The Sun.
London, England, 1820-07-25 00:00:00

THE QUEEN.

Lord Eisiiii•ir-L--My Lords, I havejust receiv-
ed from Dr. Lushingeon, Wh'co 'has leave from the
House of Commons to appear 'at' the bar of this
House as one' of the eonnsel 'for''the 'QUeen, a
Petition'frorn 'herl‘fajesty; which I have beenre-
quested to present,' and which I do most willing-
ly, .be'caii§e it contains 'a most just and reasonable
request. I will read it to 'your Lordships myself
before I ask you to 'accept it. 44 The ',Queen
la:Ments, my Lords, that this House has deemed
it proper to refuse her application for .a list of
witnesses to be examined' in support of the Bill of
degradation' and dissolution of marriage;" thus
leaving her. Majesty Wand her legal advisers in
total ignorance of the times and places to which
the charges may related or 'the persons by whose
testimony the allegations on the Bill are intended
to be supported.'? This is only preface, she does
not call upuu your. Lordships to reconsider .this
decision, but contents herself with Jamenting it,
and f..,--omes with a new. request. This is just,my
own situation—l exercised my privilege as a
Peer, and did, , as I thought and still think, a
duty to my. country, by asking your Lordships' a
few days.ago to give the list of witnesses as re-
• quested, but your Lordships having refused it, I
must not now put my individual opinion against
the itidgment of the Jlliitise, but I have a right to
. express that I.mosi deeply lament it. Her Ma.-
sty then goes on to ask a specification of the
,places, in .2viliieli, the Criminal acts are charged to
have'been comMittea7 lie forthwith' delivered ;

This last part of the Petition I hope you will
only not grarit,.by yielding to the request of your
ownfree grace. My Lords, if you refuse it, be-
lieve rile, the House will suffer indelibly in its
character and honour, which has stood so high
for ages, and enabled it to support in public opi-
nion all the other Tribunals of Justice. As her
Majesty asks only a specification of the:plaCes to
Which the 'evidencels to apply against her, we
have no concern now with the indidgences of the
Statute of Treason, "'nothing more beiner asked
than the universal analogies. of law. No crime
whatsoever can be. charged without specifying
the Place 'where committed, and-the acts charged
are almost universally facts of so limited and so
notorious a character, that the accused has an im-
mediate and 'satisfactory acquaintance with the
evidence that is to be produced; but the allega-
tions of the Bill before us 'are spread over the
space of 'six years, in Places remotely distant
froth eaCkother, So that without the Specification
of the :places, it 'is utterly impoisible that any
kind of defence can be made._ The only answer
that has been given-to-this objection is,-that
the accusing testimony has been heard, the House
would' consent tO a long adjournment, till the
witnesses for her Majeity should be-Collected ;
but I reminded 'your Lordships, "when I' moved
for the list' of 'the wittiesses, Aliat'this 'would be
only an insulting mockery ofjuStice. What, my.
birds, do you 'mean" by accusing evidence, when
no elite is farniShed for' their examinations by the
accused ? 'low can'she impeach their testimony
ivhen.she 'is an titter stranger to. their very ex-
istence,; she 'sees and.. hears. them- in' the
House ? and thits uniriipeaChecl testimony,: how-
eVer utterly.unfounded,zgoes forth from one end.'
of the, hand to:the -other, affeets theminds'of the
people-, .and comes back again upon your Lord-
ships yOurselves to' affect your own judgment's be 7
fore:you 'enter upon the :defence. What right,.
my Lords, have you to consider yourselves as su-
perkr to the infirmities:Of human nature, • which
'are the foinidatio.ns of 'all the wise- and humane
provisions of our law ? Are you horiesterkerbet-
ter than Juries,' who are not suffered to commu-
nicate e'ven• With; their own families until- .their
verdict is delivered? Are you alone to be trust-
ed; and 'to. go forth into the very Court or the
-King, who. is, the injured and properly- accusing
party in the cause ? I do -not seek to .reconcile
differences. between the -House 'of Lords ,And the
oth'e.r Tribunals,' where the anomaly of.-,your ju-
risdiction can be averted ; but you had only. to
listen to'the. Petitions presented to you, :and,the
anomaly would have been ended. had the,Queen
been granted. the Est- Of the witnesses' formerly
.askedi and the places of- supposed guilt; as: now,
requested,- the case- might have: proceeded like
any other trial, but by' refusing both,, your-pro-
Ceeding is 'like none that -ever 'existed.upen earth.
My: Lords, I have no leaning: or bias' bathe case
before- except that. which 'has been the uniform
bias of a long life spent in the administration of
justice, and which will ,nevercease, I hope, till
death.. I citnnot, be inistaken, in .the principles. of
law, and their artalogieS, are too manifest to •be
mistaken ; I therefore' move that the 'Petition be
-received.
~

