The Sun.
London, England, 1842-02-25 00:00:00

CORN-LAWS.

%Earl RADNOR, presented petitions from the
inhabitants of the ro)•al burgh of Banff, fur
the immediate and total repeal of the Corn-laws ;
and similar petitions from the United Session of Mon-
trose ; from nomford, in Essex; from Taenon, Ken; ;
the printworkers of Crayford ; two from the county of
Lancaster ; from Leeds, signed by 3,000 or 4,000 indivi-
duals ; and many others from townships in the town of
Birmingham and elsewhere.
Lord KINNAIRD presented petitions from Mus-
selburgh, praying for the total and immediate repeal of
the Corn-laws, 34 petitions from the workmen em-
ployed in Dundee, another from the congregation of
Newport Chapel, Dundee, and various others from the
same neighbourhood with a similar prayer.
CORN-LAWS.

Lord BROUGHAM presented petitions from the in-
.habitants of Perthshire, Stone in Staffordshire, Jethon,
an 1 St. Mary Whitcchapel, in favour of the total
repeal of the Corn Laws.
PRESBYTERIAN MARRIAGES.

The NOBLE LORD also presented petitions from the
Ministers, Elders, and other members of the em .
gregation of Presbyterians at Ballymuir, Dromore,
Downpatrick, and Alvanley, praying that some alteration
might be made in the law with reference to the marriage
of Presbyterians. since the Noble Lord last addressed
their Lordships on the subject, he had seen an accurate
note of the decision of the Judges in Ireland upon the
subject.. lie believed that great doubts were entertained
upon the subject, and those doubts were not confined to
himself. Ile greatly regretted that there was no form
of proceeding competent to that House "of reviewing
that decision; he deeply regretted that, though he would
not venture to suggest what the result of that revisal
might be.

The 31arquis of CLANRICARDE, in presenting two
petitions on the same subject, said that this was not the
first time this question had been mooted, because so long
ago as the year 1815 a petition was presented by Sir
Samuel Romilly on the subject of Presbyterian marriages.
Lord CAMPBELL wished to call the attention of
his Noble Friend on the Woolsack to the subject to
which the petitions which had just been presented to the
House referred. His Noble Friend was aware of
the intense anxiety which was felt by a large class of per-
sons upon the subject. He (Lord C.) had lately received
several comnrunications relative to the painful situation
of parties affected by the decision of the Irish Judges.
No doubt had existed for many years but that marriages
contracted under the circumstances in question were per-

fectly valid. Now he wished to express a hope not I
Only that the Government might at the earliest opportu-
nity introduce a Bill to remedy the evil, but
that his Noble and Learned Friend on the Woolsack
would introduce the Bill into that House in the first in-
stance. It appeared that the House of Commons were
engaged, night after night, with subjects of great public
importance, which prevented them from turning their
attention to the subject. He was of opinion that it would
be found much more convenient to introduce the Bill
immediately into that House, and lie earnestly hoped
that his Noble Friend would adopt that course.
Lord BROUGHAM said that he wished to unite with
his Ncble a:ld Learned Friend who had preceded him,
in recommending to his Noble and Learned Friend on the
Woolsack, to introduce the measure of Governmmit imme-
dia:ely into that House. He would remind his Noble Friend
that he had often joined him in expressing his disappro-
bation of the late period at which measures of import-
ance were brought;under the consideration of that House.
During the first part of the session, no business came
before their Lordships, while they were after
wards compelled to harry over matters of
the greatest moment with inconvenient expedition.
Ile was sure that there never was a subject more appro-
priate fin- the consideration of the House than the sub-
ject to which he was then referring ; and he thought that
it came peculiarly within the range of their Lordships'
deliberation.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that it was
not his intention to say a single word in re-
ference to the observations thrown out by his
Noble and Learned Friends with respect to the law
upon this question. All he would say was this, that
the Irish Bench was never filled by lawyers more emi-
nent for their legal knowledge, than those who filled it at
present. The question had been deliberately argued be-
fin-e them, and at very great length ; much consideration
was given to the subject, and he was therefore bound to
entertain the greatest respect for the decision which had
been come to under those circumstances.--L(Hear, hear,
hear.) With respect to the question put to him
by his Noble and Learned Friend, the Bill of the
Government had already been prepared under
his direction.;, and it was now before the
law officers of the Crown. The Government had not
turned their attention to the comparative convenience or
inconvenience of bringing the ;measure before their
Lordships in the first instance. But for his part he
should have had no objection to follow such a course.
E CA RLISLE presented a petition from Carlisle,
complaining of the distress of the town, and praying for
the repeal of the Corn-laws.
POOR- LAW COMMISSION.

