The Sun.
London, England, 1829-04-29 00:00:00

NELECT VESTRIES.

Mr. iIOI3HOUSE said that he rose to call the
attention of the House to a subject on which it would
be necessary for him to address it at some length,
but not at greater length than his sense of its great
importance demanded. The subject which he meant
to introduce to the notice of the House—that of
Select Vestries--was one which, at all times, and
especially at more recent periods of our history, had
much engaged, and deserved much to engage, the
attention of Parliament. It had been at various
times agitated in that House—it had frequently
been made a topic of legislation; and he was con-
vinced that these who were disposed to look at the
question, and to enter with him freely into its de-
tails, would concur in opinion with him that, in re-
ference to its bearing on the interests, the happiness,.
and the comfort of the people, there were few topics
more worthy of engaging the deliberate attention of
the Representatives of the People of England. One
of the many reasons which weighed most strongly
with him in inducing him to bring forward a motion
referring to the whale parochial management of this
country, was this—that, on former occasions, when
an application was made respecting the local manage-
ment of certain parishes, the advocates in support of
such an application were met (he had been so met
himself) by being asked, why did not he and they
introduce some plan comprehensive in its effect ?
Why did they not introduce some general mea-
sure for quieting the discontents that prevailed
upon this subject ? This, it was urged, would
be a less invidious way of proceeding in such
11 business; and therefore it was that, feeling the
free of such an observation, he had undertaken
to brireg forward the question as a measure of gene-
ral application, which, he owned, he could have
niched to have fallen into the hands of some abler
advocate.—(Hear, hear.)—Having endeavoured to
impress the House with the importance of the sub-
ject, he would proceed to call its attention to the
enormous amount of parochial assessments for the
support of the poor. By the returns laid before the
House, it would appear that the Poor Rates of
England arid \Vides, for the year ending February,
1828, amounted to 7,784,3564 Of that amount, it
would appear that 1,362,0001.—which was 17 per
cent. on the whole amount—was appropriated to
other purposes than the support of the poor.—
(Hear, hear.)—He would admit the reasonableness
of the deduction of a considerable portion of
this amount for the expence of collection and ma-
nagement of this enormous sum; but there was still
a greater surplus over what was applied to the re-
lief of the poor to be accounted for than could
fairly be set down to the expellees of collection and
management. In considering this enormous sum—
a satisfactory management and account of which it
was the object of the present measure to provide—
it would not be unamusing to compare the amount
of the parochial rates of this country with the reve-
nues of America, and of various countries of Europe.
These parochial rates, as he bad stated, amounted
nearly to 8,000,0001. Besides this, there was an
amount of neatly 4,000,0001. for paving, lighting.
and church-rates--giving, in their united results, a
total of nearly equal to a fourth of the whole reve-
nue of England, and far greater than the whole reve-
nues of the other States. For instance, the revenue of
America last year amounted to 5,539,0001.; the com-
bined revenues of Turin, the Two Sicilies, together
with Spain and Portugal, did not exceed 12,000,0001.
And it was further worthy of remark, in this com-
parison, that the present amount of our poor-rates
was equal to the whole revenue of England 50 years
ago. After observing that the total of the pa-
rochial rates, in 1795, was 2,500,0001., the Hon.
Member proceeded to state, that he would next call
the attention of :the House to the large parochial
revenues collected from individual parishes. In the
parish of Mary la-bootie alone, consisting of a popu-
lation of 120,000, the parochial receipts were
173,0001., which was twice the amount of the re-
venues of seven German Duchies. The parish of
St. James contributed parochial rates to the amount
of 63,0001.; St. George's and St. Giles's, Blooms-
bury, 30,000/. ; Clerkenwell 38,0001.—being twice
the• amount of the revenues, and two thousand over,
of a Prince who was honoured with the alliance of
a daughter of the Royal House that governed this
country. He meant- the reigning Prince of Hesse-
Homberg, whose revenues amounted to 18,000/.
The sum total of the parochial rates of Middlesex
alone was 750,0001. of which 101,0001. were ap-
propriated to other purposes than tl'e support of the
poor. It was natural and right that these pa-
rishioners should be extremely anxious to know in
what way their money was expended. lf, in the
expenditure of the public accounts, the utmost vigi-
lance was to be exercised, and the utmost jealousy
to be observed, be thought, that in the mode of
managing the parochial receipts, it was but fair that
a corresponding vigilance and jealousy should be
evinced. Thee inhabitants saw no reason why
the management of their accounts should be
confided solely to the coetroul of a few per-
sons in the parish, not honester than their neigh-
bour, and having no claim from their rank,
their property, or any other consideration to the irre-
sponsible powers they exercised. They justly com-
plained of a body self-elected and self-controuled
superintending their interests, and submitted that it
was by no means either necessary for, or consistent
with, the quiet and advantage of the country, that
such an authority should exist in perpetuity. He
was sure there was no person who would maintain
that there was anything in the Constitution of this
country which protected the exercise of this uncon-
troulable authority now exercised by the Select Ves-
tile,. Upon a popular authority, with which the
House was familiar—upon that of Doctor Burn—it
was stated that " the right of voting in the ap-
pointment of Select Vestries was anciently confined
to the payers of scot and lot." No other person had
a right to vote on those occasions. The practice by
which the Select Vestries became a fixed body was
of a revent introduction, and was by no means
traceable to the period of their early formation.
This right of election was exercised front year to
year; and it was only of very moderate date that i
many things had been introduced which had been
attached to Select Vestries, and which they claimed
the superintendence of as rights. For instance, the
Nightly Watch Rates had been only established
since the 9th of George 11. The Acts respecting
paving and lighting had their date no farther back
than the 10th of George 11., and the Act relat-
ing to the Poor Rates was only so far back as
the 43d of Elizabeth. It was idle, therefore, to set
up ancient prescription as a ground of protection for
the powers exercised by Select Vestries. He did
not now refer to such authority as was conferred
by Act of Parliament on certain Vestries, but to cus-
toms which had been defended on the ground of
prescription. He knew that there was a decision
pronounced by what was generally considered good
authority—by the Bench of this country—in which
the protection of prescriptive right had been given to
certain customs claimed and exercised by Select
Vestries. He begged, however, that it might be
understood that he did not consider himself bound
by that decision, nor should the House consider it-
self bound by it. In looking to the Report of the
trial at law which took place in 1691, he found in
the Commentary upon it by Holt, that no reasoning
or argument was mentioned upon which the decision
rested ; but in a subsequent trial, which took place
quit the right of prescription set up by the Select