The LORD CHANCELLOR said, there could-be
no question. of course, as to receiving the petition ;
but he had heard 'with considerable surprise some
part of 'what had been urged :by, his Noblee-and
Learned Friend. Would his Noble and -Learn-
ed Friend, 'lifter his long, and he' (Lord Eldon)
'must • add, his ilhistrious.professional life-, point
'out any instance in 'which what WAS' now sought
by this Petition had been granted namely, a
ipecification of the different' placeS at'which the
offences charged were alleged' to be committed?
SO "far from any Specification of places: or times
being given, the fact ‘VaS., that in indictm'ents for
high treason a yiace was merely- named' as a'
venue to give the Court jurisdiction ; 'and then, on
the part of the prosecution) proof Was allowed as
to acts of the 'accused in any place not only in
the same connty, but in any other county. • In
cases of adultery also, no specification of times
or pla•ces was ever given, but-proof Ivas' allowed'
of any act of adultery wherever' conimieted.-
Equally unsuceessftil must his Noble and Learn-
ed Friend be in draWing ally -analogy from the'
proceedings in Parliament, for in no case Was
there to be foUnd any precedent of a ap-:
plication having -been 'cornplie-d 'with.' -Without
any'authority; therefore, derived frorn the ana-
logies of law; or any sanction from -the usages of