The Bishop of EXE I'ER said he was sorry to say that
the petition which he had the honour to present to their
Lordships was one of such length that he should not move
that it be read to their Lordships. He should, how-
ever, attempt to give a brief abstract of it. The pet;-
tioners having made most serious and grave charges
against the Poor-law Commissioners for England and
Wales, he (the Bishop of Exeter) had adopted that course,
which he was sure their Lordships would have expected.
He had taken care that the petition should go into the
hands of the Commissioners, that they might examine
the contents. He had done that, and he was satisfied to
kno.v that their case in answer would be stated by a
Noble Lord high in office, and higher still in talent
and qualifications. It was a matter of satisfaction for him (the
Bishop of Exeter) to think that public officers occu-
pying such a station as the Poor-law Commissioners, should be
sure of being protected as they ought to be by the Government.
When their couduct was called in question, it was the duty of
Government to presume beforehand that they had acted right,
and while he was sure that no Government would sustain them
in acting wrong, he rejoiced to think that they would use
every means to protect and defend the petitioners. Unless the
allegations contained in the petitions were contradicted, there
certainly was much that required investigation ; he, however,
would abstain from making any comments, and would come at
once to the facts. It happened that in January, 1810, two pau-
pers died in the workhouse of the Crediton Union, in Devon,
under circumstances which excited great public feeling. Ru-
mours of the most sinister kind went forth against the cenduut
of the guardians of the Union. These reports had been widely
spread, had arrived at the ears of the guardians, and had
been considered at a meetine• of the Board, and xere con-
sidered to have been answered. The voice of the public, how-
ever, was still heard, and an attorney of great practice
and probity, felt it his duty to inquire into the facts, and he
Wean by disbelief, but evidence came on him so thick, and
with such force, as extorted from him some degree of cre-
dence. In April 1840 he addressed a letter to the Chairman
to the Board of Guardians, Jami•s Wentworth Buller, Esq., a
gentleman known to many of their Lordships as a most ho-
nourable, benevolent, and active friend to the poor. To him
Mr. Tanner addressed a letter on the 13th of April, 1840, in
the fallowing terms :—" A very serious report having been
much circulated relative to the death of a pauper by the name
of William Locke, who perished in a cold, damp shed, belong-
ing to Crediton workhouse, where he had been placed whilst
labouring under severe illness, I have taken pains to lark into
the matter, and I fear that the statement is true and can be
substantiated." He then proceeded in his letter to request an
open and impartial inquiry into the fae..s of the ease.
This letter, written on the 13th of April, was submitted
to the Board of Guardians on the 3d of May, when it was
opened by the Vice-Chairman, and no notice was taken of it.
As he couid not induce the guardians to pay any attention to
h•s complaint, or to institute any inquiry, he determined to ap
ply to the higher powers, and accordingly wrote to the Commi-
ssioners, enclosing the letter to the guardians, and expressing a
hope that they would cause a searching inquiry to he instituted.
This was on the fith, and on the 9th Mr. Tanner received a
letter stating that his communication would receive the imme-
diate attention of tile Commissioners. On the 12th he again
wrote to the Commissioners to say that he understood, from
private information, that an investigation would take place in
the workhouse on the 16th, and he requested to be permitted to
attend there and bring forward the persons upon whose autho-
rity his statement was founded. On the 14th he received an
answer to the effect that the Commissioners had received from the
Assistant Commissioner deposit ions negativing his statements,
so that the Commissioners would not feel justified in pursuing
the investigation any further upon his general statements, but
that if he should furnish them with any other specific facts,
they should be inquired into. Now what did they mean by
specific facts ? Had not Mr. Tanner communicated to them
specific facts in the letter which their Lordships had just heard,
that people had died from cold, and hunger, and neglect ?
—(Hear, hear.) They were informed that this gen-
tleman could bring forward witne sea to establish all the
cases which he alleged, and several others. But without
giving him the opportunity of substantiating his charges, with-
out communicating with the relations of the deceased, Locke ;
they allowed a secret inquiry to take place in the workhouse,
and they rested satisfied with such a partial investigation.
Mr. Tanner again wrote to them. the otter was dated May
20th, and stated that having received the Commissioners' letter,
he was of opinion that a further investigation of the subject was
necessary, and he feared, the depositions being on one side,
would not be considered satisfactory, or tend to allay the feelings
which the report excited previously to his first addressing them.
He (Mr. Tanner) further stated that not a single witness was
examined by the Assistant Commissioner, and asked how it
could be known whether such statements could or could not
he substantiated, or how they could decide that the depositions
taken could not be satisfactory ; and he sincerely hoped that
the evidence would disprove the statement of Locke and his
wife. That was the letter of Mr. Tanner, and that was the
state of things up to the 20th of May. The next stage in the
proceedings was somewhat more startling. It appeared that
Mr. Tanner, in consequence of no notice having been taken
of his complaint, informed the proprietor of a newspaper in
Exeter, and who was one of the most respectable in'sabitants
there, having been distinguished among his fellow-citizens al a
perion recommended by the Commissioners, who disagreed
with him in politics, to the Secretary of State to di:-
charge the office of a Magistrate. That geutlem-in's
name was Mr. Woo'.mer ; and he having considered
the case, gave it insertion in his paper. He the
( Bishop of Exeter) read the article, and it detailed most
grievous facts, and it sta'cil that. 11:: was prepared to insert
any contradictions if they were offered, and it also stated that
he was willing to believe the fact could not be true, and yet
for that article legal proceedings of a very grievous an I serious
nature uere taken against him. Mr. Tanner said that
those legal proceedings were instituted at the instigation of
the Assistant Commissioner, and that was important in can-
sidering his conduct. Ile for one should not criticise the
conduct of private individuals in seeking to protect them-
selves from alleged misrepresentations, but when it was sought
to bring the vengeance of the law on individuals who calmly,
but strongly brought the fact before the public, it was hard
they should promote vindictive proceedings; and when the
Poor-law Commissioners were invested by the Legislature with
powers that were oppressive, and whose proceedings it was
necessary for the good of the country should be anxiously
watched. In consequence of this, proceedings were taken in
the Court of Queen's Bench against Mr. Woolmer, for having
inserted that article in his newspaper.
The Earl of RADNOR—Who was the prosecutor?
The Bishop of EXETER—The guardians ; but Mr. Tanner
the petitioner, stated that he was informed and believed that
it was the guradians, at the instigation of the Assistant- Com-
misioner. They would recollect that he (the Bishop of
Exeter) was only quoting the averment of the petition. When
this case came before the Court of Queen's Bench, the de-
fendant prepared several affidavits to show—he had prepared
upwards of twenty affidavits—to show the truth of the alleged
statement, and that the facts which had been alleged had hap-
pened. But the attorney who had prepared the prosecution
made some unfortunate blunder. He said unfortunate, because
he believed that great mischief was the effect of He be-
lieved that if the case had been gone into then, their Lord-
ships would not have been troubled with the subject. An un •
pinloisyteaikl
ei,n
ngde tithine go upnn n s
etlhe for prosecution.s a
iTd h eirte
wwaas
fortunate blunder was committed by the parties who were em-
16th inthosif
rule
obeing
dth6aintistshee easd.Tehcisouwlads goo on, an
n the
'a
perfectlylegal
impossible
t June,ed u p
ao
nn d t hi
ne
the course of that month be believed a
mfurther commu-
nication took place on the part ofTanner with
the Commissioners in London ; and %
also
of Mr. Woolmer on the 2d of July. mr.woei the part
that course which he would say was a eomer took
of the earin t s
gof that gentleman's views. He rdi kling proof
a t addressed the
Commissioners in this way, and their Lordships
w
leet this was a gentleman smarting under the r
ociou
en dt Fecol-
tion of a very gross prosecution against him in theColunilrticof
Queen's Bench. This letter was dated July 6, 1840. (The
Right Rev. Prelate then read the letter, which stated the
writer's readiness to put the parties in possession of every in-
formation, and enclosing the briefs delivered to counsel to-
gether with the affidavits.) He begged to call the attention
of the House to the following paragraph :—" Of caurse it must
be understood that I forward the brief to you merely as
a loan,
without prejudice to myself, my partner, or any other person.
I beg to implore you, for the sake of justice to the parties con-
cerned, to cause a fair and public investigation to he
made." This was answered on the 7th of July by I
a statement that the letter had been received, and that the sub- I
ject should be attended to by the Commissioners. What fur-
ther communications took place he did not know, until the sth
of August, and on that day Mr. Gilbert addressed a letter to
Mr. Tanner, stating that he . should sit in the Board-room of
the Crediton Union on the 14th of August to hear evidence."
" Solicitors or copnsel will be allowed to attend to watch the
proceedings, and to suggest sue th questions as they thought proper
on the subject matter of the inquiry." Now nothing appeared
to be fairer than that. This _gentleman chose to attend as his
own advocate ; and, on the 14th, immediately after Mr. Gilbert
had determined to summon Mr. Tanner, who was thus made a
complainant and who was to advocate the case in person, im-
mediately before this inquiry Mr. Gilbert summoned this gen
tleman as a witness. Mr. Tanner was there, of course, and_ lie
was required to submit to an examination that lasted the whole
day, soda great part of the day folowing ; and because
lie made an affidavit for Mr. Wo Amer in the Queen's Bench,
he Was made a witness, and his mouth was shut.
Such conduct was most unaccountable. He hoped the Noble
Lord would be able to •
pre soma sort nf answer. He did not
say the Noble Lord would be unable to do but their Lord-
Tanner so,
hips must admit that some sort of answer required. Mr.
Tanner had made his affidavit soielforthweas
of
show-
ing that Mr. W I
- c`o-mer, introlueing thepaurtielesealluded to
into his newspaper had beer, billuenced by no hostile feeling,

