Star.
London, England, 1826-04-19 00:00:00

life i
the life

answer
the ~.eery, on application
to a Sol citor on the subject, he was informed that tir
whole might be compromised on the payment of 3001.
with tne addition of 301. or 401. expenses to the Solici-
tor. As he had but a life interest in the property, he
was unable to raise that sum, and he was accordingly
committed to prison. Two years agq, a Commission
had been appointed to examine into the proceedings of
the C ,urt of Chancery, and he felt convinced that no
aotestat of that Commission would be received in Parliament this
Session. He would state, from all he had sees and beard, that the
Lard Chancellor and his Court were the greatest curse to this coun-
try. (Expressions of surprise). The Petitioner also complained of
the injustice of confining the child in the jail, where, during the last
file years, they had both been attacked with a fever, which had
nearly deprived them of life. He would conclude by moving the
House to pass an Act to liberate persons confined in jail for coo-
tempt of the Court of Chancery, who were willing but unable to
pay the requisite sums demanded for that purpose.
Mr. LOCK HA RT opposed the Petldon.
Mr. S. creory FIyCL thought the Hon. Member
should have given notice f his intention of presenting
a Petition complaining of the proceedings of the Court
of chancery in such unmeasured terms as the Hon.
Member had made use of. He would protest against
Use practice E 4 Petitions being presented, and accons-
panted with suck imitative' as the House had heard, during the
agienee of those persons who might be able to give a satisfactory
expYanatiowof all grievances complained of in such Petitions. He
dld 'not deny the right of the Huh. Member to present Petitions
without notice, but at the same time would leave it to his sense to
decide upon the inustice of the practice as a general system.
e SOLICITOR GENERAL said, that it was that
house, and not the Court of Chancery, which would
become a curse to the country, if they would allow in-
dividuals that unprecedented latitude of accusation, by which they
were permitted to cast the vilest terms upon persons in once,
without a single attempt to establish the justice of their charges.
Mr. P. GRENFELL thought the censure should be
confined to the Court, or to the system. He (Mr. G.)
would most willingly accede to the truth of the asser-
tion. It was in the power of any individual, under the
present system 'of the Court of Chancery, to cast the
felseat and foulest imputations on the character of any mad, who,
after yeari of anxiety and expellee, had his only remedy by obliging
the'calumniator to pay—what ?—a penalty equal to. the gravity of
his offence? No. The slanderer was obliged to pay taxed costs.
kirrthought theaturt of Chancery was indeed a curse to the country.
Mr H. SUMNER thought a more uncalled for,
outrageous. anti improper expression, than that used by
are Hon. Member could not he used ; and if he did not
give some explanation, he hoped the House would
come to some vote expressive of their disapprobation
of the expression, as contrary to the Parliamentary course of speak-
ing. It they should tot, he (Mr. S.) would at least move that they
should do so, and repeated his intention of moving, that the words
of the Hon. Member be taken down.
Mr. HUME said it appeased that the House consi-
d r-d the expression he had used relative to the Court
of Chat:eel y (several voices, "Me Lord ChanceVor, the
Lord Chancellor") was too harsh. He mu.t repeat his
conviction that thetexpression'was perfectly correct and
applicable. Th,.C..int was a curse to the country—
and he must also say that be felt himself justified in applying the
term to the individual by whom that was kept up, nod by whose
conduct. , thige miseries were thrown upon the oountrp, of which
tie "An of the Petitioner formed nut a solitary instance. He re-
peated. the Co..ncellor who, after presiding for so many years in
the Ctnitst, bad 'offered it to continue in its present Chhilkloa, must
illare in the censure cast on the system.
The SOLICITOR, GENERAL said, it clearly ap-
pear;sl irom ate details-of the,proceeding, that the came
•
(3,f thCl'elitigorr s mist9rin tea lajb.,uot with the Court.
of Chancery, but with the litigating-persons themselves.
,He d not believe that it was want of funds which
prevented the Petitioner from putting in his answer. It pow fp-,
peered that the Chancellor and the Court were vilified for issuing
• a cootempt, a process which was just and requisite and which any
Gentleman in that Hoek would enforce under similar eireunistfo.
cos. He denied asst general principle, that the Judge was rages-
albite/or the practise. of the Court.
Mr. BARIN(i adduced several. instances similar tel
that or the Pethitiner. Persons.who sought their re
medy in the Court, in cases of small property, .found
that property gonelong before justice could be obtained; they were
then kW/without money, and their inability to produce £2O was
made a ground (or committing them for contempt. A property of,
#601) was too man to enable a person to obtain a remedy in
this Court.