Vestry of the parish of Northallerton, tho plea of
prescription was held on trial to be ill. The parish
of St. Martin-in-the-Fields was the parish in which
these usurped customs most prevailed, to the griev-
ance and wrong of the parishioners. That parish of
old contained a large district, which had been since
subdivided into separate parishes. In old times it
embraced the present parishes of St. Margaret's;
St. John's, Westminster; St. Anne's, Soho ; St.
George's, Hanover-square ; and St. Paul's, Covent-
garden. In referring back to the early period of the
history of it. Martin-in-the-fields, it would be found
that in the year 1606 the Select Vestry was
chosen by the parishioners at large; and it was not
till 1662 that a Select Vestry, clothed with the
self-elective and self-controlled powers and authority
exercised by the present Select Vestries, was granted
by Gilbert, Bishop of London, and subsequently
confirmed in 1673. The origin of the Select Ves-
tries claiming their authority from Act of Parlia-
ment was in the 10th of Anne, when a grant for
building fifty churches was made, and certain au-
thorities were granted to Select Vestries appointed
for the purpose of superintending the construction
of these churches. Some of the powers granted
for this temporary purpose had since been claimed,
and continued, although the grounds had ceased to
exist on which they were originally conferred. In
1695, great disturbance prevailed upon the subject
of the management of parochial rates by Select
Vestries, and in consequence of the petitions against
them, which then poured in upon both Houses,
leave was granted to bring in a Bill for the Regula-
_ _

tion of Select Vestries of Parishes within the Bills
of Mortality. This sheaved that great discontent
had at former periods prevailed upon the conduct
of these bodies, and that the subject wax one fitting
for legislative superintendence and revision. He
would next refer to the petitions which had been
presented to the House from the parish of St. Sa-
viour, Southwark, against the Acts of the Select
Vestry of that parish. A trial at law had subse-
quently taken place, in resisting certain Acts of the
Select Vestry, and it was decided that the custims
set up by the Select Vestry were not good and rea-
sonable—the Select Vestry was quashed, and that
parish now enjoyed the advantage of a popular
Vestry. In 1715 this subject had engaged the at-
tention of the Legislature ; and on reference to the
Journals of the House, it appeared that the Bill for
introducing some regulations and control over the Se-

lect Vestries of certain parishes had passed this House
by a majority of 134 to 34. This Bill he certainly
could not trace beyond this House, for it appeared that
the other House of Parliament took no proceeding
on it. In referring to the proceedings upon that
Bill, he found that leave was asked to insert an item
which had been omitted in the Report, which item
was, a charge of 171. 19s. for a dinner at the Mul-
berry Tree, so that the expensive entertainments of
Vie Select Vestries were by no means a modern
practice; but it was an old-established custom, ap-
parently to provide themselves with a costly banqwet
out of the parochial funds entrusted to their manage-
ment.—(A laegh.)—A Committee was appc.inted
on the subject in 1741, which sat for a year, and in
consequence of the Report of that Committee, a
Bill was brought into the House of Commons, which
on the 28th of March, 1742, was lost Hy a majority
of 160 to 132. He had troubled the House with
these statements, to show that the complaints against
Select Vestries were by no means of a modern date.
When the parishioners of St. Martin's-in-thi -Fields
—a parish of great extent and population—fourid
that they could obtain no relief from Parliament,
they made application to the Court of King's Bench
no fewer than four times. The first two of those
applications were completely unsuccessful. The
circumstances attending the second two were so ex-
traordinary and important, that he begged to call the
particular attention of the House to them. In 1791
the case was tried before Lord Kenyon. It had been
agreed between the complainants and the Select
Vestry that the case should be tried on a feigned
issue—namely, that from time immemorial the
Vestry of the parish of St. Martin's had been a Se-
lect Vestry. Lord Kenyon, however, having stated,
that if the number of the members of the Select Vestry
had not always been fixed, there could be no legal cus-
tom, the Counsel for the Vestry established by evi-
dence that the number was 49; and the complain-
ants were defeated. Now the House would be
very much surprised to hear, that 30 years after-
wards, when the books of the parish were looked
into, it was found that the number was, not 49, but
22; it was found also that there had been perpetual
variations in the number of the vestrymen, but that
it never exceeded 22. Had the Jury, who tried the
case in 1791, been aware of that fact, to a moral
certainty they would not have returned the verdict
which they did return. On that false conception,
however, they gave their verdict in favour of the
i
Select Vestry, who continued to exercise their lle.
gal power, levying rates, such as church-yard rates,
which were most oppressive. In 1823, the case
came again into the Court of King's Bench, and was
again tried on a feigned issue. The Judge who pre-
sided was the Learned Judge who now presided in
that Court, Lord Tenterden. It was a strange
thing, that after the terms of this feigned issue had
been, as before, agreed upon, between the com-
plainants and the Select Vestry, Lord Tenterden,
for reasons no doubt satisfactory to himself, changed
the terms of the issue, struck out the words " certain
number," and inserted the w ords " Select Body of
Parishioners." In consequence of this, the verdict
was, as before, in favour of the Select Vestry, which
body had ever since retained uncontrolled power
over the affairs of that extensive and populous pa-

rich. Other parishes had been more fortunate;
but the House would be surprised to hear, that
in one or two instances, the parishioners had
taken the law into their own hands; and, as
it was notorious that the Select Vestries had
no legal foundation, they had succeeded. In the
parish of St. Ann's, Soho, the parishioners broke
open the Vestry, and burnt the books, and from that
time the Vestry of that parish had always been an
open Vestry. The parish of St. Paul's, Covent-
garden, had been also fortunate, for the question
with respect to that parish had been tried before the
Court of King's Bench, and although the Select
Vestry bad usurped their assumed powers for a
hundred and twenty years, they suffered judgment
to go against them by default, and it was now an
open Vestry. In St. Giles's, Cripplegate, custom
was also pleaded; but the custom was found to be
not sound and reasonable. So much for the Select
Vestries who founded their claims on custom.
There were others established by particular Acts of
Parliament. The Select Vestry of the parish of St.
James founded their claims on an Act so far back as
the reign of James 11. Undoubtedly, in conse-
quence of a great increase of population in the
parishes in the vicinity of London, and in London
itself, it had been found necessary to apply to Par-
liameat to pass Acts, the object of which was to
render parochial elections lets turbulent than for-
merly. As in States, so in Parishes, a state of
anarchy naturally led to a state of despotism. Be-
fore the Bills of 1818 and 1819, there were mail
parishes, the Vestries of which were open; but in
consequence of the turbulence of those Vestries, the
respectable part of the parishioners absented them•
selves, and a few of the most turbulent parishioners
obtained the whole management of the affairs of the
parish. The Bills brought in by the Right Hon.
Gentleman, in 1818 and 1819, and especially that
in 1819, gave parishes the power of creating Se-
lect Vestries if they pleased so to do—Select Ves-
tries not self-elected, but formed on the principle,
which, if the House would grant him the Select
Committee for which he was about to move, he
would propose to introduce with reference to the
Metropolis, of election from the great body of the
parishioners; a principle, the adoption of which
had done great good throughout the country. There
was one provision, however, of the Bill to which he
had alluded, that, in his opinion, it would not be
advisable to introduce into any measure respecting
the Metropolis—he meant that regarding rateable
property, by which
i votes were given to the respec-
tive parishioners n proportion to the amount of
that property. The House would see by the'Re- ,