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 25, 1842

but that he had done so upon the representation of Mr. Tan-
ner, who knew nothing of the circumstances of the case from
his own knowledge, but, having heard of the circumstances, he
had been induced to investigate the case, aed had communi-
cated the result of that investigation to Mr. Wo diner. Mr. Tan-
ner had been subjected to a most rigid examination and cross-
examination. On the second day it had been arranged that on
meeting again an advocate should appear IT Mr. Tanner.
The inquiry was then adjourned, and on the 26th of August.
Mr. Tanner received an intimation from Mr. Gilbert that the
inquiry would be resumed on the 27th. Mr. Tanner was asto-
nished at receiving such an intimation, because it had been left
doubtful if the inquiry would be resumed ; and he complained,
and justly, that he had not had longer notice given to him;
at the same time he handed in a list of witnesses to be exa-
mined, requesting that they might be called in the order in
which their names stood on the list. On the day of the meet-
isle Mr. Tanner was surprised to find that Mr. Gilbert was
assisted by ano.her Learned Gentleman, Mr. Parker, also
an Assistant Poor-law Commissioner. In consequence of the
understanding which had been previously corns to with
Mr. Gilbert, Mr. Furlong, a respectable attorney of Exeter,
attended as the advocate of Mr. Tanner. When Mr. Furlong
attempted to act as Mr. Tanner's advocate, he was interrupted
by Mr. Parker, who said, " We want no advocates here;" and
he refused to let that gentleman act. This course was con-
sidered very extraordinary, and excited the indignation of the
Chairman of the Beard of Guardians, Mr. Buller, and a gentle-
man of equal worth and respectability with Mr. Buller, though
his name was not so well known—Nß-. Sillifant, the Deputy
Chairman of the Board. They both expressed their strong
indignation at the coarse pursued. They told Mr. Tanner that
he ought to be heard by his advocate. But the matter did not
end there. When they saw that justice was refused, though
the complaint was made against the board of guardians, and
the course of the Commissioners seemed to be in their favour,
yet they would not accept it, but resigned their posts as Chair-
man and Deputy Chairman of the board. They considered
that justice was yisulted, when a person coming to coreplain,
even though against themselves, was not permitted to take the
course that was always adopted. He did not mean that they
actuelly said this, but this was what they virtually said by their
aet of resignation. Two days before this the board of guardians
met and resolved, that the made of conducting the inquiry
was wholly unusual; that public justice would not be satis-
fied with it, nor would the Board be able to maintain the con-
fi fence and respect of the public. The guardians, therefore,
approved of the step taken by the Chairman and Vice-Chair-
man, and also resigned their seats. A long letter was then
sent down by the Poor-law Commissioners, defending the mode
of the inquiry, which was conlueted in a private room, theugh
he should state that the reporters of the Exeter newspapers
were admitted. But neither the complainant, nor any person
on his behalf, were allowed to appear ; no person to examine
evidence, or direct how it should be taken, or any one ac-
quainted with the circumstances. In consequence of this a
second resolution was passed, stating that the withdrawal of the
Assistant Commissioners from the public room was not rendered
necessary by the conduct of the persons p. esent, and that the
only interruption arose from the refusal of the Assistant Com-
missioners to pursue the course of inquiry they had themselves
laid down at the commencement of the proceedings. The mas-
ter and surgeon of the workhouse were present, so were Mr.
Parker and Mr. Gilbert. The witnesses were examined and cross-
examined, as it was stated, in a most vexatious manner. At
any rate Noble Lords would see that the parties against
whom the complaints were made had the advantage
of cross-examining all the witnesses brought forward.
and on the other hand there was no power given to the com-
plainants to re-examine them. Nor was that all, the Court itself
did not know what they were examining about ; the Corn.nis-
sioners knew nothing of what the principal witnesses brought be-
fore them were brought to prove ; they heard something of
what they had to say, but that was a very small portion of the
charges. When the witnesses were proceeding to relate the
facts in their own way, they were told that they should answer
certain questions put to them and those only. There was no
doubt that the parties who instituted the complaint were treated
most harshly and unjustly, at the same time he (the Right Rev.
Prelate) should say be believed there was no intention to ins-
peach the character of Mr. Gilbert or Mr. Parker—he believed
they were gentlemen of high respectability and irreproach.
able character ; at the same time, whether they meant to
do so or not, they acted most unfairly and harshly to-
wards those parties. But he must say even that was not all.
The course which they pursued was, as he would show, an
outrageous violation of decency and fairness. The brief sub-
mitted by Mr. Woolmer to his Counsel, for his defence in the
Q teen's Bench, was obtained from his attorney, and the confi-
dential notes in the margin were communicated to the persons
accused, contrary to the express agreement with the attorney,
and notwithstanding Mr. Tanner's repeated protest. It was
net surprising the inquiry terminated in the acquittal of the
accused. He would show their Lordships upon what
es-id-nee they were acquitted.—(Hear, hear.) One of
the physicians stated that the room: was remarkably
small, and contained a small stove, which was no', in his opi-
nion, sufficient to warns the room. The temperature ought to
have been nom 65 to 70. Another physician was called, who
stated that the room was warmed not' by a common fire-place,
but by a plate. He tin 'tight that Otte would produce an in-
jurious heat ; there was an offensive smell in the room. Mr.
Tucker said that the mem was calculated for persons in good
health, but this opinion was expressed in August or September.
Ile further stated it was only fit for one or two people He
further thought that the ventilation was unsuited to an incle-
ment season. He thought it was totally unsuited for persons
suffering under decease. Another surgeon was called, who cor-
roborated this testimony. 'I heir Lordships must recollect that
this room was occupied by two persons in this state for several
days. In September last two eminent medical men were called
in on the part of the guardians to depose to the fit-
Tit,SS of the room. One was Mr. Barnes, an cm'nent
surgeon This gentlemen sail there was no offensive smell
when he was there, bet that the room was cheerless—and
cheerless was tie best name that could be given it. It was
kept sufficiently warm, and was well qualified fir the purposes
to which it was applied—namely, an idiot ward. That it was
very well adapted for such persons in a state of health, but it
was not at all suited for sick persons, because if sick persons
were allowed to remain in it, it would become close and un-
wholesome. That was the testimony of tho person. called in
to prove the fitness of the place. Another physician, Dr.
Miller, gave a more favourable opinion ; fur he said he did not
consider the rooms too small, and that the mode of heating
them was not had. The house-surg on gave a more favour-
able opinion than either; but as he was not known in the
county, his testimony was not so valuable or so much to be relied
on. The inquiry was very protracted, and lasted for 14 or 15
days, and when they came to a close many individual, were not
ex mined ; and he thought it very surprising_ that 23 wit-
nesses were not examined at the investigation. He also thought
it matter of surprise that more witnesses were examined
fir the defence than for the complaint, as was stated
in the petition. On the 17th of October the Commissioners
ma le a report, in %!.11i,:h they ann ,uneed their decision, and
gave an entire acquittal to all the parties concerned. They
stated that they had examined the evidence of the inquiry at Cre-
diton, and they considered the treatment of the deceased pa-
tients could not be complained of, hut that, on the contrary,
the care taken of th in was highly creditable; and that the
master performed his difficult task of taking care of the pa-
tients with great satisfaction. The Commissioners concluded
their Report by stating that they would, if the guardians
wished, give the fullest publicity to the documents in the case.
The answer to that letter was that the Board felt that it
would be desirable that the utmost public ty should be given
to the deteiled statements made by the Poor--law Commis-
sioners. Subsequently a letter hal been received from Mr.
Chadwick, stating that they had no objection to have the whole
correspondence published. After all that he had said, and in which
there was a good deal that was surprising, their Lordships
would no doubt be astonishes' at what he was now about to
bring before them. Though the Commissioners sent these demi-
rsGuardians, and though they had expressed
a ehopen t sto
the
be made publ e, yet still when
tthta ht e
the boards
documents
of
they came to the Board, it. was at the express desire of the Board
of Commissioners in London, returned te them, and no copy
was permitted to be taken. While he fully acquitted the Com-
missioners of any intention to do injustice or behave with
cruelty, yet he thought that in their conduct there was that
which showed they were unfit to be trusted with that extent of
power which their Lordships an I the other House of Parlia-
ment had given them- He was not surprised at the prayer
with which this gentleman conchided ; he prayed them to take
the subject into their grave coasideration, or that. they would
select such portions of the case as they might deem requisite
fir inquiry ; or if they did not thick fit to make and inquiry,
then that, unless these facts were answered, their Lordships
would not concur in any Act of Parliament which should con-
tinue uncontrolled the unprecedeated power of the Poor-law
Coniniissioners. He moved that the petition be laid on the I