grimmer.
and no answer put in, the Court of Chancery prow/led
in its ordinary course. But, let the Hones for a milieu
suppose, that the complaint proceeded from the -other
party. Suppose the answer put in, and no further
notice taken of it. Suppose such a case, and it was quite
fair to suppose it—then, he asked, would there not be'
just as much reason to vituperate the Lord Chancellor,
in the one case as the other? It could not be denied,'
nor did he (Mr. Canning) mean to deny the general
position, Cr it law was extremely expensive in this
country ; but grievous as it WAS that it should be so, it
must be the height of injustice to attribute that expen-
siveness to the Lord Chancellor. (Hear, hear.) In tact,
in this Petition, the complaint was equally ma a against
all the Courts of Law, and it would be just as unfair to
vituperate the venerableChiefJustice of theKing'sßench,
and say his Court was a Court of corruption, as to
say it of the Lord Chancellor and the Court of Chancery.
The Hnn. Member who introducei it, disclaimed all
ersunal application to the Lord Chancellor. Nothing
had as yet been said in this debate which did so; and hr ( Mr. Can-
ning) therefore, saw no objection to the Petition being printed ; and
the more so, as its complaints were equally directed against all the
Courts of Law. That the law was expensive, he was ready to
admit; but the vituperation of those who were called on to admi-
nister it, could not afford the safest remedy for Its cure. And this
he begged leave to tell the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, and those who
thought with them, that if the object of their vituperation were the
removal of the able person from the once of Chancellor, that
they were not only mistaken as to the mode, but that they would
isdeoe every man of honour the more firmly to support him.—
(h eets of hear, hear).
Mr. JOHN WILLIAMS agreed perfectly in the
Irinciple that nothing could be more improper than the
ntroduction of anything like personality into this dis-
cussion. The Hon. Secretary for the Home Depart-
-meat on the occasion ofthE motion for a Commission
to enquire into Chancery Grievances, which had been
already treated and censured as a nuisance to society at
large, had preferred a sort of pocket commission of his
own, which it was admitted would take two years up
in investigation before anything could finally be re-
ported on the subject of those grievances. Then the
Hobse was called on to approve of the labours of this
abortive commission to try the merits of the Noble and
Learned Lord, through the medium of his own officers
and servants, upon an imperfect report drawn up on
250 or 250,000 Chancery cases,,he could not tell which,
nor was the number of any the slightest importance.
But he could tell the Right Hon. Gentleman at the head
of Foreign Affairs, that there was no reason to dread
that any extent of vituperation would produce any
change in the sentiments of that Noble and Learned
Lord, whether that vituperation were codified to the
single term bywhich the public denounced the grievances
of suitors in Chancery as a curse, or in the more studied
and prepared vituperation, which no one knew how to
inflict to his knowledge with more effect than the same
Right Honourable Gentleman opposite. That Right Honourable
Gentleman might cheer up and take comfort to himself for that
Noble and Learned Lord would never quit °like, but with life—.
1(A laugh).--The country was therefore in this predicament even by
I,the confession of the Noble and Learned Judges friends, that it
,Utust, during the life of that Noble Lord, except it expressed itself
Istrongly so as to compel his resignation, remain in this hopeless
' condition as respected the rights of suitors in the Court of Chan-
cery, where it was now a matter of notoriety that no man of mo-
derate property or fortune could obtain justice.