;Parliament; which, in fact; formed:tik.
Parliament, he could:' discover no-ground-upon
'which this application ought-tOhe,grantedi lie.
:wished it' to-be distinctly-understood; that; with..
regard. to this case, he Was-only anxious:o,de his,
,duty in the situation-. in: which:he was,.placed,,
and a material part of that duty was to point out-
to- their Lordships- in What:respect any metionjo
which their attention was: oailed- was Colltrar-Y•to
the usage and. practice of. Parliament.
- LordHar.r.A.ND—Without„ my-, 'Lord:olJ going,
into the question of" the analogies of law, upon
which subject the. Noble and: Learned Lord is
much better informed than. myself,
I may be allowed to call your Lordships',atten-,
tion to the precedents in your Parliamentary prac,
tire, in all of which, since the Revolution, I be,
lieve it will-be.found that a mare enlarged speci.-
fication of- charges was given in the.preambls
than in the. Bill now before the House. This will
be
,found to be the case in the Bills of Pains, ands
Penalties against Bishops Atterbury, Plunkett
and Kelly, in all of which the skecification
more distinct and mare at length than in the. p. re.-.
sent Bill. I take it for granted that the Noble'
and Learned Lord- meant to confine his preci
dents to Bills ofAttainder and Bills of Pains and
Penalties, otherwise with regard to proceedings
by, impeachment, there can: be no doubt that a,
much more enlarged specification of charges- has
been given in them than there is in the present
Bill, and I have no hesitation 14 givipg it as my
opinion, that an impeachment confined to the
mere limit of charge contained in the present Bill
would not be considered in this House as suffi-
cient to call upon the defendant to answer. But
,without going any further into analogies, I con-
tend, that upon every principle of impartial jus-
tice the request contained in this Petition ought
to be complied with. It is'true that some chili-
culty may arise with regard to it, the Secret Com-
mittee to whom the sealed bag of papers were ,re;
ferred being now fiinctus officio, and no longer in
existence. And upon this point it becomes a cu-
rious question in what way, or froth' what quar-
ter, the Attorney-General, or his Representa-
tives are -bp be instructed with regard to the case
for the ~prosecution, or -how they are to become
acquainted with the contents of the Green. Bag.
As,:howeyer, a, list of, the witnesses has been re.
fused to the. Queen, your Lordships surely cannot
refuse, to. grant her the smaller facility of a spe.
Cification of the :places where the acts of crirni-
nality.are. alleged 'to have been committed ; it
• seerpsto me that such a proceeding is' called fOr
by impartial justice, the only principle to which
we ought to look in this anomalous case.
The'Pdarl of LIVERPOOL-I am utigh-TeTiny
Lords,-to discover any reason or analogy appli-
cable to this proceeding, which can authorize
the.complying with:the application contained in
theTetition. I perfectly'agree with the:Noble
Lord that we ought only to. look to , impartial
justice.; but let
.us consider bow
:the case stands.
The Secret Committee having' made their Re-
as•fiMember, of the Executive 'Govern-
ment, brought in the Bill which is. now before
the,House.. .YOur Lordships must recollect that
no sooner had the Billbeen brought ins than her
Majesty petitioned . that ,we- shciuld, pro,(:eed to
hear'the ..case forthwith ; there was no applica-
tion for any list Of witnesses, .or. specification of
places, but .we were called upon to hear the case
forthwith. It is in compliance with this. request
on the part: of her Majesty that yoOr Lordships
have appointed the earliest, day for.that• hearin,,,cr
thatis consistent with :the ends of justice;,for-if
it is not absolutely necessary;-_it is at least highly
properithat :the or some of them, should
Attend during
.the :hearing., of the ease. It is,
therefore, obvious, that -her Najesti, by calling
for animmecliate hearing, doLuot consider either
a list of witnesses Or. a ,naKifiqatiOri of plates as at
all esSeiiial' to her defence. •-',lNsth regard bathe
objection to the preamble of. the Bill, that it..cicies
not contain _spe6itic' charges as to- time and place*,
it should be, recollected; that it is not Conhned
to any..specific act of• adultery,.but that it' charges
an adulterousintercpurso, continually kept Up, for
a oonsi.derable.period,
.and which therefore can-
not; from its nature, be liMited to any particular
time oriplace. It should also be recollected, arid
particularly when analogies , of law, are.referred
to, that the- Queen- in 'this ease- will have advan.
tages which are not granted to' any individual iu
Court'df law, in: the-. interval twhich.must. he. al.
lowed, if her Majesty requires it, between the,
close of the case for the accusation and the de.,
fence; there. being no -instance in Any Court of
Law of- such an' interval, .being,grantestbetwen
the' case for the prosecution; and the tlefence, nor is
it at'all &insistent' with- the principles of justice.—
The:Noble anti-Learned:Lord says, that sve*Lall
separate-after hearingthe'Case.for .the accusation,
find be• liable to imbibe prejudices in the interval
- between .the close of. that _case, and the commence.
nTent. of the case for the defence.:. Alt 1,, can
say in'answer to .this iss that it is of the. ;very
'nature' efthe proceedings of,:this house, t~tiat It
sirohld all 'cases separate from day to day-;
instances,areenot wanting
'Where•tlie defence. -has been brutal, a concider:lWe
period-; after -the -casts . for the ,prosecnt!'n.;
anti .the defence in another .This
the
lohnoassfe,cll:eataltrs:oetiljth):Palelrrieieia(eatilhcl:l?o'lll:vutie
- instance' Where
d
in otie Session,
ofis
the
e
•acctJuris
fSsoli ttdeir;nerf:! rt
c.
necessity'wyemii tt
Ihd'e;r day
i to pteht let
course
tri
re
--case tender
pi;oc.eedin,,fl;ytite-openit*• alhe-vittornel-Oe.
neraPwill furnish to the Queen's Counsel alLthe