. •
turns on the Table, that thetumber of Select Vv.
tries in England and Wales, tiMer the' Right Hon.
Gentleman's Act, was 2,868. In most of those
parishes, the evils which existed a hundred and forty
years ago, were as great as those now existing in
the parishes to which he had been lately alluding.
Those evils were happily described in a work by an
author of much estimation, Da Foe, who wrote
Robinson Cr'isoe. In a small pamphlet by De Foe,
called " Parochial Tyranny," which, although it
might be known to some of the Hon. Members, he
had no doubt was not so familiar to the greater
number of them as Robinson Crusoe (a laugh), he
spoke of the Select Vestries of his time in these
terms. The Honourable Gentleman here read the

passage to which he alluded, and which was to the
following effect :—" There is not a greater abuse
in this country than the Select Vestries. By their
tyranny they deprive u 3 of the enjoyment of our
civil liberties; nor is there any prospect of redemption
for us, and unless our gracious Sovereign interfere
to rescue us from their jaws, they will continue to
be our rulers for ever. All other bodies of men in
this country are elected by the people; but these
bodies are self-elected. The consequence is, that
the abuses of -which they are guilty stink in the nos-
trils of their fellow-citizens. Parliaments are sep-
tennial, Mayors and Councils are annual, but Select
Vestries are hereditary. As the Members of them
drop off their places are filled up by others, who are
prepared to concur with the main body; and thus

the same system of tyranny is perpetually carrying
on, to the great terror and injury of the poor pa-
rishioners. If, by some strange mistake, they happen
to choose an honest man, be is either compelled by
their conduct to absent himself from their meetings,
or to sit in the Vestry-room like an owl among the
other birds. Of the Select Vestries, it may be said,
as it has been said of the Mint, ' let a man go in
honest, and he will not come out so.' " The autho-
rity which he had before quoted (Dr. Burn) also
described Select Vestries pretty much in the same
way. He declared, that of all the modes of paro-
chial administration they were the most nefarious
and unconstitutional ; that they deprived the great
body of the parishioners of their rights, and the re-
spectable portion of them of the control which they
ought to have over the affairs of the parish; and
that they were found to be to oppressive and
unjust in their proceedings, that there was
a constant struggle making to abolish them,
which was no wonder, especially in parishes
where they were self-elected : as it could not be
supposed that those who were guilty of evil prac-
tices would elect associates not disposed to connive
at those practices, and concur in continuing them.—
A stronger opinion adverse to Select Vestries could
not be given. He was sure the House would recol-
lect, that in 1925, that most excellent man, not then
in his seat (the Hon. Member for Waterford), in-
troduced into Parliament a measure for the correc-
tion of abuses in Select Vestries, or Vestries self-
elected in Ireland. The principle on which that
lion. Gentleman proceeded, and successfully pro-
ceeded, was exactly the principle which he (Mr.
Hobliouse) proposed to introduce—namely, that a
small number of persons should not be allowed with-
out interference or controul to tax their fellow pa-
rishioners. Such a regulation would now be the
more important as Roman Catholics were now, for
the first time, qualified to rote in vestries. in con-
sequence of the measure of the Hon. Baronet, which
received the support of the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite, then Chief Secretary for Ireland, a great
reform took place in Ireland ; and he (Mr. Hob-
house) hoped, if his views were taken up by the
Select Committee, which he trusted the House
would appoint on the subject, to be able to introduce
into this country most, if not all, of the pro-
visions ofthe Honourable Baronet's measure. The
House would, he hoped, pardon him if he pro-
ceeded to state some facts connected with the
conduct of the Select Vestries of the Metropolis.
They had fortunately been able to get at some
of the parish accounts; and some of them had been
published by the daily press, which had done most
essential service to the community on this subject.
Of cowl's?, every lion. Gentleman was familiar with
the list of items, among which was two shillings for
rose-water, &c. &c., which constituted the gross
sum of thirty-four pounds expended by the Select
Vestry, of St. Paul's, Covent-garden, in a visit the
pauper children of the parish at Norwood, at a
dinner, at which the Rector was present. It ap-
peared, however, that these gentlemen dined very
often together at the expence of the parish. The
Hen. Gentleman here read a long list of charges to
the parish to St. Paul's, Covent-garden, of from
twenty to nearly sixty pounds each, for dinners for
the Select Vestry. One most extraordinary charge
on the parish of St. Paul's, Covent-garden, sanc-
tioned by the Select Vestry, was a charge of 115/.
for burying the Rector of the parish, in 1815.
( A laugh.)—He very readily admitted that that
gentleman was a most worthy man ; and he was
quite sure that if he were alive, he would object to
being thus buried at the expence of the parish.—
(A laugh.)—lt appeared, however, that the funeral
was furnished by some gentlemen with a strange
name, Messrs. Bourdillon, and it did so happen that
those gentlemen were not only furnishers of funerals,
but Select Vestrymen at the time. Ile saw present
several Hon. Gentlemen who were well acquainted
with the proceedings of the parish to which he was
adverting; and who knew that the vestrymen be-
longing to it frequently decided in one room on their
own proceedings in another. Until lately, no accounts
were exhibited to the parishioners; arid now those
accounts were so made out, that it was a matter of
great difficulty to understand them. By their con-
duct, the Select Vestry of the Parish of Sr. Paul,
Covent-Garden, had, in a short period, raised the
rate from 2s. 6d. to 3s. I id. in the pound. The
practice of allowing Select Vestrymen, in one cepa-
c:ty, to pronounce upon their own conduct in ano-
ther capacity, was not confined to St. Paul's. In
the parish of St. James, Westminster, the accounts
of the Governors of the Poor had for ten years beer,
audited by the Governors themselves, in their other
capacity of Select Vestrymen, of which body they
formed a great majority. Even in the best Select
Veggies, all could not be done, by honest arid ho-
nourable men which they wished to accomplish. In
the parish of St. George's, Westminster, until very
lately, a pipe of wine was said to be drunk annually
at the communion service. That quantity was now
reduced by a third. He mentioned this circum-
stance, to show how sharply even honourable men
mutt look about them, when its such situations, to
do their duty. As an instance of the strange
charges which were sometimes made, there was one
among the parish accounts of Christ Church, Spi-'
talfields, of 801. for carving the legs of the com-
munion table, and another for a cloth to cover
the legs ; so that the parishioners could not see
halla d thesdoot
hepxfiearpl:
jeep: h
insysrehvi
expensively
yolg and
fifpsasiodrl...fco
fora gilding
herespf
saair
nd
dsf or
another
hinges. t.•ie•
IGseic.re
George's,
theygia
etr
g,hsyee,
in another
in which a reform was now going on,
in the year 1820 twelve gentlemen of the Select
Vestry voted 1,6401. for the repairs of the church,
9601. of which sum was shared among those who
voted it. Another instance, which it was impossible
to call by any other appellation than one of great au-
dacity, occurred in the year 1820, when the Vestry
of the same parish took the liberty of burning all
their accounts up to that year, thereby rendering all
subsequent inquiries into their conduct nugatory and
unavailing. But he must return to St. Martin's-in-
the-Fields. As the Select Vestry of that parish had
formerly been the model for the Select Vestries of
all the other parishes, so their accounts were more
singular than those 'of any other parish. In 1818,
the charge for the balance on the Easter Monday
dinner of the parish of St. Martin's-in,the-Fields
was 511.; in 1819, 44/. 10s. ; in 1823; 30/. 135.; in
182 G, when there was a stir in the parish on the
subject, the gentlemen of the Vestry paid Mr. Cuff
for one of the excellent dinners with which he 'sup-
plied his guests, only 14/. ; in 1827, the charge, be-
sides what the members of the Vestry defrayed out
of their own poiskets, was 371.25. Another "strange
charge in the Recounts was WM. 7s. 104. for Bibles