—fifr.Secretary CANNING.—The Hon. Member who
had just sat down appeared to have taken it for granted
that the petition set forth the:practice of the Court of
Chancery; but he was mistaken; it was equally appli-
cable to Courts of Law. The first part of it related to
the summons by John Doe and Richard Roe, &c. with
staves, sticks, &c. which he bad treated with contempt,
• in consequence of which the plaintiff entered and took
possession. 'The inference which had been drawn from
that circumstance was against the Court of Ci,ancery ;
but it Was wrong ; far in that respect the common Courts
. of Law and the Court of Chancery were the same.—
Wise whole bui then of the argument of the Honourable
Member was, that law was expensive; that it was a
subj:ct of regret that no means could he devised of re•
diming die painful pre-eminence which the wealthier
members of the community possessed in a contest with
the poorer.—ln fact, the complaint made in this petition
was; that the evils alluded to, belirged to every other
tloort of Liw as well as to the Court of Chancery ; but
still the only inference which could be'drawn from it
Was, ad inviatiam, and p-rsonally dire,cted-to the Lord-
Chancellor. Such a course of proceeding he could only
'characterise as one of gro:a.unfairoess--Of gross injus-
tice, and if any man thought he • could dispose this
House to enlarge s full inquiry, by indulging in such
unfairness and injustice, he could inform him, that he,
snore than deceived himself—for in place of effecting
los object, he was Interesting every man of honour,
in support of the accused—(Hear, hear, hear).—
There was, however, a statement made in this Peti-
tion, by way of aggravation, which'completely :hewed
that it was got up tor some unfair and some unworthy
.purpose. The complainant stated, or was made to
state, that his child, of the tender age of seven years,
was also confined with him, by the fact of disobeying
the orders of the Court of Chancery. Such a statement
could only be intended to produce effect in this House,
as weal as out of this House; but the knowledge he
lad that the fact should have been very differently,
stated, evinced to bis judgment that it was the work of
falsehood ; and under such circumstances, he had
some doubt whether the Petition should be received.
No matilamented mote than he did, that the cow.
.plainant was in such adverse circumstances, or so poor;
but it was one thing to state that his child was in prison
ilrlth him, as if under the sentence of the Court ; and
another, that it was because of the father's being impri-
siiited for a contempt, that his child was with -him, as.
pith its best protector. (Hear). He (Mr. Canning) at first.
V ett this harmless from its very, absurdity; but
• be found the effect it was intended to Otnduce,
tlsd hoW artfully it was stated, he felt it'shOuld bO
treated in a very different manlier. One half of the
reifies was directed against the Court of Chancery