Lord WH A RNCLIFFE was sure their Lordships would
give the Government credit for not wishing; to defend any
case unless they thought it was a realty defensible case, and
that the case attempted to be made out against them had
failed. In almost all these cases there were some parties more
or less worthy of blame, and he was far frora saying that in
the present caoe he did not see things which ought not to
have occurred, and as he proceeded he should not Spare those
whom he thought worthy of censure. The Poor-law Com-
missioners were called upon to perform a most arduous and a
most disagreeable duty, and it behoved their Lordships to be
cautious how they threw on gentlemen so situated a degree of
blame which they did not deserve. In all cases of this nature
the first thing to be considered was the circumstances under
which the accusation had been made, and secondly, the con-
duct of those whobrought.forward the accusation. They ought
to come into Court with clean hands ; there should be no
evidence of anything like a contrivance, or of any-
thing like an attempt to get up a case; no cir-
cumstances to show that the case had been got up by the
accuser for the mere purpose of making himself notorious, and
of advancing himself in his profession. NoW, it did appear to
him, on looking at the history of this case, that the great ob-
ject of Mr. Tanner throughout the case had been to acquire
notoriety for himself, and probably to derive from it the means
of assisting himself in his profession. In the first place, the
transaction itself, of whatever cha'acter it might be, occurred
two years ago, and two inquiries hail taken place, which ended
in August or September, 1840, yet this was the first
time anything had been said about it in either
House of Parliament. The House of Commons was open
to Mr. 'fanner, and there were Noble Lords who would have
brought the case for him before this House. But he never
availed himself of these opportunities until now, when he saw
that a new Poor-law Bill was about to be enacted. However,
it could riot be denied that it might be very reasonable for him
to take these means of showing the House they ought to be
cautious in giving such powers to any Commissioners again.
But, at all events, he had slept on this ease since 1840. The
first inquiry took place on the 30th of April in that year. On
the 2d of May, Mr. Tanner wrote to the Chairman. It hap-
pened that he was not at the Board on that day, arid it was not
surprising that the guardians did not think it right to take any
notice of the letter until he should be present. It might, per •
haps, have been better if they had acknowledged the receipt of
the letter. But, at all events, Mr. Tanner knew that the
Chairman to whom his letter was addressed was not present,
and he might reasonably expect an answer after the next meet-
rn-
ing• de wrote this letter era the 2d, and on the. bth he wrote
to the Commissioners. Now, he did not get an answer from
'4f
them until the th. But, upon the Bth, the letter which ap-
p-ared on the 9th' in the Exeter
paper must have been co
an
implicated to the editor. That v.-as the letter upon which the
criminal in'ormat ion was laid, and there was little
doubt that it was written by Mr. Tanner himself.
In the letter addressed to the Commissioners, this gentleman
did not state one, even one, mate-ill fact with reference to the
case. It was true, he said those poor men died, but he never
stated what they were, or how they died. One of them wa,, in
point of fact, an idiot, and the other was a poor man, subjectro epileptic fits, He said the ow they were kept in was
improper place : the medical persons connected with the in-
stitution said that these poor men were kept in a ward which
wappropriated to lunatics.
as New he ( Lord Wharncliffe)
thought that such conduct on she part of this gentleman wy.
nfla a,
matory in the extreme. The newspaper represented the
place in which these paupers were kept as a filthy place, with-
out windows, and that it was unfit to be inhabited. On look.
kg at the evidence of the medical gentleman there was no
such thing stated ; on the contrary, the medical men said that
the place was well ventilated and warm. Now, suppose this
were stated to the Commissioners, and that they, on sending
down their Assistant-Commissioner, found that the place
was quite different from what it was represented to be,
it would not be necessary to seject the parties to
an inquiry into the matter. It was, however, ascertained, that
instead of the place being filthy and empty, there was straw
for bedding, and ample means for ventilation. In fact the de-
scription of the place was totally different from that which was
given in the newspapers, The Poor-law Guardians were not