and Prayer=booke. Finding the same amount every
, year, he had been induced to inquire particularly
into this charge, and he found that instead of for
Bibles and Prayer-books, it was for a Bible and a
Prayer-book, of which a present was made to the
retiring Churchwarden. Another strange item of
charge was of 481. to Messrs. Wood and Adams.
On inquiring into the nature of this charge, he found
that it was for publishing a sermon which had been
preached by Archdeacon Potts on the death of Queen
Charlotte. The sermon, though published at the re-
quest of the Vestry, had never sold, and this charge
was to make good the deficiency. Sir R Birnie re-
ceived in balance of his account as Churchwarden the
sum, which he afterwards gave to the parochial
schools (and for which benefaction his name was
put up in large golden letters), of 401. 16s. 3d. But
would the House believe that this account of Sir
Richard Birnie's had not been settled until 16 years
after the charge had been incurred ? What could
be thought of a parish which kept their books in
such a state ? The House would hardly credit
another circumstance, which Was, in fact, highly
penal. On the watch account there was some years
ago an annual charge of 130/. to Frederick Booth,
the vestry clerk, on the pretext of being a gratuity.
That sum had been allowed to remain unpaid, until
it accumulated with interest to 3,5851.; and the
parish was now paying it off by instalments, and
continuing to pay interest for the balance. Added
to this, the same Frederick Booth received from
150!. to 2001. annually from the parish for law ex-
pences. There was another item, small indeed,
but of so extraordinary a nature as to be scarcely
credible. It was as follows :—" February 5, 1813,
for a petition against the Catholics, 51."—(A
laugh.)—Now really this was a most extraordinary
charge to saddle a parish with. He could perfectly
understand how a rector, or how other inhabitants
of a parish might be disposed to petition against
the Catholics, but it did appear to him to be an al-
most incredible thing that they should charge a pa-
rish with the expellee of such a petition; especially
when it was considered that parish formed part of a
city which returned the two Members by which it
was represented by an enormous majority, although
those two Members had always been among the
warmest advocates of Catholic Emancipation. It had
been said by some people, that the members of Se-
lect Vestries were not paid; that they didgood for the
love of good ; that they were philanthropists, and
were actuated solely by a wish to benefit their neigh-
bours. This all sounded mighty well; but if the
House looked at the way in which the sums at the
disposal of the Vestries were managed, they would
see how easy it was for a man without directly put-
ting any of the money into his own pocket to obtain
great advantages and influence by putting it into the
pockets of other people. An immense number of
tradesmen were employed by the Select Vestries,
over whom the members of those Vestries naturally
exercised considerable influence. Not content with
that, some of them thought it would be a good
thing to nominate Members of Parliament. In Sep-
tember, 1806, the Select Vestry, of St. Paul's Co-
vent Garden, summoned a Board, at the request of
Earl Percy, his present Grace of Northumberland,
who desired to pay his respects to them previously
to offering himself as a candidate to represent the
city of Westminster in Parliament. In his Lord-
ship's presence a resolution was moved, seconded,
and unanimously carried, " That in the opinion of
the Vestry of St. Paul's, Covent Garden, Earl
Percy was a proper person to represent the City
and Liberties of Westminster in Parliament ; arid
that the Board would give him their cordial sup-
port." He (Mr. Hobhouse) was pretty ivell ac-
quainted with the city of Westminster, and ought
to be aware of every legitimate mode of making his
political sentiments known to the inhabitants of that
city ; and he maintained, that to go to a Vestry,
and to receive from that body an assurance of
support, was to invest it with more power than
either law or usage intended it to possess. lie
hoped, however, that these abuses would soon end,
and that there would be no more charges for rose
water at dinners, or declarations of support of an
election candidate proceeding from Select Vestries.
He must not omit to state that Mr. Paul, who was
on the other side of the question, did the same thing
as Earl Percy had done, and waited upon the Ves-
try, but experienced a very different reception from
that body. It was undoubtedly true that according
to the present system in some of the parishes go-
verned by Select Vestries, the parishioners had
nevertheless the right of seeing the parish accounts.
In the parish of Marylebone those accounts were
published in forty closely-printed pages, which any
one who went to a specified place might see. In
St. James's, Westminster, on application, the Ves-
try furnished accounts extensive enough to cover the
table of the House. But from these accounts little
satisfaction was to be obtained. Nor was much
satisfaction to be derived front any appeal to the
Magistrates; for in many cases those Magistrates
were themselves Members of the Vestry, or if not,
the members of the Vestry were among their inti-
mate friends. He would mention a case which had
occurred, without stating the names of the parties.
There was a Magistrate who occasionally received
the compliments of those who protested against the
conduct of a Select Vestry. It happened that this
Magistrate was a very agreeable man, and sung a very
good song, and the first song which was sung after
the dinner, of the Select Vestry in question, when
assembled to settle the parish accounts, was always
sung by him. When a compliment was made to this
Magistrate of the conduct of the Vestry, his answer
was, that he was satisfied that their conduct was
justifiable and that he would not interfere. There
was another case, in which lie felt no difficulty in
mentioning the names of the parties concerned.
When the parishioners of St. Paul's, Covent-garden,
were so discontented with the conduct of the Select
Vestry of their parish, that they applied for redress
to Sir'Richard Birnie and Mr. Halls, they were re-
fused ; and it was his (Mr. Hobliottse's) duty to add,
that their application was treated in a manner that
was not becoming. The same applicants after-
wards made the same complaint to Mr. Minshull.
He attended to them; by Mr. Minshull 80/, was
struck off from the quarterly account of the Vestry;
and by him the parishioners of St. Paul's, Covent-
garden, were first inspired with a hope that they
might obtain an ultimate release from the grievances
under which they laboured. In the parish of Hamp-
stead, the auditors of the accounts of the guardians
of the poor were guardians of the poor themselves—
and thus audited their own accounts. The natural
consequence of all this was, that exceeding discon-
tent prevailed in all the parishes of the metropolis
and its neighbourhood. Some of the parishes had
had the good fortune in a great measure to emanci-
pate themselves from the thraldom under which they
had so long laboured. St. Matthew,Bethnal-green, had
done so; but hors ? He had forgotten to state, that the
Select Vestry of St. Martin's in the Fields never
held a vestry without barricadoing their doors. The
Select Vestry of St. Matthew, Bethnal-green, imi-
tated them. The parishioners broke in at the win-
dows, succeeded in their efforts, and, to a certain
degree, secured an open election. St. Mary's, Isling-
ton, was formerly a close Vestry, but was sow an
open one ; although still requiring reform. St.
Luke's, Chelsea, was formerly a close Vestry ; it
was now an open one ; and the good effects of the
change were distinctly manifest ; for, in conse-
quence of it, and also of the mild and conciliatory
conduct of the excellent rector of the parish, Dr.
Wellesley, the parish-rate had been reduced from
'4s. 6d. in the pound to 2s. 7d. (Hear, hear.)
Wherever the principle of self-elected Vestries was
preserved, there (with one excepth n) discontent
prevailed. In the parishes of St. Martin'e-in-the
Fields, St. John, St. James, and St. Margaret, the
Vestries were self-elected, and all those parishes
were discontented; St. Margaret's less than the
others. In the parish of St. George, Westminster,
the Vestry was self elected; but he must do the
gentlemen of that Vestry the justice to say, that
they took great pains to discharge their duty, and
the consequence was, that the discontent was but
small. In the parishes of St. Anne, Soho; St.
Clement Dam's; St. Paul, Covent-garden ;

