The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1840-05-22 00:00:00

IMPORTANT FROM TEXAS.

NEW ORLEANS, APRIL 17.—8 y the steam-packet Nep-
tune, Captain Pennoyer, we have received Texas papers to
the 13th inst. We copy below the only news we find in
them.

From the Civilian Extra of April 12th.
IMPORTANT NEWS FROM TIIE WEST.
By the steamer Dayton, which arrived this morning from
Houston, we have received intelligence that the Centralists,
under Arista, and the Federalists, under Canalos and
Zapata, have had a bloody engagement near Mier, on the
Rio Grande, in which the Federalists were totally routed,
with great numbers killed and wounded, the exact number
not being known.

THE CURRF,NCY —A bill requiring all the banks of this
state to redeem their notes at half of one per cent. discount,
either in New York or Albany, has passed both branches of
the legislature.

On the 25th April a bill was brought before the Senate by
Mr. Adams, for the imposing of a duty on foreign silk.

FROM THE PACIFIC.—The ship Congress, Capt. Water-
man, arrived here yesterday, after a very short passage,
having left Coquimbo on the 13th February. She brings a
cargo of the value of about 300,000 dollars, including 138,000
dollars in specie. The market at Valparaiso was overstocked
with American goods.—Brother Jonathan, New York paper
of 25th April.

We have received a copy of the St. John's (New-
foundland) Times of the 15th of April. The news
contained in this paper is of comparatively little im-
portance. It complains bitterly of the new burden of
taxation imposed upon the colonists—a complaint
which will meet with a ready response on this side of
the Atlantic.

It will be seen from our parliamentary summary that
the bill brought in by Sir P. Egerton,' the *conservative
member for South Cheshire, to enable the trustees of
the River Weaver navigation to provide out of their
surplus funds, an increase of church accommodation for
the population which the improvement of that river has
drawn on its banks, passed the second reading on Tues-
day evening by a majority of 76. We are glad to record
this evidence of an inclination on the part of the House
of Commons to despise the opposition offered by a
clique of canters in parliament, and brawlers out of
doors, to every measure the tendency of which is to
extend the usefulness and advance the cause of the
religion of the Established Church ; and we accept the
decision of the house upon this individual case, as a
favourable augury for the bill which is shortly to be
introduced by Sir Robert Inglis, the object of which is
defensible upon precisely the same grounds as the bill
whose second reading is now sanctioned, and whose
principle is thereby admitted.

Our readers will no doubt remember the clamour
which was raised, by a few of the hacks of the minis-
terial faction, when it was first proposed by Mr. Tolle-
macho and others to apply a portion of the funds of
the navigation to the purpose of supplying the spiritual
destitution of that portion of the people of Cheshire
which is located in the neighbourhood. The parties
by whom that clamour was made—righteous, pious
men !—had no idea that a population of boatmen and
flatmen could have any need of a church ; so long as
there were beer-houses and conventicles, hush shops
and dram shops, what need could this degraded and
ignorant class have of churches ? How prompt was
each Whig landowner or mill-owner to lift up his
devout countenance and exclaim against the proposed
application of these funds as a job, and—what in
their saintly eyes was worst of all—a church job !
Alas, alas ! After all these denunciations made upon

principle—your thorough Whig always has "principle"
upon his lips, but jobbery in his heart—after all the
Mawworm cant of voluntaryism, the real, substantial
objection to this application of the River Weaver fund
is, that it touches the pockets of these saints, the funds
being now applied in aid of the county rates of Che-
shire, thus saving to the Cheshire landowner a few
paltry pence per annum, which he may possibly be
called upon in future to contribute.

Of course the second reading of the bill was strongly
opposed in the house, and, in particular, by that
shining luminary, Mr. George Wilbraham, whom we
hope our Conservative friends of South Cheshire will
get rid of with all convenient speed. His exhibition
on Tuesday evening will probably afford as poor a
recommendation to the favour of the yeomanry of
Cheshire as his Jim Crow performance upon the Corn
Laws.