MADEMOISELLE DEJAZET AND THE NOVEL OF
FascirsaTtort."—A peculiar interest attaches to the novel of
Fascination," which has just appeared, edited by Mrs. Gore_ A
clever dramatic piece founded on the story, has been selects I for
the debut of the celebrated Mademoiselle Dejaset at the Fr, ench
Play : in order to appreciate which, it will be necessary for al 1 the
frequenters of that fashionable entertainment to peruse the mei! .nce,
a work of the most original and piquant nature.

satisfied with Mr. Gilbert, and they were determined to insti-
tute
a criminal prosecution against the newspapers for a libel.
Accerclinglv, they moved for a rule in the Court of Queen's
Bench. They obtained liberty to file a criminal leteenation,
fhey did so, and the Editor employed.Jr.l fanner to defend
it. They came into the Court ,if Queen's Bench, and the very
first thing done was to take a technical objection, which upset
t'ae whole proceedings. Mr. Tanner had, of course, instructed
his counsel to raise that objection, and the result was it pre-
vented that public inquiry which he affected to desire. Mr.
Tanner must have given directions in this case, because no
counsel would have acted without it. It. appeared that Mr.
Wooliner consented to deliver up to the Commissioners his
briefs, as stated by the Rev. Prelate. These briefs were accom-
panied by the affidavit which Mr. Tanner had prepared for
showing cause against the rule in the Queen's Bench. The
moment they received the briefs and affidavits they felt it
their duty to make further inquiry into the matter, and again
sent down their Assistant Commissioner to make that inquiry.
They were now arrived at the case—the question of these in-
quiries. A great deal had been said upon this subject, and
with perfect truth, that these inquiries, from the nature of
the thing, could not be impartial. However that might be,
the Act of Parliament gave power to the Commissioners to make
inquiries an I swear witnesses, and he apprehended that it was
sufficient if the. Commissioners believed that an offence
had been committed, and they had thesanction of the Govern-
ment that it would be their duty to institute a prosecution. But
the inquiry the Commissioners had to make was an inquiry for
a special purpose, of obtaining information, and not for the
purpose of convicting individuals of crime. Now, it was very
true it would be much better if those inquiries could be con-
ducted before a jury, as it would be the more satisfactory.
He hoped that when the Bill came before that House
some means might be devised that would give the
Commissioners power to have a real, substantial, and impar-
tial inquiry whenever it was called for. But, as had been
said by the Right Rev. Prelate, it was improper in Mr. Gil-
bert in calling upon Mr. Tanner to give evidence upon the
ground of• his having introduced certain affidavits in the Court
of Queen's Bench. If Mr. Tanner had wished to conduct the
case, and produce witnesses for examination, it would have
been proper for him to have said they had prevented him, by
making him a witness, and he would have had just cause of
complaint against the Commissioners. _ It had been deter-
mined that counsel and attorney should ha admitted on both
sides, and that the investigation should be conducted in such a
manner as to he satisfactory to the public. Now two statements
had been made with respect to that investigation. Mr. Tanner
first said that his advocate would not be permitted to speak,
whilst the Commissioners represented Mr. Tanner to have
used very strong expressions. There was no place where a
man was called upon to show more patience, and absence of
any ebulition of temper, than when sitting upon the bench of
Justice. Now he held that the language used had been rash,
to use the mildest expression. The Guardians, like honest
men, who were conscious of their innocence, wished to have a
fair investigation, in order that any imputations which
could be cast upon them might be removed. In his
opinion, and contrary to the opit ion of the Commis-
sioners, he was free to confess that the expression of opinion on
the part of the guardians ought to have induced the Assistant-
Commissioners to revise their opinion, and satisfy the public by
continuing the inquiry, no matter what abuse they received
from Mr. Tanner. The Right Rev. Prelate had stated a part,
and only a part, of the evidence of the medical persons. And
in the first place, the averment in the paper that the persons
died of want of proper treatment, was not true. It was said
the place was not warm, but the medical evidence proved that
there was a means of warming it, and it was clear that it could
be made sufficiently warm. They spoke of the impurity of the
place and the smell, but it was not surprising that wren the
T'r'ends of the patients went to see them they found the air im.
pure, and a not ‘ery agreeable smell. He had no doubt at the
time the air was impure, but the evidence showed tbat the per
sons were not ill, and the air was not impure. They spoke of the
non-pavement; of the ceiling, and cold, but the evidence showed
that the place was such as was esed for persons in their state,
and in point of fact pains were taken to make it so. He con-
fessed from the manner in which Mr. 'fanner spoke in his pe-
tiion he was induced not to attach much credit to it. The'
Right Rev. Prelate had stated that they promised to publish
this, and that after all they would not allow it. Now, that
struck him at the moment as a. most curious circumstance, and
since the Right Reverend Prelate had made the statement
he had inquired into the subject, and found that
the Commissioners wished it to he published, and that
for that purpose they sent it to the guardians
but they refused to publish it. Another point which was
stated in the petition, but which the Right Rev. Prelate did
lilt refer to, was an assertion that the witnesses for the charge
and against it were paid in different ratios. Now that was not
the fact—all that had been done was to adopt the course that
was constantly pursued in Courts of Justice ; the witnesses
were paid according to their station in life. Now such an ac-
cusation as that was calculated to taint the petition, and his
firm belief was that the petition was got up by Mr. Tanner,
while he stated that he felt bound to admit that there were
several things done by the Commissioners which he could
not sanction.