, .

Luke Chelsea, Paddington, and St Mary, Newtfs;
ton, the election for vestrymen had become pap
and in those parishes there Willi no discoattati
In order to watch the proceedings of vestries,,eo
rishioners were obliged to select committees, and
lose e great deal of time and sacrifice much troub/a
Those bodies would be perfectly unnecessary, ft!
posing a system to prevail which gave the hrs-d,
rishioners a legal direction of their affairs. It'ife
been commonly stated, if you introduce an eleer,';, I
principle immediately you have popular tumult
But, he would ask, why did such popular tutna"t
occur, but in consequence of the parishionerse:.
0
having the elective franchise? It was 01d1t
other day that in the parish of St. George, 8100-6
bury, emancipation took place, and the parishiota
had elected their churchwardens with perfect "'IL
quillity. The election had continued until We";
at night, and no disturbance had taken place. Set;
ral Bills had passed, and others were now ie
gress through the Houses, in which the electis'a
principle was recognized ; and in a Bill lately rial.ed
for the emancipation of St. Marylebone, be f°,te
every thing which he thought requisite and wr-i,;.
in his opinion, might easily be applied to 0114
parishes. With respect to the parish of St. Ite
Covent-garden, a Bill, giving it an open vestry, 7i-at
passed that House without opposition; and, a°
as he understood from good authority, it Wag 11.0
likely to be opposed in the Upper House•
the parish of tit. James, Clerkenwell, a flialle,'°-•
elective principle had been introduced, and sots`
had been done in the course of last Ir-e'
by the agitation of the question ; for, by I ;.1,1%;
ference to the Returns of the Poor Rates, t
parochial expenditure of 1828 was less thee t"se
of 1827 by 141,0001. This diminution, thoug
not very great in amount, was important in °li;
ment. He had a cut ious document, which he sr°",eo
beg leave to read to the House. It had reference ',14
the management of parishes, and would show bee.°
the principle of the Right lion. Gentleman ern
site, if brought into play, would operate in the ailai
tuition of the revenue of parishes The paritilv°
Walcot, in the city of Bath, containing 27,000 in
bitants, when under the management of ove
not elected by and responsible to the people, hid,
on an average of three years, ending in 1822, sPelic
on annually netaiaclillyp7a,u9p4e2rl.befoirrtgth,el.p4oso. r2rda.tes,
Butth easa:ooerengsel 714,7:
parish came under the Act of the Right Hon. Gel
tlernan (Mr. Sturges Bourne), on an average 11:1,
three yea:'s, ending 1828, the expenditure was °l,neld
4,0901.; and each pauper, upon an averages
cost the parish only Ms. 7d. This was a s'eu'i
great reduction, and it showed how immense
the difference made by proper and improper rnanag;
ment. In the parish of Walcot, under the nevi flro
tern, the utmost harmony prevailed. The Ocet
were often re-elected, and the accounts waieer
published and seen by everybody. Let the 11°Lt,
but make a comparison between this parish and t:,'
of St. Pancras. In the latter, under the head of p0,5i..7
rates, the parishioners, for 1826, were charge tt
less than the sum of 30,6991., and the number of a:4
poor relieved was only 773, for which was dolga.
8,6211. For the out-door paupers was charged 10,70
For salaries, prosecutions, county-rates, and oi_Ali/I:d
expences, 7,748/. was charged, and to the hei':of
Gratuities was put down 6931. Thus nugkee
30,0001. put down to the poor, so much was "roe
for other purposes. Were St. Pancas goeerneuo 4
the parish of Walcot now is, instead of 773 nallYi;ee
being maintained for the sum charged, the 11°111e1
would be 2,208. After these statements he trna•-i
that the House would allow that he had done stenT.
thing towards making out a case. The MetrOpe"',,-h
Members of that llouse, who experienced so 104.0
trouble with reference to parish management, w°-Sisi
do well to assist him in introducing some goieer..
system of controul and government. Me was A',
that the difficulties of local reforms were very got'
Private feelings of individuals were to be consulted;
they did not like changes to be made, Jed their
language constantly was, as long as you make' al
charges against us, we will not assent to any refornl.
The parish of St. James had set forth a curio 11
reason against any reform—they had identifies,
reform of the parish with an alteration of thigle
rious Constitution. " What I" said they, "are yo
gong to alter the Constitution, and won't you 1..
!
7,
even our tittle parish alone ?" He would say th:
the alterations that he was about :to prope:,
would, he felt convinced, prove beneficial lee
parishes at large ; and he had received humor;
communications from Clergymen upon the sot leitee;
in which they concurred in expressing how gle-Cilea,
would be to see the question set at reste
jority of the Clergy, he believed, were not 5
of Select Vestries; but they would be
in any scheme which would give the people of ejire,
parish a reasonable controul over their own ans, g
00
He would now say, that he did not intend to b 0
forward any Bill upon the subject, for it involved
many conflicting interests; though, he should ere
that the interests of the parishioners at large vise
paramount to all others. He should propose.° eese
lest Committee to inquire into the subject. He -to
happy that ho did not anticipate any oppositie%ed
his motion, for great discontent at present pre/oi,!
against the existing system. He wished to ado
what none would dispute to be the broad rine
of the Constitution—that taxation and represent:,
tion should go hand in hand. Parishes ought lie:
to be allowed to do what Parliament would neve.
arrogate to itself. lie should now conclude by 01°,0
ing for " a Select Committee, to inquire into -ti",
general operation and effect of the laws and wog:
under which Select and other Vestries are constito'
ed, in England and Wales."
Mr. HUME seconded the Motion.
lid
glad to join
Mr. Secretary PEEL was not prepared to si.a
any opposition to the motion, so far as inquiry eOO,
be the means of establishing any check upon exPe e
diture ; but in acquiescing thus far, he begged leel
to state explicitly that he by no means acquiesce
in the Hon. Member's charges against Select Vec,
tries in general. Still less was he prepared to 065
quiesce in the proposition, that the system of Sel° e
Vestries, as now established in London, shouldl/1"
abolished. The Hon. Member had certainly P'
duced instances of a very lax expenditure of roe
ehial funds, but it was unfair to include in a geor
ral charge those vestries which had properly :cc
ducted their affairs, and without any blame attloc
ing to their expenditure or to their system et.e.4 it;
mination and audit. If the Committee mete° 0
devising any plan which was better. than that. 1,4
practice for attaining an economical expendituro-•
parochial funds, and a more efficient system ..infir:j.
neral management, he, for one, should be eau; 1:-0(
he should be pat ticularly so at the establisbnitwe
any efficient system of audit. He could not, uite
ever, admit that any effectual remedy of the e,,e-
would be found in a system of popular elect'.e.
The greatest advantage would be derived from by
tention and application to parochial management' be
gentlemen whose property and intelligence svotad
a security that no mean and sordid objects wouldeelea
fluence the decision of the vestry. Any system 1"";',
obstructed the exertions of gentlemen of this deaf.
tier) would be objectionable. Any scheme which dr°,,ct
from parochial concerns gentlemen of wealth, °'',o
substituted those that would be elected if ail vi.e
paid rates had votes in the election, would de.;l,ie
utmost injury instead of effecting any benefit. '
begged the Hon. Member to recollect the rec6,4l
tnendation of the Committee on this subject; Wi'.'e;
was founded upon the fact, that in open VeStrZei,
where the body was very large, no attention W,P7t
ever was paid to business by the' Vestry, and'aP.!ii
fairs at last devolved upon the overseers. Uriiverle,
sutTrage and annual overseers were round not
swer the purposes proposed. For these .ritsons' to
Committee had recommended that power should:et,
given to select bodies; and that the annual aprrj
ment of overseers might be dispensed with id
that officers might.be appointed, with .salaries;
holding appointments for a longer period than toyear. He was aware that in the cases to which.oce
was alluding, Vestries were appointed by thostliii
ing rates, and they were not'seif-elecied.; ftint"
the Committee of 1827 proved that ii 'did inifftsi',
that because every pa;-son pail:lt-rites had a