,ioirits of the case for the ,Ibrosecution, and with
-the interval which must be allowed for preparing
the defence; it must te ,Allowed by every one
that the ends of justice will he fully attained,
-whatever may be theresailt. Under all these cir-
•eurnstanees, therefore, with the desire of the
Queen, expreszzed to this riouse, that we should
proceed forthwith, and with the assertion of one
of her Majesty's Advocates, (it might, perhaps, be.
a figure of. speech) that he knew. all the contents
of the Green Bag and from whence they were
d-rived. I can see me ground fur agreeing to
this application.—As to Divorce Bills, it is
well known -that this House is not . precluded.
froin examining witnesses as to acts of adultery
which were never given in evidence, either in the
Ecclesiastical Court or in the action in a Court
of .Law ; the analogy; then-fore, on this ground
wholly fails..
Lord KING urged the House to comply with
•the request of the Petition, fur though it might
be necessary in some cases, to proceed by Bill,
still they nright not to refuse to grant to the ac-
cused every facility of fdefence. Impartial jus-
tice would. no doubt, ultimately be done, but
they ought nevertheless to avoid all appearance
of injustice. Such an appearance of injustice in
public opinion, must be the result of refusing this
epplication, and therefore he contended that it
wolld be wise •and expedient to grant the prayer
of the Petition.
The Earl BATHURST maintained that it would
I,e utterly useless to the Queen to grant the
prayer of the Petition, as it would be impossible
for -her, bet we.en this and the 17th of August to
mane any inquiry regarding the witnesses that
could 'be of the least service to her cause. It
would, therefore, be useless as to any purpose of
justice to comply with the prayer of the Petition,
whilst every facility would be afforded to the
Queen, for the purpose of making her do-knee.
Lord ERSKINE—My Lords, as I have no mo-
tion now to make, but that her Majesty's Coun-
sel be-called in, I should not have troubled you
with any further observations, except that I feel
myself bound to answer the questions of my
Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack,
which I answer thus every indictment the
place must be mentioned, and the precise nature
tend quality of the offence, and as the offence is
not only within the realm but in some very HT
mited.local jurisdiction, no doubt can remain as
to where committed, or how to be proved.—
Whereas here it is a series of conduct for six
-years, instead of a single act, and in countries
-widely distant. The Noble Earl opposite truly.
says that it is not the mere fact of adultery, but
indecent and suspicious demeanour in various
places ; but does not that render it more neces-
sary to collect witnesses to prove what her gene-
ral conduct has been, for how else can a beha-
viour of six years be supported, if unknown Wit-
nesses can pounce upon her in the ab-
sence -of those who might contradict them ?
The Noble Earl, who always speaks with
great ability and skill, also says, that even
in the Ecclesiastical Courts, in suits for aC-
vorc,,, diffe:ent evidence may be given at the Bar
here, than had appeared either in Doctors' Corn-
mons, or against the adulterer in the Courts. .A
new case, he says, might be made here. To that
1 Can only reply, by asking if the Noble Lord
can instance any such a case ? I am sure he can-.
not. If the evidence against the adulterer were
not sufficient, nor that in the Commons, did any
-one ever hear of a Bill to divorce upon evidence
never givtb., before ? I am confident that no such
ckse.,..ever happened, or ever will. A Noble Earl
-who spoke last, for whom I am sure I -entertain
a. great personal respect, has endeavoured to
chew, that granting the request of her Majesty
would be of-no use to her ; but are we to judge
-of that and refuse her the option of judging for
herself ? The Noble Earl ought to have shewn
that the granting her requeSt would disappoint
the justice of the case she is called upon to an-
swer. Shew me this, my Lords, and lam silent.
Has this been attempted either to-night, or when
the list of the witnesses was refused ? or has it

teenshewn that the evidence for the Bill ough

to prevail, if she is denied the opportunity of
their cross-examination ? When the evidence for
the Bill is finished, and the Queen, after an ad-
journment, has collected her witnesses, can their
original examination be resumed ? Such a thing
-was never heard of ; in short, my Lords, our pro-
ceedings have created a great sensation through-
out the whole country, which your Lordships
will have hereafter to lament. I have now only
to move, that her Majesty's Counsel be called
to the Bar in support of her Petition.
The House here divided; and the numbers
were—

For the Motion
Against it . 37
Majority - —2s
Adjourned till to-morrow.

[For tire 'Proceedings in the House of Commons, set the
Fourth Page.]

THE COURT OF CLAIMS.—The Court was
yesterday occupied in hearing arguments for and
against the Claims of the Rev. Mr. Dymoke to
perform the office of Champion by deputy at the
King's Coronation. Precedents were adduced to
show that this claim had been allowed in former
instances, and particularly that of a Lady, pos-
sessed of the Manor of Scrivelsby, who was per-
milled to appoint ono of her sons as her deputy
at the Coronation of Richard 11. It was also
shown that, in cases where the office had been
performed- •
by deputy, the King had never inter-
fered in his appointment. The Attorney-Gene-
ral, however, contended against the right of the
Rev. •Mr. Dymoke to appoint his deputy. A
claim was then put in Olt behalf of Lord John
Townshend to serve the office of Champion, on
the plea that the Manor. of Scrivelsby appertain-
ed to the Manor of Marmion, of which he was
Lord, and that he was capable of performing the
service in person. The Court, after consultation,
considered. Lord John Townshend to have failed
in establishing his., claim, and deferred the con-
sideration of the Rev. Mr. Dvmoke's claim to
serge by deputy till the 31st instant.

LONLON JOURNALS.