Lord CAMBPELL did not intend to go into the merits of
the question. His intention in rising was to give their Lord-
ships some information which might be useful to the forming
an opinion as to one part of the case. In his petition, Mr. Tan •
nor stated that he had had no opportunity of bringing the case
forward in the Court of Queen's Bench. Now he (Lord Camp-
bell) could assure their Lordships that Ifr. Tanner had had
ample opportunities of bringing the case under the cogniz-
ance of the Court of Queen's Bench. The petition stated that
the prosecutors had either intentionally, or unintentionally,
made a flaw in the proceedings, thereby clearly intimating
that the flaw had been purposely introduced by the prosecutor,
for the purpose of preventing investigation. Now he (Lord
Campbell) could assure their Lordships, that there was not the
slightest foundation for such an insinuation. The rule had
been moved for in a regular manner. All the materials neces-
sary were furnished to the Court by the prosecutor. The
affidavit on which the rule had been moved, was filed, and the
newspaper containing the alleged libel, wis attached to it; but
it so happen that in drawing up the rule, the officer of the
Court had omitted the words, "On the reading of this affidavit
and of the newspaper annexed thereto." The counsel for the
defence, acted under the instructions of Mr. Tanner. They were
honourable men, and he was sure they would never have
taken the objection if Mr. Tanner had urged them to abstain
from doing so ; and he also felt assured that if those gentleman
had placed any great reliance on their affidavits, they would have
advised Mr. Tanner not to take the objection, but to let the case
go before the Court upon its merits, so as to have the rule
discharged with costs. That objection had been taken volun-
tarily on the part of the defendant, and he (Lord Campbell)
was su .e it would not have been taken without his instructions.
The Court had felt bound to yield to the objection, and
it had only been owing to the defendant's own objection, that
the merits of the rule had not been gone into.
Therefore it was improper for Mr. Tanner to say that he had
had no opportunity of bringing the merits of the question tin-
der the consideration of th Court of Queen's Bench. He
(Lord Campbell) regretted exceedingly that the affidavits on
both sides had net been placed before the Court, who would
have decided the case upon its merits. _
The Bishop of EXE f ER, in reply, said that the merits or
demeri's of Mr. Tanner had nothing to do with the question,
..
and contended that the Poor-law ':ominissioners had shown
themselves unfit to be trusted with the powers confided to them.
The Noble Lord had asked why, a, the subject-matter of the
petition had occurred two years ago, the case had not been
brought forward before. He explained that it was because the
petitioner wished to present it when the measure for renewing
the power of the Poor-law Commissioners came before Parlia
ment. He believed also, that Mr. Tanner was a man of honou's
and above bringing forward the case from any unworthy motive.
The Right Hon. Baronet, the First Lord of the Treasury, said
last year, in reference, to this subject, that it was the duty of
the Commissioners to stand between the poor and the Guar-
dians.—( Hear, from Lord Wharncliffe.) Then it was their
duty in this case to have examined and inquired before
they gave their judgment ; and if their Lordships desired, he
(the Bishop of Exeter) would be prepared to prove, at the bar
of the House, the truth of Mr. Tanner's statement. But in
consequence of the contradictory character of the evidence be-
fore the Assistant Commissioner, he had not read any part of it
but that of the medical men ; nor had he read soma very strong
harts of it. The Commissioners were satisfied wi h the apart-
ment 3 for the sick. Now experiments were made, from
which it appeared, by the testimony of the medical officers,
that whilst the thermometer was 78 Fahrenheit, in a room in
Exeter where there was no fire, it rose only to 74 in the sick
room of the workhouse, although th fire in the stove was kept
up so high that the bars were red-hot. lie (the Right Rev.
Prelate) said the Poor-law Commissioners were guilty of the
grossest disingenuousness—the charge against Mr. Tanner
sunk into nothing when compared with the conduct of the Com-
missioners. The only reason why he was anxious to refer to
the evidence of the witnesses was merely so far as hi 3 (Mr.
Tanner's) honour was entrus'ed to the Right Rev. Prelate in
bringing forward the petition before the House, and the more
ingenuity, the more praiseworthy ingenuity the Noble Baron had
shown in endeavouring to exhonerate those officers front the
charges brought aeainst them, the plainer it was brought to his
(the Right Rey. Prelate's) mind, that no real answer had been
given, and no real answer could be given, to the complaints made
in the petition.
The Bishop of EXETER shortly afterwards rose again and
said, if the Noble Baron (Lord Wharncliffe) wished to see any
of the documents, they should be laid on the table of the House.
Lord WH A RNCLIFFE said he did not want to see any do:
cuments ; he was perfectly satisfied to leave the matter where
it was.

The Bishop of EXETER thought what he had done was
trite enough, and he would therefore beg leave to lay the peti-
tion on the table of the House.
The petition was then laid on the table, and the Hoe ad-
journed at Eight o'Clock.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
TATTERSALL'S—YESTERDAY.
The betting did not commence in earnest until four o'clock,
and even then was not remarkable either for its biiskne,s or
foe its effects on the prices. We may observe, however, that
11 and 12 to 1 were hid outright against Chatham, 10 to tin
conjunction with other horses, and that the feeling towards
him was far from favourable. Wiseacre was also in the shade,
' 30 and 33 to 1 having been betted three or four times, followed
by offers to go on. Palinurus was in high favour, at 1,000 to
15, taken two or three dozen times, but slid not advance.
The Dirce colt, Mr. Batson's Acacia colt, and Mr. Forth's lot
were supported with some show of spirit, and may be looked
upon as rising favotrites. We have no other changes to record.
DERBY.
3 to 1 agst Scott's lot
28 to I agst Mr. Forth's lot—taken
7 to 1 agst Col, Ansen's Attila
11 to 1 agst Colonel Peel's Chatham
30 to 1 agst Mr. Dixon's Ballinkeele—taken
30 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Dirce colt
33 to 1 agst Mr. Wreford's Wiseacre
40 to 1 agst Lord Westminster's Auckland—tk, and aft off
45 to I agst Mr. Greenwood's Lasso—taken
50 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Joanna c.—tk, and aft off
50 to 1 agst Mr Pettit's Espartero —taken, and aft offd
50 to 1 apt Mr. Dixon's Policy—take 1000 to 15
1000 to 15 agst Sir R. Goodricke s Palinurus—taken
1000 to 15 agst Mr. G. Clarke's Witham Le Gros—taken
1000 to 15 agst Mr. Batson's Acacia colt—taken
1039 to 100 agst Chatham and Artful Dodger—taken.
10 to 1 agst Chatham and Barrier —taken
10 to 1 agst Chatham aid Defier —taken
OAKS.
8 to 1 agst Mr. Etvrall'a Pas!ion
15 to I agst Lord .Jersey's Adela filly—taken
CHESTER CUP.
14 to 1 agst Mr. Plummer's Alice Hawthorn—taken
20 to 1 agst Lord Chesterfield's Rhodanthe
30 to 1 agst Mr. Payne's Johnny—taken
30 to 1 agst Col. Cranford's Diselo•ure—taken
35 to 1 agst Mr. Greville's Rory O'More—taken
COURSING.
BARTON-UPON-HUMBER, FEB. 15, 16, 17, AND 18. —The
Great . St. Leger Stakes were woo by Mr. Hutchinson's
Grasper, the Cup by Mr. Hutchinson's Violet, the Dci by by-
Mr. W. Richardson's The Doctor, the Oaks by Mr. Brarkill's
Magic, the Aucholine Stakes by Mr. Richardson's Roller, and
the Ninterton by Mr. Foster's Classic.

