then they were accepted
as candidates, and stood a fair chance of being
returned ; but if they declined to pay off these
" fixtures," then all they had to do was to pack up
and be oft; for no chance would they have of ever repre-
senting the borough of Sudbury.—(Laughter.) Such
was the system—the disgusting system—which prevailed
in this notorious and profligate borough. All he asked
the House now to do, was to proceed on the evidence in
the book now upon the table, and at once to disfranchise
a place in which there was no nucleus for honesty and
public virtue. Where the franchise thus taken
from Sudbury was to be extended to, was
not then the question before the House.
That was a matter for after consideration ; and
therefore, confining himself to the only point strictly
before them, he thought Hon. Members could, upon the
evidence now before them, have no difficulty in agreeing
to the second reading of the Bill for at once disfran-
chising the borough of Sudbury.
Mr. BLACKSTONE felt that if he attempted to op-
pose this Bill he would not be successful, as the Bill had
been taken up by one of the law officers of the Crown,
and came with the whole support of the Government.
He did not, therefore, feel called upon to make any op-
,,n to the Bill, although he did not believe that the
whole of the e.:l7.th. rs of
Sudbury were corrupt.
--:*toe on this Bill he
On the motion for the C0ma,.....
should move, as an instruction to the Vv

that the right of voting should be extended to the hun-
dred in which Sudbury was now situated, which had
been the course pursued by the Government with respect
to Bassitlaw, that place having been extended to the
hundred of East Retford. If he should be unsuccessful
in this, he'should take the sense of the House upon the
principle of the Bill on the third reading.
Mr. TUFFNEL expressed his satisfaction at this
having been` introduced.- He trusted that the Govern-
ment would, on every occasion, do all they could to
put down bribery and corruption. He congratulated the
Government upon their having introduced the Bill, and
he sineerelyhoped that it would be successful.
Mr. DILLON BROWNE thought there were other
boroughs in the country, besides Sudbury, which ought
to be disfranchised on account of bribery and corruption.
Mr. W. WYNN thought the House'ought to be con-
sistent with itself, and proceed at once to pass this Bill.
Ile thought the evidence which had been adduced, with-
respect to this Bill was amply sufficient for the House to
act, in legislating on the subject. He looked upon this
Bill not merely as a penal but a remedial measure. He
thought that no borough had ever exhibited such a sys-
tem of bribery and corruption as that which had been
shown in the borough of Sudbury.
The Bill was then read a second time, and ordered to
be committed to-morrow at twelve o'clock.
The House then adjourned until Five o'clock.