theinforenstionowas marly so,
164
fie.et. :4.111

eke the motion en
the-subject of the Corn. Laws, of which he had given
,tootice In the early pan of the Session. The first point
to which he should beg to direct the attention of the
House was the relation which subsisted between the
Corn Laws as they at present stood, and the principles
ghee trade upon which his M rjesty's Government had
laudably acted.; and which had received the fullest
*fiction of the House, and the approbation of every
enlightened man in the country. he professed
himself unable to reconcile those principles of commerce
[ with the eXistence of a system so anomalous as the C,rn
Lein. It was impossible that the Legislature could
rvere in upholding those regulations, unless they
dstmade up their minds to be the laughing-stock of
all who entertained any thing like sound or scientific
tiews of commercial policy. They must stop short in
their career of commercial emancipation, or repeal the
ICorn Laws. How could they, under such a set of absurd
land mischievous restrictions, give an adequate and
'equitable reply to the silk weaver, the glover, or other
manufacturers, when they complained of the difficulty,
nay, the utter impossibility, of entering into a competi-
tion with the foreign manufacturer, free, as he compara-
tively was, horn taxes,and having at his command, as he
unquestionably had, plenty of food at moderate prices ?
Haviag taken the first step, the House will pledged to
carry the principle of free trade to its utmost limit.—
They could not with any Thew of justice say to one
Class of traders, "You shall carry on your business
without the slightest restraint or limitation;" and to
another, " You shall never be released from the anti-
quated restrictions to which, io a former condition of
our commercial relations, it was deemed necessary to
subject you." The manufacturer in Great Britain was
to enter unprotected into a competition with his Conti-
nental rival ; while the chief means of, his subsistence
were to be kept at an artificial price, far above its cost
in other countries. He would positively assert, that
the principle of reciprocity could not, ander the present
circumstances, be acted upon in a satisfactory manner.
England could not reduce the principles of free trade
to practice, until she had acted fairly—until she had
applied them to the Corn Laws, Sugar, &c. He was
now sorry to be compelled to state, that the Corn Law,
passed by that House in 1815, had inflicted more po-
sitive evil upon Poland, Flanders, America, and indeed
the world in general, than the anti-commercial and
anti-social decrees of Buonaparte himself. In this
assertion he felt himself supported, beyond the possi-
bility of doubt, by a Report upon the Corn Trade made
by an individual, Mr. Jacob, who had been sent, and
most laudably sent, by Government, to obtain informa-
tion in those countries where corn was grown, and'
where it was exported. By the Report of thh Gen-
tleman, he was borne out most amply in his opinion;
and it was not a little strange, that whilst we were pro-
fessing to act upon the principles of free trade and free
commerce, whilst we were professing a wish that a
similar system should be acted upon by others, we
should at the same time enact the most extraordinary
law that had ever passed—that had ever been submitted
to the consideration of a legislature; and which had in-
flicted more injury than even the Berlin or Milan decree.
The course of journey taken by Mr. Jacob was through
- •