.the-business of the parish was better done. Often
money was saved by the general body being ex-
cluded. In London a different custom prevailed,
partly by custom, and partly by law. He thought
there might be some modification of principle, which
the. Committee might strike out for effecting a per-
feet audit of accounts. From the experience he had
had he should say, that with reference to the check
of expenditure, the employment of tradesmen and
Many parochial abuses, a better system might be de-
vised than that of universal suffrage. He believed
that the parishes in general were perfectly ready to
submit to inquiry. If dinners had keen given irn-
koperly in some parishes—if extravagant charges
had been made for them—and if parish officers had
indulged in such personal gratification at tbe ex-
pence of the parishioners, no man could defend such
an application of parochial funds. Such abuse; did
not exist in many parishes, and there was no general
feeling against inquiry.
Mr. aTURGES BOURNE said, that the Select
Vestries under the 59th of the late King were es-
sentially different from Vestries in London, and yet
the terms of the motion had been made to include
the Vestries under that Act. To this he objected;
arid thotigh he had no objection to enquiry, he
Warned the Hon. Member for Westminster, that his
Motion might, as it was now worded, occasion some
alarm to the country, lest parishes should be put to
the inconvenience and expence of sending persons up
to town. to give evidence. No two subjects could
be more. distinct than the crowded parishes of Lon-
don and those of agricultural districts. and the Hon.
4ember would find his course to be one of great
difficulty. He would, however, make no objection
to the motion, and he thought that no opposition
could be made to the inquiry into abuses.
• Mr. RIDLEY COLBORNE said, that if the
Committee were appointed, and the case made out,
he still ahould not be satisfied that the fault was in
the present system; for, irk his opinion, it was in
those who ought to put that system into execution.
were
the proposed alterations to take place, what
description of persons was likely to be elected on
Vestries—tradesmen, active attorneys, and others,
Who would increase the evils complained Of. Not-
ithstanding this view of the subject he should vote
for inquiry.
Mr. HUME thought that if the proposed Com-
itlittee could not alter the system of self-elewed
Vestries, they could do good. The Right Hon.
Gentleman (Mr. Sturges Bourne) had mistaken the
uhject of the motion, which was not to blend the
rating system, but to correct the error of Vestries
Sing established, over whom the parties who are to
Pay, and who are the most interested, have not any
e"tvoul. Let the House look at St. Marylebone,
St. George's, and St.Pancras. Not a more respectable
set of individuals could be found than those com-
P°aing .the Vestries of those parishes, and yet it
was notorious that in each of them certain acts were
done which. were not done with the knowledge and
concurrence of the respectable parts of the Vestries.
The systena adopted in the country was much more
applicable to London, where the people were more
Intelligent and better able to be entrusted with the
Management of their own affairs. The Right Hon.
Gentleman had said, that in the case of general
suffrage, improper persons would be elected ; but in
his (Mr. Hume's) opinion, in ordinary cases, certain
qualifications, certain incomes, certain situations,
Would secure elections. Those who administer the
ananees of a parish ought to be elected by those
'alto pay the rates.
HOBHOUSE explained. He wished
L_t4t- the elective principle should be modified in
"irge.parishes of the metropolis, so as to avoid all
disturbances.
M. 5. PEEL explained.
17he motion was carried.
SILK TRADE.
On the moving of the Order of the Day for the
and reading of the Bill,

dot r _ brie
FYLER said he thought he should consult
convenience of the House, without sacrificing
Igo:interests of those whose cause he advocated, if
-postponed what he had to offer on the subject
tiOtil the motion for the Speaker's leaving the Chair.
•'llr. ROBINSON thought that under the cir-
ellinstences of the case, the Hon. Member for Co-
ra,
try had acted with wisdom and discretion. The
stood for Friday ; but although there
144 been already two discussions on the Silk Bill,
hgped the Committee would be allowed to take
precedence on that day.
lli)1 Alderman WAITHMAN concurred in what
ad fall from the Hon. Member.
.Mr. V. FITZGERALD felt convinced that his
Right Hon. Friend near him would afford every
facility in his power to enable the House to go into
a Committee early on that day, with art understand-
ing that they should get through the Committee on
that day.
Mr. WAITHMAN meant to offer no unnecessary
opposition, but it would be impossible to say how
far the discussion might be carried in the Committee.
The 13 ill was then read a second time, and ordered
to be committed on Friday next.