FRENCH PLAYS, ST. JAMES'S THEATRE.
EVENING, FEB. 23.
The Performances will commence at half-past Seven with LES
DEUX FRERES.
After winch, L'HOMME SOIX ANTE ANS.—Le Chevalier de
St. Julien. M. Perlet.
To conclude with LE BENEFICIARE.—Le Beneficiaire, Mons.
I'erlet.
Private Boxes and Stalls at Mr. Mitchell's Library, 33, Old Bond-
street;Mr. Seguin's, 12 Regent.streei ; Mr. Sams's, St. James's_
street ; and at the Box-othee uf the Theatre, hich is open dai(
from Eleven till Five. Admission to the Boxes, 6s. ; Pit, 3s. ad ;
Gallery StaUs, 3s. ; Gallvry, 2s.

13:,.N, proved to us, by their acquiescence in Mr. FERRAND'S
rinark, .that they were willing to tolerate anY
which could for the mome: t hide
item from themselves, supposing, probably, there"
:)y, that they should be equally hidden from the public.
But Mr. COBDEN'S remarks will be read as they
were heard, and we can with all sincerity assert, though
the impression which he made on the landlords was pro'
bably immediately
.effaced by the misplaced buffoonery
on such a subject which followed it, it wilt not speedily •
Oe effaced from the public mind. -
The public will probably conclude that the confusion
created was the proper element for perpetrating n greo
wrong. It will serve for an excuse. Mr. ViLLigni
very appropriately, therefore. placed the division 0n•
Mr. FERRAND'S speech, and as appropriately and.
justly asserted, from the support it had received, that.:
the majority of those who opposed his motion .4°4..
the sentiments so unfavourable to our mercantile ebn'
meter which Mr. FERRAND had pronounced. More than
a majority of the whole House have now declared for:
the maintenance of the law which deprives-the labouring.
cluis?.s of abundanCe of food, on no better groUnd
rently-than that the manufacturers treat them ill, an
that the landowners are in debt. For their sins, the
Legislature inflicts the punishment of starvation on the.
labouring classes, who thus, like slaves of the olden
times, are immolated for the vices of their masters.

• if
The Shareholders of the Edinburgh and Glasg°
Railway have acquitted themselves like men. 5°..„,111e
.
months ago the Directors resolved that it was exr,
dient to run Sunday trains, morning and evening,
referred their final decision to a meeting of the Share'
holders, which . was appointed. to. be held on TitestitT
the 22d instant. In the meantime the Scribes and rll°P;
sees were not idle, and the mode in which they attempte"
to defeat the rational, and in fact the necessary, c(4l',,s:
proposed, was in keeping with the character which t"
race acquired at' the very commencement of Chris:
tianity. Deceit, falsehood, persecution, and ,1°13.7,
prayers, were the weapons they employed to carry WI:
selfish purposes into effect. Scarcely one petition w9i
presented which did not abound in fl)rgeries.
these petitions were all written in the same hand. fie-;
rants, children, nay paupers, were practised -upon. Pea
the Commissioners of the General Assembly
at this Nt holesaie system of forgery, and apP9"loc
one of th it numb?r, the Reverend DAVID EicAs:
a Doctor of Divinity, to appear as their represent:it/0i
and enforce the earnest cry and prayer of the PoPle:s
"We have lifted up," said he, "our he°'
in prayer privately, and called upon our congregati ;",1s
tl6 in supplications publicly, that GOD W01.11(' I nil
it into the hearts 'or our countrymen to abstain 1.1")1,1
what would bring the judgments of Gov 1.
our beloved country." What right has ,tl/4i;
worm of the earth to divine the 'i;
uf the ALMIGIITY, and declare that our Werney.
ul CREATOR will bring judgmen ts on-. lit:2,
people for performing works of necessity and lue4re:a ?
Does he wish to see his horrible predictions Irenil``tol
Would it be a consolation to him to learn,,as he 100°13;he
the pulpit in the West Church next Sunday, that;,4i
train had run off the line, and that twenty human brf
had fallen victims ? We cannot think so i°lo
a Minister of Peace ; but what then d°es if
mean by the judgments of Gop ? And eve° it
such an awful calamity were to occur, what WOulfell
prove-7 Were those on whom the Tower of Siiooo
sinners above all others ? He knows the ans'.eo
Sir ANDREW AGNEW `vas present on the occalij
but he said nothing about judgments, or the comre,
to keep the Sabbath holy. No. He threatened the 'l'%,;
holders with an action for controverting the
statutes of the realm by running trains on Stl,
Did the ancient Scottish legislators then. P 7-71
the second sight, and make laws ag°ins;;lj.
mode of travelling which has been diecoveted ,
within a few years ? But it is in vain to reason-witb
such knaves and madmen. The only way to dea
t°l thiit
them is by deeds; and this the Shareholders,
too •
great honour, have done with goad effect, for they the
rejected the prayer of these fictitious petitions by
enormous majority of 571 votes and 4,113 shares.

COURT CIRCULAR. o'4
...,ute
Batourom, THURSDAY.—This morning, at twenty nu" ,ed "
Ps-
eight o'clock, his Royal Highness Prince Albert, accorod
Duke Ferdinard of Saxe.Coburg, the Princes Augustus an
pold of Saxe-Coburg, left the Palace for Bursted Park, Susse,e;ool
seat of the Earl of Liverpool (Lord Steward), with theiu`
of returning again this evening to the Palace to dinner. the
His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales was taken out
Pavilion Grounds this morning for an airing. 000
The Princess Royal was taken for a carriage airing this in
at one o'clock. o'6l