MONEYAND. COMMERCIAL NEWs'.
CITY, QUARTER TO THREE.
The sales of Cotton at Liverpool yesterday were 5,000 bales,
of which 1,200 were taken by exporters. The rates were
steady. Sales 200 Pernams at ad. to 58d., 50 Maranham at
54d., 150. Egyptian at bid. to &id., some Surat at 3d. to 30.,
and the rest American at 4d. to 74d. for Orleans. Shares
were rather healthier, with a good business doing.—Bir-
mingham Wand Gloucester, 94 ; Dublin, and Cashel, 47;
Eastern Counties Registered, 13* ; Glasgow and Greenock,
11* ; Grand Junction, 229 ; Ditto Half, 1141; Great Western
Fifths, 23i; London and Brighton, 46i ; Midland Counties,
Quarter, 234 ; Sheffield and Manchester, Quarter,lo/ ; South-
Eastern, 35* ; Trent Valley, 101 ; Lyons and Avignon,
1/. 18s. 6d. ; Orleans, Tours, and Bordeaux,l4.
The commercial letters received yesterday from the Bra-
zils are not of a satisfactory character. Much disappoint-
ment continued to be expressed at the want of a greater de-
gree of liberality than has been shown towards Brazilian
produce admitted to British ports. A most extended
trade would be carried on in our manufactures were but the
imposts upon sugar reduced a trifle only.
The attempt to introduce into the London market Aus-
tralian salted meats appears to have met with very indifferent
success up to the present time, and there are some who look
upon it as a decided failure, and augur no better re-
sult for the future. We think, however, in reference
to the latter, - that whatever may have been the
case hitherto, too hasty a decision should not be
come to as regards what may be accomplished hereafter,
since it is a matter of considerable importance, and in which
perseverance would be highly laudable. We pronounce no
decided opinion, however upon the subject, and the heat of
the climate may be an objection ; but the following informa-
tion from Mr. Williams, the American Consul, at Sydney, to
the Editor of the Herald published there, seems very favour-
able :
" Knowing the solicitude which is felt by this community
to learn the result of the salting experiments of the last
season, I have much pleasure in stating, that Capton Tabor,
of the American whale ship Tuscaloosa, who supplied his
ship with colonial salted beef, on his last visit to this
port, has informed me that he never had beef on
board his ship which gave himself and his crew better
satisfaction than that from Sydney. The beef in question was
packed with Liverpool salt exclusively, and he thinks might
not keep so well for a long voyage as if -St. Übe's salt had
been used." The editors of the Sydney Herald say in reference
to this communication :—" This beef we understand was
cured so far north as the Richmond River. We have also
been informed that the colonial beef shipped on board her
Majesty's ship North Star was so much approved of, that on
her last visit to Sydney she landed all her Deptford cured
meat, and filled up with colonial."
As respects railway property the circular of a Manchester
firm, received to-day', has the following remarks :—" The
Government and other dividends coming upon the market
along with rents, and the continued difficulty of employing
money beneficially, will work favourably for railway adven-
tures ; moreover, the improving traffic for the last half year,
in comparison with the same period of the former, cannot
fail to have influence, especially under the increasing abun-
dance of capital, unrequired, as it is, for other purposes at
the present time •
The Funds are steady to-day. The dividends are now in
course of payment at the Bank, but parties receiving on the
first day, except bankers and trustees, are not generally those
who have a surplus for re-investment. Consols for Money
and Time are 98i to 99. Exchequer Bills realised 745. to 765.
premium. The Reduced Three-and-a-Half per Cents. brought
102/ to I, and the Three per Cents. 994 to I. Bank Stock
has been firm at an -improvement to 194, and East India
Stock at 284* to 285. The Government broker has bought
a small parcel of Consols.
Business in the Foreign Market is extremely dull. Mexi-
can have gone back to 35i for the Five per Cents., and to
15i for the Deferred. Spanish are a dead letter for the pre-
sent. The Fives are called 23 to it, and the Threes 33 to
Colombian Stock has been at 13i to Belgian Bonds are
quiet at 1031, and Dutch Two-and-a-Half per Cents. at 61.
There has been less business doing in the Railway Shares,
but, generally, the holders require very full rates. Birming-
ham have touched 127 to 128 premium. Great Western are
50* to 504, and Bristol and Gloucester, 16i premium. North
Midland are 2 to 3 discount.
BRITISH FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
(From the Official List.)
Bank Stock . .. ....... . . ....... 199%
3 per Cent. Reduced Annuities ........»..,.«... 99%*
3 per Cent. Consols. Annuities 98%599
334 per Cent. Reduced Annuities 10234
New 3% per Cent. Annuities
Long Annuities, Expire sth Jan. 1860 l2 7-1634
India Stock
Bank Stock far Account ... 199
Consols for Open ng 99
Exchequer Bills, I%d. 130
10001. ..... ..... 74 pm.
5001.. .. ... 76 pre.
Ditto 74 put.
Ditto Advertised
FOREIGN FUNDS THIS DAY AT ONE O'CLOCK.
Belgian Bonds, 5 per Cent 10334
Columbian Bonds
Mexican Bonds, 1637, 5 per Cent. .... ........
Ditto for the Account, 36 35504
Ditto Deferred Stock 15%
Spanish Bonds, Five per Cent 1840 ........
Ditto for the'Account. 23
Ditto Three per Cent.
Ditto for the Account
Dutch 21,6 per Cents
a—,
Ditto for the Account ..... •“••••••
Dutch 5 per Cent 5................ ....... 100%
PRICES OF SHARES THIS DAY AT ONE.
RAILWAYS. PAID. PaR SHARE.
Birmingham and Gloucester lOO 9834 to
Ditto New 1734 ...... 24%
Bristol and Gloucester 3O 46% to
Chester and Holyhead 5 ..... 41 to '
Edinburgh__ and Glasgow 5O ..... 62 ...... to
Great Western
London and Birmingham. lOO .228
, Ditto % Shares
London and Brighton 5O 46 to
London and Croydon
North British
North Midland
Trent Valley
York and North Midland
North
:9-1:1
Ditto 34 Shares 25 52 to
Ditto Scarboro' Branch
'Orleans, Tours, and Bordeaux... 1
Fernand Rouen. .... 20 -
MANCHESIKR STOCK EXCHANGE, JULY B.—We have
oa d n
da
oquiet market,and
iiwithout material
Manchesterch a change ga
and
d B
i n p
Birming-
ham, cme
n: —Lg -
ham, 54 ; Date; Quarters, 31'. 7s. and 3/. 7s. 6d. ' • Trent
Valley, ; Manchester and Liverpool District Bank,
10 15-16.