[IMI1,1" EX fl

FROM Mk MORNING PAPF.RS 'I HIS-DAY.

[Morning Post.]
We yesterday noticed, and expressed our in-
dignation at a Paragraph 'respecting:. the queen
which had appeared in an Exeter Paper. t was
last night brought before Parliament by Mr. We-
therall, «ho characterized it as a gross perver-
sion of justice pending the trial of her Majesty
by the highest Court of Judicature in the Coun-
try—for such virtually is the effect of the Bill now
before the II ou se of Lards. The expressions, we
repeat, are highly improper and offensive, and do
not appear to us to be excusable upon any
ground, even of political or party argument.
And we are the more ready to state this opinion
unreservedly because we have seen how desi-
rous the Liberals are to mis-state and misrepre-
sents entiments' of an opposite nature, so as to
force them to bear this construction. We will
yield them their triumph, which we do not be-
lieve to have imposed upon the most stupid fol-
lowers of Radicalism. But with regard to the
Exeter Paper, we must add, that we condemn it
not merely because it is a libel upon the Queen—
one of the parties in the vitally important ques-
tion—but on principle, because even in any other
case, as applied to any Lady of birth and educa-
tion, it would be no less a brutal and abominable
attack. We cannot, however, help remarking
upon the conduct of those persons who, while
they affect to complain of unfairness on one
side, endeavour to instigate every species of
outrage, and to apologize for every act ini-
mical to the due administration of the laws,
on the other. Our notions of propriety and
rectitude teach us to abominate both ; and we are
well convinced that when the cloud of passions
stirred by malignant faction shall be dispelled,
the good sense and honesty of England will, as
in former instances, resume their influence, and
that the course of patient inquiry and fair trial
now pursuing will be as unanimously approved as
it , has been weakly and vilely slandered. The
licentiousness of the Press unquestionably needs
some check ; but it is curious to observe, that the
most daring insults to the Throne, and to every
branch of the Constitution, are daily offered with
impunity. No one ever thinks it worth while to
call the libellers to account, though there is no
measure to the language which vilifies the head
of the Government, and tends incessantly not
only to impede Justice, but to bring the entire
Laws and Constitution of the Country into con-
tempt. It is a pity that the balance is not held a
little more even, while the attribute of blindness
is so closely maintained.

[Morning Chronicle.]
It is expected that the Committee appointed
to arrange the preparations for the proceedings
on the Bill of Pains and Penalties, and for en-
forcing the attendance of Peers, will make their
report this day. Rumour says, they have settled
to recommend that an Absentee shall pay 1001.
fine for each of the first three days of absence,
and 401. for every succeeding day. It has be-
come a question, whether Peers, who have not
taken the oaths, ought ndt to be summoned and
ordered to attend. It is thought that the seat of
Sir Thomas Tyrwhitt will be assigned to her
Majesty, together with a retiring room. A tem-
porary gallery will be elevated, and if there
shall be 'room, each Peer is to have one ticket
for the admission of a stranger.

It was reported on Sunday, in the Ministerial
circles, that Bergarni was arrived in Holland.—
(Ibid.)

[British Press.]
Mr. Soane, the Architect, was in attendance
at the House of Lords yesterday, to take di-
rections for making the necessary alterations
in the House, preparatory to the approaching
investigation. According to the present ar-
rangement of the seats there would not be
accommodation for above one half of the Peers
who may be expected to attend on this so-
lemn and interesting occasion. There were
various modes suggested for remedying this
defect, but we believe the Earl of Liverpool's
suggestion, of running a sort of gallery along
the sides of the House at a sufficient height
from the floor to clear the heads of the Peers
sitting on the back form, will be adopted. The
backs of the centre seats are also, we understand,
to be taken off, which will allow their Lordships
to turn and face the witnesses, who of course will
be placed at the bar; but it would be a material
improvement if the platfOrm on which they are
to stand were elevated, so as to permit them to
be seen by the whole of the House. These al-
terations are to be completed, we understand, by
the 14th August.