LIFE ANNUITIES' BILL.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EX-
CHEQUER the House went into a Committee on
the Life Annuities' Bill.
In answer to some questions from Mr. HUME and
\
Sir H. PARNELL,
I , The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
stated a few words across the Table as to the dif-
ference between the old Bill and the present ; he
feared he was not able to explain himself with suf-
king clearness, but it was of the less importance
e(it present, as he should move the re-commitment of
1,h4: bill ; arid; as it would be printed, Honourable
-Invere
prould come down prepared to discuss the
ovisioner.
Navin. 'The ,
(;lauses were agreed to ; and the House
7iq dered resumed, the Report was brought up, and
Monday be taken into further consideration on
next; and to he printed.
CITY CANAL.
,t9nanal , the motion for the second reading of the City
Dill,
form' Mr' HUME said lie could not help repeating his
c'e, objections to this Bill ; he contended that
psi Lkie ought to have been public, no matter what
etwas offered by any public or private Company.
Itcbui till WU then read a second time, and ordered
. , e committed to-morrow.
•n' LUNATICS' PROPERTY BILL.
tir',:e the Motion of Mr. SUGDEN, the Lunatics'
tau‘e',PertY'Billread a second time. To be con:-
d on Friday next.
TRADE WITH INDIA.
It Bl!1-1, r` W. 'WHITMORE postponed the Motion of
lr,Pl he had given notice, relative to the East
~:AllTrade, from Thursday next till May the 1 lth.
'cliourned at Half-past Seven.
.-.....---
'Ci

'ICOUNTRY RESIDENCES.—The very first in-
-9,4 nof returning Spring is perceptible by reference to
I,,,Clurans to-day, fur until now there has not been a
i 44 villa on sale. Several of the most distinguished in
Oi'leittity of the metropolis are at length announced by
110:41c Roams, including Harrow Park (late Lord
-111wica's); Highwood House (Sir STAMFORD
th:),_LREe, Bart., near Hendon) ; the admired residence el
'4li THOMAS Nam, Esq., (near the Horticultural
It;I:tlet1); Old Windsor Lodge (Captain Srayings's) ;
)44 h kond Hill, (the Rev. 11. GREATES') ; Lady ROBERT
pllllrx s's, at Sutton; Chelsea Park, (Mr. •Pamig's) ;
therwood Lodge, the once favourite retreat of Mrs.
LitililltattaT, at Battersea. So many distinguished villas
!eltioni been in the market any antecedent season.
),
t,00.,:1be prize given by the late Earl of HOPE-
-41, % commemorate his Majeaty's visit to Scotland, was
174 t for,on
.Thursday at Hope. Park, by, the Royal Corn-
-1):,!, Archer's king's Body Guard, and gained by
tli,l.44,,SNiaar, Esq. W. S. As usual, a party of the
ifT,ters alined
datewards in the Archer's Hall, in honour
birth. of their Royal Master.— Caledonian
lterc
learn from good authority, says the
ifoartitee Courier, that the pernicious trade of smuggling
ths i. 11 ilniVat wholly eradicated front the peasantry in
of Aberdeenskire and Banffshire, amongst whom
.'l4"',lled only a few years since
.to a great vne.
• ,

b "1
,-,:.i'! •,'-3.-.14..------7-I.!i•♦----‘ V
‘- -;' -_
---,4 s, '-'...4:' i 4)
..,.......6 - ..

LONDON,
WEDNESDAY EVENING. APRIL 29. 1t,29.

We are happy to understand his MAJESTY is in
the enjoyment of the bet possible health.

A Cabinet Council was held at twelve o'clock
this day, at the Foreign Office, which was tetended
by all the Ministers. The Council broke up about
two o'clock.

His MAJESTY held a levee this day at Sr.
James's Palace. Shortly after one o'clock the
SPEAKER of the House of Commons, and all
the Foreign Ambassadors, arrived in full state;
the LORD MAYOR and Sheriffs also arrived
in state, about half-past one, from which time up
to Once o'clock there was a constant succession of
carriages, amongst which were those of the Great
Officers of State, Judges, &c. &c. and a great num-
ber of General and other Officers. The Cabinet
Ministers did not arrive till late, on account of at-
tending the Council. The crowd was not nume-
rous, which is probably to be accounted for in con-
sequence of the Drawing-room to-morrow.

Mr. HonnousE, last night, obtained a Select Com-
mittee to inquire into the general operation and effect
of the laws and usages under which Select and other
Vestries are constituted in England and 'Wales.
Mr. W. WHipiORE postponed his motion for a
Select Committee to Inquire into the State of the
Trade between Great Britain, the East Indies, and
China, from Thursday next, to Monday, the I Ith of
May.

The Duke of NORFOLK, Lord CLIFFORD, and
Lord DORMER took their scats, last night, in the
House of Lords.

By German Paper,, received this morning, it ap-
pears that great obstacles are thrown in the way of
the vessel which was announced a few days ago as
attempting to open the navigation of the Rhine as
far as Cologne. The Dutch authorities at Rotter-
dam have even overstepped the bounds prescribed by
the laws of Holland, in order to deter the Captain of
the vessel from pursuing his plan. There can be no
doubt that the free navigation of such an important
river us the Rhine is a most desirable thing for the
commerce of England. The only wonder is, that a
point promising such national advantages should have
been so long overlooked by our Government, after
the Duke of WELLINGTON had presented a note
upon this subject to the Congress of Vienna. We
hope his Grace will now take up the business in a
proper spirit, and he must succeed, notwithstanding
the jealousy of our Dutch neighbours.
These Papers contain no other news of interest.
The trade of Trieste and Venice has much increased
►within the last few years, and must continue to in-
crease if the parties consult their own interests.

The people of Silesia complain about the heavy
rate of taxation with which they are visited, but they
have received no favourable attention from the Go-
vernment. They are taxed in a heavier ratio than
the other provinces, and yet it appears that in the
nine years, from 1816 to 1825, the population had
increased by 366,496 souls, amounting in the
year 1825, when the last census was taken,
to 2,280,621 souls. The number of horses had in-
creased, in that period, by 9,523; of oxen, 73,798;
and of sheep, 467,733; and these too almost en-
tirely of the improved breed. The production of
wool, of corn, &c. has much increased.