LLOYD'S SHIPPING.--(tHIS DAY.)

LONDON, JULY 9.—Wind N.W., light breezes and fine.
DEAL, JULY B.—A.M. Wind light andvariable. P.M. S.W. to
S.E. and S.S.W.—Arrd. Conrad, Hanns, Rio for Hamburgh ;
Potentate,, Sutherland, China; Awe, Whitehead, Calcutta,
for Bremen; Protomelia,:. M‘Diamid, Mauritius; John Wil-
lis, Willis, Demerara; Campbells, Orr, Barbadoes ; Glasgow,
Somerville, Quebec. Sld. Pagoda, Cape of Good Hape ;, Pro-
tector, Eliza Gilles, Fannga Gaingues, and Columbus,.
Ichaboe ; Mary Dare, Valparaiso.
PORTSMOUTH, JULY B.—Wind W., fine.—Arrd. Euterpe,
Hill, Havannah, and proceeded for Cowes ; Choice, Crane,
Quebec; her Majesty's ship Camperdown, Sheerness. Sid.
Foam, China. Off, Anna, Havannah for Bremen ; Superb,
Baltimore for Rotterdam ; Switzerland, Knight, New York.
COWES, JULY B.—Arrd. Expedition, Rio; Florentia; Good-
wyn, Manilla.
OFF ST. ALBA.N'S.—Harriet, Newfoundland • ,
PLYMOUTH, JULY 7.—Wind S.W.—Arrd. Lady. Mary,
Bower, Quebec.

,
FALMOUTH, JULY B.—Wind moderate.—Arrd. off, Isa-
bella, New York for Bremen ; Recovery, America; Lady
Mary; St. John's ; Endymion, Miramichi, for Hull. •
OFF FoucgroxE.—Clara, Crowe, Sydney, New South
Wale's, Feb. 20.

PADSTOW, JULY 7.—Arrd. Voluna, Shippegan. •
GLOUCESTER, JULY B.—Sld. Till, Quebec.
SWANSEA' JULY 7.—Arrd. Michael Williams, Bridgeford,
Valparaiso, 104 days.
PILL, JULY s.—Sld. Independent, Quebec.
CORK, JULY 6.—Arrd. Jane, Cunningham Rio Grande ;
Lady Falkland, Baker, St. Domingo; Rapid, Thomas, La-
guna. Sld. her Majesty's ship Albion, Gibraltar.
OFF .CORK, JULY 6.—Lecan, Lima, left Dec. 24, Juan Fer
nandez Feb. 24, Flores June 13 ; Lady Colebrooke, Mobile,
Theron, Restigouche, Brazilian, Cunningham, Newfoundland.
LIVERPOOL, JULY B.—Wind N.N.W., moderate.—Arrd.
Victoria, Guisby, Tobasco ; Metoka, Rockall, Lancaster,
Bahia; Martha Walpole, and Victoria, New Orleans; Alex-
ander Grant, Mobile ; Lord Seaton, St. Andrew's ; Am-
broesne, Quebec; Speed, Mobile; Ocean, Charleston; Yazoo,
New York. Sld. Lord Elgin, Jamaica; Canada, Africa;
Mary Campbell, Vera Cruz; Richard Andrews, Virginia;
Melessa, Bay Chaleur. Off, Corsair, Halifax ; Ann Baldwin
and Elizabeth Radcliffe, Lima; Denison, Antigua; Amazon,
Valparaiso Pluto,
IMPORTANT TO MARINERS BOUND TO THE PORT
OF NEW GRANADA.

The following is an extract of a letter received at Lloyd's
o-day

British Vice-Consulate, Santa Martha, May 3, 1844.
"Sir,—lt is proper to inform you, for the information of
merchant vessels bound to the different ports on the coast of
New Granada, that it is requisite that they should come with
bills of health, signed by the Consul or Vice-Consuls at the
port from whence they come. During last month three
British vessels have had to undergo quarantine at this port,
owing to their having sailed without them.
" W. Dobson, Esq."

PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.

(From the rotes and Proceedmgs`qk Me Howe of CoMMoor.)
MONDAY, JULY 8.