[New Timesl
Her Majesty presented a Petition yesterday to
the House of Lords, to be heard by Counsel in
support of her demand to be furnished with a
specification of those placeS at whiCh any criminal
facts are alleged to have been committed by her.
—Their Lordships, adhering to the principles
which guide the practice of their House in ana-
logous cases, rejected the application by a great
majority. We have often avowed our wish, that
her Majesty, throughout the whole of the pro-
ceedings against her, may meet with every in-
dulgence that is consistent with the attainment
of substantial justice, and we are perfectly confi-
dent.that those wishes will not be disappointed ;
for we place our reliance on the integrity and
honour of the Two Houses of Parliament : and,
apart from all political considerations, the per-
sonal characters of the Members of those two
august bodies afford the surest possible guarantee
of rectitude in their proceedings. Whether,
therefore, the Queen's Petition had boo granted
or refused, we should have felt equally assured
that the decision of their Lordships was con-
scientiously dictated by a desire to do justice ; and
it is obvious, that where established principle or
precedent exists, it furnishes the best and surest

'guide to the attainment of that end. The forms '
of proceeding in the two Houses may in some
respects vary, but, generally speaking, they are
dictated by the same spirit, and are alike the re-
sult of experience and wisdom. All the clamours
of faction come to this, that the two Houses of
Parliament are both partial, both unjust, both
oppressive. A monstrous suppositiaK, acid which,
16 it.Avere true, th-e'rev wpul4.,no longee any
safeguard to the life or liberty of man, under the
freest or fairest Constitution ever framed. Let
it be observed, that there is a double security to
innocence in the separate proceedings of the two
Houses. People commonly talk of the proceeding
against the Queen as confined solely to the House
of Lords, whereas, on the contrary, the whole
matter must necessarily undergo a separate in-
vestigation in the Commons, if the Bill should
pass the Upper House. If, therefore, any body
could be so weak as to suppose, or so wicked as
to assert, that her Majesty would not meet with
justice from the Lords, she would still have
sure resource in the integrity of the National
Representatives.—A circumstance which occurred
last night strongly illustrates the watchfulness of
the Commons to protect her Majesty against all
violation of her rights as a Queen, and as a per-
son under accusation. A paragraph was said to
have appeared in a Provincial Paper applying
very coarse expressions to her Majesty ; and
upon this ground an Hon. and Learned Member
on the Ministerial side of the House gave notice
of a motion that the Attorney-General should
be instructed to prosecute the Editor. How the
fact may be we know not, for we have not seen
the Paper alluded to (The Western Luminary)
and the passage has only met our eye in another
Journal which is very likely to have quoted it
unfairly. If, however, it has been more accurate
in this instance than it usually is, we must say
that the language of the Provincial Editor was
extremely reprehensible. On the other hand,
however, we trust that the lion. and Learned
Gentleman will take some notice of the very
gross and infamous attacks which have been made
on the witnesses for the prosecution. Let the scale
of justice, in this great and important trial, be held
with a firm and steady hand. Let her Majesty
enjoy every protection that presumed innocence
can claim ? but let the same protection be ex-
tended to those persons who come forward under
the sacred obligation of an oath to speak the
truth. If it should hereafter turn out that they
are perjured, let the heaviest punishment fall
upon them ; but do not suffer an unprincipled
Journalist to stigmatize them with perjury be-
fore they have given their evidence, for that
conduct may operate prejudicially in two ways : it
may intimidate the witnesses by the fear of bodily
violence from declaring what they know ; or it
may exasperate, and make them say more than
the truth, out of revenge for their ill-treatment.

THEATRICAL REGISTER.
Performed Last Night.
TIIEATRU ROYAL, HAYMARKET.—A Day After the Wedding.
After which, The Beggar's Opera. To which was added,
A Roland for an Oliver.
THEATRE ROYAL, ENGLISH OPERA HOUSE.—Woman's Will—
A Riddle. After which, Don Giovanni.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.
We thank "A YORKSH I RE;NAN, but not of the City of York,',
for his Letter; but the Article from " The Birming am
Chronicle" was in THE SUN of last Friday.
"AN OLD TIMBER MERCHANT," " IGNOTUS," and THE CO-
LONIES, To-morrow.

ERRATUM.—In Yesterday's Weekly Retrospect, Line 44, for
" Increase" read " income ' of.
—rep—

ST. JAMES.—Holiday at the Bank, Exchequer, East India,
and South Sea Houses.

MAILS. •
Aserven—l Dublin, I Waterford, 1 Guernsey and Jersey,

1 Lisbon, 1 France.
Dut-1 Holland, 1 Gottenburgh, 1 Hamburgh.

HIGH WATER AT LONDON BRIDGE TO-MORROW.
Morning, 51 minutts after 2.—Erening, 13 minutes after 3