VIENNA, APRIL 17.—Metalliques, 98 i; Bank
Shares, 1,104

The appointment of the Duke de Lsvat, MONT.
MORENCY to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs still
forms the theme of Editorial remark and conversa-
tion in Paris. Some Papers insinuate that the
Duke will not accept the appointment, while others
contend that he will. Upon this subject the
Illessager des Chvnbres observes, that the Journals
" have gone so far as to refuse patriotism and
love of Prance to a name so national as that of
MoNTmoRENcv ! The Duke is a stranger to all
parties—to all coteries ;—for these fifteen years he
has constantly displayed great merit and prudent
ability in the various posts which he occupied."
" Who does not recollect," continues the Mes-
sager," the benevolent hand which he held out in
Spain to the victims of political troubles, the gene-
rous influence which he exercised at Rome, and the
noble patronage given to the literati and artists in
the ancient capital of the civilized world ?
" These are titles which may be exhibited to
those who talk of the spirit of reaction and of poli-
tical inclination.
" It is affirmed that M. de MONTMORENCY will
not accept—that he cannot resolve to unite with the
present Ministry. Heaven be praised, all this petty
contempt, all this disdain for an Administration, the
only objection to which is, that it does not give it-
self to parties, have little influence on'political men;
and we are sufficiently acquainted with the character
of M. de Laval. to affirm, that he will accept the
trust which the confidence of the Throne has placed
in his hands. The MONTMORENCIES have never
been wanting to other Kings."

A Sincapore Paper of the 4th of December, and
Price Currents of the 6th, have been received, but
they contain no intelligence worthy of extract.

We have only room to point attention to a most
respectable meeting which took place in Manches-
ter, upon a subject of the last importance to the
Commercial and Manufacturing interests of this
country—the East India Monopoly—and the abso-
lute necessity of throwing open the trade to the
East freely to all classes of his Majesty's subjects.

TIIE FUNDS.-(TIIIS DAY.)

CITY, TP7PLIF: o'CLocr.

The same universal gloom that has latterly pervaded
every thing attendant on business in the City still mn-
tinues, and the price of produce of every description seems
to be daily more and more depreciated ; this state of affairs
appears to have caused some alarm among the merchants
and persons of capital, and is becoming still more seri-
ous to the general welfare by the accounts received of
the state of trade in the country ; from this cause may be
traced the disinclination, on the part of srculators in the
Funds, to enter into new engagements till they can see
their way more clearly. Consols have been steady at
87k all the morning ; Three and a half per Cent. Re-
duced, 96 ; and Four per Cent., 1826, 103 i I. Ex-
chequer Bills, 59 60 pm. ; India Bonds, 50 2 pm.
The Foreign Funds have scarcely had any business all
day, and prices remain nearly nominal at the undermen-
tioned rates; Brazilian Bonds are, however, a shade worse.
Shares remain at their former prices.
TWO O'CLOCK._

Consols have improved a trifle, and are now 87 ;
Brazilian are also a shade batter. In neither the British
or Foreign Funds is there any businetio doing worth naming.
THREE O'CLOCK

Consols, 87g. -- --
FOUR O'CLOCK.—CLOSING PRICES.
Consols 87/'} Danisk 651
Do. for Ac. 871 !Greek, 1825
Brazilian Bonds 53 ! Mexican, 1825
Buenos Ayres Peruvian
Chilian Do. Russian 96
Columbian, 1d24 15i ISpanish 9i

LAW INTELLIGENCE.-(T MS DAY.)

HOUSE OF LORDS.
The LORD CHANcEt.ton, and Earls MALMISSRUItY
and Flinn Ens, sat Scotch Anpeal. to-,InY•

CAMPBELL V. ANDERSON.
The question in th;s appeal was, whether the appellant
was liable for ill, pavment of a bill, driven by the re-
spondent, as !lie a,-cot or a gentleman cf name of
Gordon. It appear. d that Mr. Gordon having amassed
considerable property in the West Indies, returned to his
native country (Scotland), and purchased an estate,
called Draikies, near Inverne. Wishing to have a
residence here, he commenced a course of very expen-
sive improvement. In 1808 he entered into an arrange-
ment with Campbell, Fraser, and Co., merchants of
considerable eminence in Glasgow, to make large pecu-
niary advances upon the condition of their receiving the con-
signments of his foreign produce. It became necessary at the
end of that year for Mr Gordon to revisit his estates in the
West Indies, prior to which he granted a power ofattorney to
the respondent for the management of his Scotch affaira.
The power of attorney also enabled him to discharge all debts,
and, if he should judge it to be fur Mr. Gordon's interest to
borrow any sum of money to the extent of 5,0001.—
Messrs. Campbell, Fraser, and Cu. was the mercantile
house with which Mr. Gordon generally dealt; it was
arranged that the respondent was to draw all bills upon
that house, which they agreed to honour. Under this ar-
rangement several bills were drawn and duly honoured.
Towards the close of 1809 Mr. Gordon required further
advances from Campbell, Fraser, and Co. A letter was
therefore written by the respondent to them, stating such
to be the case. The appellant answered by stating that
the drafts on Campbell, Fraser, and Co. would meet ho-
nour to the extent mentioned. In consequence of this per-
mission, the respondent made application to Mr. John
Fraser, who was their agent for the Bank of Scotland, at
Inverness, to discount the bill, which was for 5001.,
which he ultimately agreed to do. A copy of the bill was
immediately forwarded to Campbell, Fraser, and Co., who
made no objection to it. Before, however, Messrs. Camp-
bell and Co. accepted the bill, infOrmation was received of
the death of Mr. Gordon, in the West Inslies, and ulti-
mately Measrs. Campbell and Co. refused to accept the bill,
alleging that there was a considerable balance due from
Mr. Gordon to their house. In consequence of this an
action, at the instance of the agent, was brought to en-
force payment of the bill front Campbell, Fraser, and
Co. Against the action a keen defence was kept up, be-
fore the determination of which Mr. Fraser became
bankrupt. In the result Campbell, Fraser, and Co.
were declared liable for the bill and interest. Upon the
case coining before the Court of Session, certain inter-
locutors were pronounced against the appellant, from which
he appealed.

POLLOCK appeared on the part of the appellant,
contending that the bill was vitiated; that in permitting
it to be drawn, Campbell, Fraser, and Co. made a positive
stipulation that they should he reimbursed by the respon-
dent personally, should no remittance arrive from the West
Indira.

Mr. MILLER followed on the same side.
Mr. ADAMS appeared as Counsel on the part of the re-
spondent, at the conclusion of whose address,
The LORD CHANcr.r.Loa observed that as be was under
the necessity of leaving the House to attend elsewhere, the
further arguments must be postponed till a future day.
Upon the motion of the Earl of MALmrsistra-s- several
Private Bills were read a second time, committed, and the
House adjourned to Frid.y next at Ten o'clock.