Mr. Secretary PEEL was now satisfied. from what Poland, Dantiie, Bavaria, Wirternberg, and Paris, and
,had escaped from the Hon. and Learned Member, who was,prosecuted generally out of the main road. He
'began by professing himself so totally in ignorance as stated that the complaints of land-owners, who had
to the information submitted to Parliament on the state formerly been corn-growers, were by far too general to
of the Court of Chancery, that he did not know whether admit of their being attributed to the distressed circum-
there were 180 cases inquired into or 180,000, that no stances of the respective complainants, proceeding from
inquiry would have contented him. Suppose there had causes of individual mismanagement or misfortune.
been a report founded on an inquiry into only seven or The Hon. Gentleman also referred to the Report, to
eight ca%es, the Honourable and Learned Member show that there had been a great falling off of latter
would no doubt have laughed at it, whilst at the same years in the culture of the land in foreign countries in
time, with remarkable inconsistency, he argues that the article of grain. In one case mentioned, a Noble.
there have been so many cases inquired into that the man who had formerly employed 26,000 acres in the
Report can be good for nothing. Last Session the Hon. culture of little else but grain, had now, in come-
and Learned Member begged that there should be no quence of the English ports being closed, turned his
meagre report ; now, because the evidence, without the attention to the rearing of fine wool, and fed upwards
report, was full and explicit, he turned round and re- of fifteen thousand Merino sheep. The Hon. Member
jetted that as too long. Long befae the meeting of pressed these facts upon the attention of his Majesty's
that House this year he (Mr. Peel) had, certainly irre- Ministers, assuring them that there was nothing more
gularly, taken upon his own responsibility to put that deserving the important consideration of
.a Govern.
evidence into the hands of printer, so as to be in a ment than the means of supplying the people with food.
state of forwardness to put into the hands of Members He would undertake to show that under the old law,
when this question should again be agitated, and this from 1773 to 1815, when the obnoxious measure was
was the return which he met with from the person who passed, there had been virtually a free trade in corn
affected to be most anxious to possess and distribute betwixt this country and the whole world. The highest
that information. But why war this evidence so To. duty paid during that period was 2s. 6d. a quarter;)
but that amount was very rarely paid, the duty seldom
luminous ? because all persons were invited- to prefer
their charges, not excepting even Solicitors,
and rising above 6d. The law of 1773 provided that there
then the Honourable and Learned Member thought
should be one high duty payable when wheat was at
it 445. a quarter ; and two low duties, one at decent to make this a ground of impeachment, 2s. 6d. paya-
th.ough originating in his own suggestion—(Hear),— ble whea the quarter of wheat was from 445. to 48s. and
There was a good deal which was questionable in the the second at 6d. payable when it reached or exceeded
Petition, on the face of it, and as the Hon. and Learned that price. This Act was its face till 1791, during
which time the high duty was scarcely ever paid.—
Member had confessed the Petition was drawn up by
an attorney, and so far was ex parte, he conjured the In that year, however, a new law- was made, pro-
House to form no opinion on it until they saw what vidiog that the first high duty should be payable
case the opposite attorney could make out. For his only when the price of the quarter of wheat reached
own part, be did not believe the facts stated in the Peti. 50s. and the first low duty of 2s. 6d. was made
g who had granted a en. Here was the case of a man payable wheel it passed that price to .541. after
mortgage, and who had been served with notice to pay which 611. watt -to be the rate of duty. During
it up, which he (alleging himself to be an unpracticed this period it *as very seldom that any duty above
)abouriog man) neglected, not thinking it erf conse- 6d. was paid. In 1804 the 'Cale of duty was
quence. The Petitioner then says, he saw something again raised, when 635. was made the amount at which
in it aborit John Doe and Richard Roe, and about staves the•high duty came into orration, arid 06s. the amount
rind bludgeons, and so thought it all nonsense, which at which the first low duty of 2s. 6d. was applied, and
looks highly suspicious, when it is conceded that the after that, 6d. From 1804 to 1815, there was no one
'Petition is got up by an attorney, who might be sap. year in which the second duty of Ls. 6d. was payable ;
to know and to have taught his client better. and, consequently, with the duty of 6d. there was a
posedn
it appears this harmless and inexperienced man free trade in corn. New he would refer to the House
offers the mortgagee to pay off the principal to get rid whether there had ever been a more prosperous period
of the execution, which he refuses, unless he shall first for the chuntry—when every interest, and especially the
pay the costs incurred by bringing him there. He had agricultural, was in a most flourishing condition, than
felt it his duty to draw their attention to:this part of the the period of filly years to which he had adverted.—
Petition which he would have wished should not have at present This fact, he thought, ought to allay the alarm of
been printed, in order to introduce some further explanation on It, Hon. Members as to a state of free trade in corn.—!
and prevent the Members coming to any conclusion, or forming any He should now spew that the restrictions on the iMPOr•
jedgment upon an es part 4 statement.
Mr. GASICFELL explained. ration of corn had given a blow to the external as well
Mr. BROUGHAM begged to observe upon the ten- as the internal trade in that article, of the most mischie•
dency of some expressions dropped, that though the evi. vous consequences. He had said in 1828, and again io
dente consisted of eight or nine hundred folios, it might 1824, that fatal effects might be expected to flow from
still be imperfect in his as well as other people's mind, the present law, from the tendency which it had to create
which shewed it was not so easy to please every one.— a dearth of corn. (Hear.) He had stated this as the re.
Though eight foliovnight possibly be too long, it was suit of certain principles which he had promulgated, and,
possible that 800 might be still t,:o short. He knew upon the authority of documents to which he had re
-
•of himself that there were many omissions. There were (erred. It was true that he had expected it to occur
also questions which, though answered, obviously sug • sooner ; and, although it took some time to work off the
pate& that °there should be pet; sod towbar guldens there were stocks of corn on hand, those stocks were much reduced.
ansieerssiven width eeetahted dm feet Infortsaatiem. In general there was about three or four months' supply
Mr. ROBERT SMITH sal4 tie Coinedadoe had applied ,
chameleon. the pertevesseee et the dudes imposed at diem, eel* or wheat in the country beyond what was required for
anxiety se worm that dui saaistaatettly and ciaacteittgdy; Bad • the year's consumption. The annual consumption he