Well, the Ministry of Lord Melbourne is again
beaten, and upon a vital question. After three nights
of debate, after exhausting every effort which baffled
fraud could suggest, after appealing in vain to the in-
terests and the fears of the House for support, Lord
Melbourne's Administration is in A MINORITY OF
THREE in a division upon the Registration Bill of
Lord Stanley—a bill the passing of which is acknow- •
ledged to carry with it the certain destruction of the
Whig faction, and the loss to those pure and patriotic
gentlemen of all the snug pickings and the pet places
to which they have clung with such devotion for the
last ten years !
We certainly cannot pretend to guess at the course
which Lord Melbourne's incapables will take upon the
occasion. An honourable party would at once resign
office; but that the despicable faction which now mis-
governs England will take such a step is more than we
dare predict. It is hard, very hard, to drag a Whig
from his plunder, and harder still when he happens to
be a degraded and a hungry one. Shame has no
blush for a tWhig cheek. Scorn and derision recoil
from the impenetrability of a Whig breast. One only
method there is by which he can be driven to disgorge,
and that method—the application of the foot to his
dorsal extremity--we have little expectation of seeing
adopted so speedily as the people of Great Britain de-
sire and fervently pray for.
We do not then expect that Lord Melbourne will be
guilty of any such madness as a resignation of office
would be in the eyes of his coadjutors. There are still
devices to be tried, appeals to be made, trickery to be
attempted, in the hope of staving off the day of reckon-
ing. A majority of three, in a house of 599 members,
is no mighty affair for Whig ingenuity to surmount ;
and we have no doubt that every means which faction
can suggest will be adopted to defeat the measure
which that majority has declared its intention to carry
into a law. We have no doubt that by the present re-
formed House of Commons the attempt will be made,
and as little doubt that the attempt will be made in
vain.

The debate upon this bill, prolonged to three nights

for a factious and dishonest purpose, has not been
without its effects throughout the country. The minds
of the public have been disabused of those gross delu-
sions which it has been the unceasing effort of its
opponents to throw over it. The MONSTER EVIL by
which Ireland is degraded and enslaved, is now un-
masked ; the veil is torn from before the face of
fto-
mish corruption, and its hideous features presented
naked to the world, glaring in all their horrible defor-
mity. No Ministerial trickery will now be 'permitted
to replace that covering which the band. of Truth has

drawn • 'ie. No ruffianism of the mendicant impos-
tor wl- -.as fed from its pollution, will succeed in sti-
fling the indignant feeling with which the people of
England have regarded the disclosure of its demo-
ralising and soul-destroying tendencies.

But it is not alone the progress which sound prin-
ciples of legislation appear to have made in the estima-
tion of the public and of parliament during the discus--
sion of this measure, upon which we are dispcsed to
congratulate the country. We have never feared that
such a measure would not eventually be passed, al-
though we may have doubted whether in the present
House of Commons, or during the present session,
such a consummation could be realised. The princi-
pal gratification which we derive from the debate,- is
caused by the admirable illustration which it affords
of the unutterable meanness by which the proceedings.
of the present Whig faction are characterised. With
what loathing—with what ineffable disgust—would a
Whig of the school of Fox and Burke turn away from.
contamination such as that which the WlAgs of the
present day submit to and 'court ! How such men
would scorn to herd with the O'Connells and Humes
.
of the Reformed House of Commons !—to hold office
by the kind permission of- those vulgar demagogues,
and at the price which they choose to exact as a re-

muneration for their venal votes ! Yet such is the
position of the present Whig Administration. They
dare not walk " cleanly"; they dare not turn aside
from pollution ; they must swallow the potion, nasty
though it be, which is held to their craven lips, anti
are not even allowed the privilege of making faces !

The debate on Lord Stanley's bill has displayed
fully to the public this disgraceful bondage, and the
ready zeal with which the supporters and members of
the Government enter into the factious Views of the.

beggarly impostor who dictates the terms of their ex-
istence. How otherwise could the discussion of a
question, already worn bare, be prolonged for three
nights against the recorded wishes of the majority of
the House How otherwise could Lord Stanley be
refused permission to proceed at once to forward his
bill one stage in committee ? How otherwise, we ask,
than by a disgraceful collusion between a contemptible
Administration and an equally contemptible faction of
traitors and bullies ?
It is no doubt true that Lord John Russell attempted,
at the last moment, to disclaim any connexion with the
disgraceful attempts made by Hume and O'Connell, as
recommended by our Clayton-square orators, to impede
the progress of the bill by repeated motions of adjourn-
ment. " I have no power," lisped Lord John, " to'
control the party from whom these motions proceed."
We are well aware that Lord John Russell has no con-
trol over the sayings and doings of Daniel O'Connell,
and for the simple reason that Lord John and the
members of the administration are the slaves, and
O'Connell the tyrant. Lord John control him ! Fudge;
But one thing we predict Lord John will find that
he can do, and that, if he hopes to receive the con-
tinued support of the Agitator, he must do. He will
be required to oppose, by every factious manoeuvre in
his power, the progress of Lord Stanley's Bill in com-
mittee. 'We can assure him, however, that in doing so
he will only be sinking himself and his party more
deeply in the estimation of the people of England.
The bond fide constituencies of this protestant country
will not any longer endure that their franchises shall
be swamped by the perjured and fictitious consti-
tuencies of popish Ireland. The corruption of the
system of registration in that country must be rooted
oat, not glossed over. The measure of Lord Stanley
will effect that object, and it must be passed, 110-
weakened in its provisions, and undiluted with any of
the fraudulent and spurious patchwork which Lord
John and his Radical allies would gladly be allowed to
be mini :'mod with it !