The Earl of Liverpool left the Palace this morning f for
o'clock, for the purpose of making the necessary prePars.fill
her Majesty and Prince Albert. t e P°;:,
The Royal carriage was ordered at twelve o'clock, for -11 t
pose of taking her Majesty to the Earl of Liverpool's sear'wjegi
consequence of the unsettled state of the weather, bet
countermanded the order. ors the
Mr. Hayter has taken a portrait of his Royal Higbn
Prince of Wales for his picture of the Royal Christening'
P4e
Yesterday was the birthday of his Royal Highness e „AO.'
of Cambridge. His Royal Highness received a visit of Ono of
lotion from her Royal Highness the Duchess of Glouccsier4er
as
Royal Highness paid visits to her Majesty the Queen De
Marlborough House, and to the Duke of Sussex at gcn`gl
Palace. Many of the Foreign Ministers, itteludin'veir7
Bavarian Minister and the Baroness de Cetto, Monsicumrioistcri
the Netherlands Minister ; Count Potion, the Sardinia,. ' is,f;
Baron de Moncorvo, the Portuguese Minister; Baron de :vet
the Russian Minister; Count Kielmaniagge, the Ii°,110000e"
Minister ; the Grecian Minister and Madame Tricoupi ; le -„,en,
deur Marques de Lisboa, Brazilian Minister; Chevalier /3°"- gsm
Prussian Minister ; Baron Gersdoff; the Saxon Minister; sfig!
Koller, Austrian Charge d'Affaires ; and Baron Rehouse:l'ol°j
dish Charge d'Affaires, called during the day ~3, 101 i,
bridge House, to make their inquiries after t"1"
Duke, and to leave their names for his Bc'x,d ne°:sl
ness. The Lord Chancellor, the Duke of Norfolk, 31'. IV;
all the Nobility in town also left their names for his
A
Highness at Cambridge House.
In the evening his Royal Highness's tradesmen instv
their hous:".s. e °
"2. Prince George of Cambridge visited her Majesty r-h •
Dowager at MarlborJugh House.
Ireland. 0: lo,tl.
A Deputation of the Millers of .r;ngland and
of Mr. Watney, Mr. Kidd, .Mr. CrosEeld, Mr. White. ""; °%,
too, Mr. Stanborough, Mr. Dunn, Mr. Mercer, Mr. Silt:n .41cpe
Mr. A Illiams, on behalf of the English Millers ; and Ain If °I, ,;At
ander, Mr. Malcomson, Mr. Russell, and Mr Davis, on be; t 300,10
Irish Millers, had an interview with the Earl of Ripon
do
theoffice of the Board of Trade, on the subject of the r°l4`;„,g X. ,e 1
on wheat and flour. They were accompanied by the folleur''coloir,
hers of Parliament and Gentlemen :—Mr. G. Bymg. lMI14„0
Wood, M.P., Lord Sarlon, M.P., Sir Howard Douvi
Mr. Keinbie, M.P., Mr. Antrobus, M p Colon In• 00
M.P., Colonel Conolly, M.P., W. johobe:' WO 0,
Mr. Morris Reade, M.P., Captain Taylor, M.P.,
,:g„rior
Patten, M.P., Mr. Fitzstephen French, M.P, the 011,1001 P ?0,
M.P., Mr. Ffolliott, M.P., Sir Charles Coote, M.P.. 311.,;fr,
M.P., Mr Blackburn, M.P., Mr. C. J. Round, M.P., ,/,'1,00.0,,i0
M.P., Mr. Branston, M.P., Mr. R. Gore, M.P., Sir or. flsic'
monde, M.P., Hon. Colonel Dawson Darner, MY.
M.P., Mr. James Power, M.P., Mr. P. Scrope,
house, M.P., Sir David Roche, M.P., Captain Arc"- ;1. f','„,c4
Mr. Gill, M.P., Mr. Wilshire, M.P., Mr. Master:ll', r.,-00
Edmond Hayes, M.P., Hon. Mr. Liddell, KY, ;Ni_foo•
M.P., Mr. Murphy, M.P., Mr. Christmas, M " 1,00,1
Wortley, M.P., Mr. Hamilton Lindsay, M.P., Mr' wll'''.
Colonel Acton, :M.P., Colonel Jones, M.P., Hon. V.
M.P., Mr. Irton. M P., Mr. Young and Mr. Dryden.
Sir William Gomm has errived in town trent Ja;f,
William had an interview yesterday with Lord St°l°-
'th the
Loid Adolphus Fitzelarence had an interview r te
Haddington yesterday, at the Admiralty. salic't°r, 01
The Chairman of the Excise; and Mr. DehaneJ' oters'
s.
the Excise, had an interview with the Earl of lIIP°n 1

the office of the Board of Trade.
their
• binsA
SIGHT AND HEARlNG.—ratrollile their phi!'
Majesties the King and Queen of Hanover, an",e • ofc6
Highnesses the late Princess Augusta, the rii,,n;-°Prilicy;ol:
her Serene Highness the Princess Esterhail, t"" of aow
Mary and Rosa, her Grace the Dowager iliu,cite:rl.
ford, and their Graces the Archbishop of Can— piarlo"
Dukes of Norfolk, Devonshire, Manchester, and ~„,,,oe'yciCg'
Marquises of He Londonderry, Sligo, arid Tford,O
of Shaftestniry, Tankerville, Harewood, Fowls, Orwscioeo;yoro,
low, Verulam, Harrowby, Buckinghamshire, Aleat,ll,:i. 013,.ne AC'
ford, Lisburne, and Ferrers, Bishops of Ele,,; y,
Lincoln, Cork, Elphin, and Kildare, Lords HO, ethe
In addition to the above distinguished patronsfieTer
Invented Spectacle Lenses and Sound MaSawst,;isore(V It
Operative Voice Conductor, Messrs. S. and °silo"
Albemarle.street, Piccadilly, opposite the York a.'_..entioa
King William.street, City, state that their valuableinovi sbov,efoirc
also gained the sanction and unqualified approbati°lloo;on. 'vefOct:
'hundred of the principal members of the medical Prt'e ptseed 0.111
diately these Newly.invented Spectacle Lenati.Broireis.,.ct
extremely imperfect vision, that mist am' 014:',DtP",
appear before the eyes is at once removed, ewe 0.00,;
conies clear arid distinct, so that the most aired ilnoPuthful,
comes bright and brilliant, and is brought to its voice "Iwe
and original state. Their Invisible Operative t .erceP%trea'
Sound Magnifiers for deaf persons, is not the Itss-:-01110e,w.4
uncomfortable ; they give immediate reaf to 010
u;
re osera;ie
cases of deafness, and the faintest whisper at 39, 4044'
heard with exact distinctness. To be had only a. wiolow;001/
street, opposite the York Hotel, and 76, 'Lifeine, par'
City.—No connection with persons of the eagle P. •
50
in Ireland le
.0
°fel wail' .o'i'
The General Steam Navigation C°lmhertivYso'll'll°l'
the Columbine, from Rotterdam, arrived
the
at eleven o'clock,
We are authorised
Robertson, who has been engaged in a Collet; „wile 1414
llorthwick,' M.P., is not the gentleman "
of
Liekss all
nected with the City and a Director of the
At. oM statewt.h thtehpar tiii,d'e,:cf :01;',

ol
io
London: Printed :aid Published LI MOW° '
No. I Strap .1, at The Su). O
ebruar
ffice? 140. ill, ;0-
the Coßnt cf lOiddlesex, Friday, ry 26,

• rt,A.
9a
aut.4.444 t
- , 7 inia\a‘ 4•1 , 4at. ' • 1 ..;491V.
• , '
0 ,