took to be twelve millibfitt *Ad 60* tAnliod for seedi
which gave about three Or four millions in hand at the
time of the harvest. It was Clear, hiivreveri that a
country setting out even with this stock might, by the
operation of a variety of accidental causes) find its Stack
gradually diminish. The questinn then arose upon this
consideration, whether there wits not something iit the
circumstances of this country which tended to produce
the diminution of which he had spoken ? The natant
of the corn trade was to induce the dealers in That article
to go to market and buy when *beat was at the lowest
Adam Smith had justified, in a very adequate and
beautiful manner, this natural effect of dealing in coca;
and shewn the perfect harmony which subsisted, in dile
particular branch of trade, between the interests df the
individual and the interests of the public. Now, fof
Some years, there had been a constant declension dt
prices, and k was well known that the grain holders
had been subjected to most serious losses. the average
price of wheat in 1817, was 94.5. per quarter ; 1818 i
83s. Bd. 1819, 725. 9d. 1820, 655. 10d. 1821. 545; Sd:

1822, 435. 3d. Upon these years there was a continued
fall, the consequence of which had been, that the .corn:
Idealer had not continued to make his purchases as
usual, being disgusted with what had so long been a
losing concern. It was true, that of late there hid been
a rise in price. All this was the result of the courst
pursued by his Majesty's Governments They had pro=
claimed their intention of establishing the pttneiplti of
free trade, and it never had been conceived that they
would leave the Corn LaWs in their present restrictive
state. Unable, consequently, to foresee what fluctuation
in prices might follow the new laws, a partial stagnation
in the trade had been the consequence. It was indeed
impossible that the speculators could continue their
operations in an article under these circumstances, the
price in the corn market being from 50s. to 60s. and
70s. and in bond from 20i. to SOs. It was therefore
clear, that the internal as well as the external trade in
corn had been injured by the conduct of Ministers, and
according to the reasoning he had endeavoured to incul-
cate upon the House, it was equally clear that a great
dearth of corn might come upon the country unawares,
the usual indication of a rise in price being wanting.—
He trusted there was now enough o :corn in the country
to answer the demands upon it for some time, at least
until the next harvest, provided that should be abun-
dant and early. At present we were actually living
from hand to mouth, and it was that which constituted
the great peril of deferring the settlement of this ques-
tion. For these reasons it was that he deplored the law
of 1815, as the most barbarous and absurd, the most
contrary to every principle of policy, and opposed to
every dictate of experience that an enlightened Legis-
lature ever adopted. What he bad stated proved, he
conceived, the necessity of altering the law upon the
principle on which he hXd proposed the alteration last
year. The scale of duty which he had then proposed
' was, that 10s. should be imposed upon importation,
when wheat was above 555. from 555. to 50s. he pro-
posed 15s. from 50s. to 451. 20s. and under chit, 251.
Such a provision, in the shape of duty, he admitted
ought to be made as gave adequate security to
the minds of the agriculturists. One effect of
our Corn Laws was, that foreign countries had
been driven to adopt the same course—(Hear).—
France, Spain, Portugal, and Holland, had placed re-
strictions upon the importation of corn. The great
opposition to a repeal of the Corn Laws proceeded from
an apprehension that the country would 'be deluged
with foreign corn if there were a free trade in that at title.
The fallacy of this notion he would endeavour to show
by documents, exhibiting the quantity of foreign corn
imported into this country from 1800 to 1820. It was
to be observed, that during this period there were no
fewer than five years of :comity, 1800, 1801, 1810,
1817, 1818, and in those jean the prices of coin were
exceedingly high. s. d.
In IEOO the Quarter cii TIM was . 110 3
1801 . . . 11S 11
1510 • • . 103 3
1517 . • • . 54 0
151$ . 53 .

The effect of these high prices was to draw every grain
of corn from every quarter of the globe. And of
the proportion of Impor cation belonging to these five,
Out of the twenty. one )ears, the House might be en-
abled to judge by the following quantities:
1800 were Imported 1,263,7111 Qantas.
1801 . . 1,414,241
1810 • . 1,439,615
1617 . . 1,030,129
1816 . . 1,5116,1*0
_ _ _

During the twenty-one years, from . 1800 to 1890, inch.
sive, the whole quantity imported was 12,577,000 qrs.
of which the five years alluded to absorbed more than
one-half. Taking the annual average from this period,
he thought would be taking it very fairly. It amounted

to no more than 598,906 quarters, and the average price
was 84.5. 6d. In this he thought there was nothing to
alarm the landowners of this country; especially when it
was considt red that during the greater part of this
time, until 1815, there was no obstruction to the entrance
of corn into the ports. It was an impf.nant facts that
the greatest quantity of foreign corn came into this
country from the poor countries. From the. rich
countries, and even such as were agricultural, as
America, hardly any was supplied. The average
quantity of corn imported during each year; rf
those twenty years, had been 598,96. quarters, and
the average prices of those years, 84s. 6d. Since it
was evident that poorer countries must export corn to
the richer ones,- he would take from official documents
the amount of corn annually exported from some of the
former countries to this country.

Annual average imported from 11100 to 14201 . .
Russia . . . 6075 qrs.
Sweden • 12,575
Prussia, including Poland . 204,467
• __
Germany .
United States

Canada .
Holland
Flanders .
France .

•

4 •

97.11

. sfay
=
. tow

Denmark and Norway . . is,ssi
There was another account copied from official docu-
ments also, of the exports of wheat from the ports of
Dantzic and Elbing, during nearly two centuries,.
Annual export of wheat book Minsk and ElMpi; .
From 1651 to 1675 • 51,775 Ifb:„.
1676 to 1700 . 124,1110'
1701 to 1725 . "row ''''''.
1726 to 1751 . 5t6114 44
1751 to 1775 141480 ,
1776 to 1800 • 120,255„
1501 to 1625 .
The annual amount of export during tt\stle period
was 215,307 qOarters of bread can, sent front Dantsic
and Elbing, where no extraordinary deMand'hoti been
caused. The annual average of the erf&W bi wheat
and rye, from the same ports, for esaewni Its since
1790, was as follows:

For 9 years from 17110 to 1795
For 5 years from 1795 to 1100

. 260,451 qr.
409,588

• ' 111.
. '....k..„e -
• It,
..46,
• • iF
,r .IN 9111.
crua•rrmeirp..vpr.mpn
otsteOtif 'Of •S
individual bad a
**•••/:.)- in aWitiht dependent upon the
a child nine years of age; had neglected to ,
the filing of a Bill in Chancery, and upon appl

• -.•
=. sod the Lord ChasesilototadthCodiat half agaltatake 4111111144:09A that the ktionaltb
kie Courts of Commas Law, int leivuldti bojost as to& k
liViliesaid t ileti Asa bad
of cal to enter into a tirade against* Court of King's tas intilt.cloto did not t toe otterstst,d ;
Per Bench, for the defects of the COMIIIIOII Law, as againu reepeet.:...e.rbe Petition was atarretto be printed.
leo the Lord Chancellor for those of the Capri of Chancery. CORICLAWS.
the The gnomons in this case was, that a Bill being filed, Mr. W. WHITMORE rose to make tl
. • a • - _r -I_ el I' r I_!_i- I