In uur remarks on Tuesday, upon the Liverpool
Mercury's misrepresentations of Lord Stanley's Bill,
we promised to return to the subject and to expose
the calumnious spirit displayed by our contemporary
towards one of the speakers at the Amphitheatre meet-
ing—the Rev. Hugh M'Neile. We are sorry that we
made the promise. The task of exposing falsehood is
not to our taste, although it is a part of our duty to the
public ; and we enter upon it on the present occasion
with the greater reluctance from knowing that our op-
ponent is unworthy of the notice we have ahead,'
bestowed upon him, or he would probably have re-
ceived before now a castigation from a hand which !ts
well able to inflict it, upon a " foeman worthy of hjs
steel."

The Mercury accuses Mr. M‘Neile of suggestivg
falsehood, by quoting from the speech of Mr. Bolero°
rennent, at the Belfast meeting, a passage which asserts
that by Lord Stanley's bill the 'claimant to register has
"the registry brought to his own parish and his 0"
door, for the first time, instead of being dragged from
the farm to the quarter sessions' town." Nowr we.d°
not pretend to say, and neither Mr.. M'Neile nor Mr-
Emerson Tennent meant it to be understood, that lite-
rally and strictly the bill enabled the claimant to com-
plete his registration at so cheap a rate and with so little

trouble. The object of these gentlemen was to show
that it increased, instead of limiting, the existing fa-
cilities of registration. But, in point of fact, the bill
of Lord Stanley does, for the first time, bring the re-
gistry to the claimant's own door, when it enacts that
the clerk of the peace shall make out yearly an alpha-
betical parochial list of all persons entitled to be placed
iupon the register of voters ; shall post such list upon
or near the doors of all the churches or chapels within
the respective parishes in the county or town to which
such lists shall respectively relate ;" and further, "shall
annex to every such list at the foot thereof a notice re-
quiring all persons who may claim to have their names
inserted-in the register of voters for such county or
town respectively then next to he completed to send in
their claims to be inserted within the time limited by
the act." It gives these increased facilities to voters and
claimants, and it also provides that similar lists shall
be made out, and posted in the same manner, of all
parties objected to, and that the onus of proving the
objection shall Ise imposed upon the party objecting.

But the Mercury, quoting Mr. Sharman Crawford's
letter, considers it a hardship upon the claimant to
have to appear before the assistant barrister and make
good his claim, and would have us to understand that
this hardship is for the first time created by Lord Stan-
ley's bill. We showed, in our remarks of Tuesday,
that the necessity of appearing existed under the reform
bill of 1832, and that the raising of an objection to
Lord Stanley's bill on this score is a suygestio falsi on
the part of the Mercury himself. But have we no
suppressio reri also ? Is there in that bill no endea-
vour to bring not only the registry but the registering
court nearer to the claimant's own door ? We turn from
the Mercury's pitiful misrepresentations to the bill it-
self, and find in the 18th section a power given to the
Lord Lieutenant to appoint additional places for hold-
ing, the registry sessions, thereby doing away with
the necessity, existing under the present law, of the
claimant having in every case to support his claim at
the county or sessions town. It would, of course, not
suit the purpose of the ;llercury to
,notice this feature
of the bill.

But let us look to one or two other serious charges
which the Mercury brings against Mr. M`Neile. That
gentleman, gravely observes our contemporary, has
throughout his speech " blinked a fact !" " suppressed
the truth !" " suggested falsehood ! " " Blinked "
what fact ? our readers will ask. Why, the fact that
Mr. William Wallace Currie, in his never-to-be-too-
much-lauded speech in Clayton-square, " begged to
say, on behalf of the whole Liberal party, that it was
their disposition to protect the franchise, and to re-
move acknowledged abuses,—if abuses did exist in the
registration of Ireland, as they knew that abuses did
exist in England; but because they wanted to purify
the register, they did not want to destroy the fran-
chise." The important fact that Mr. William Wallace
Currie delivered himself of this piece of bombast—and
a painful accouchment it was, as we can testify—is
Suppressed, " blinked," burked, by that shocking
strangler of Whig pretensions—Mr. M`Neile, who
has the hardihood to insist, in the teeth of Mr. Cur-
rie's declaration, made "on behalf of the whole Liberal
Party," that the opponents of the bill are "encouragers
of perjury, fosterers of corruption." Now, we are
Willing to admit that the gentleman in question, who
is an alderman or a councillor—we don't care which—
did make a speech ; we were painfully convinced of
that fact at the time, But how the fact of his having
Made a speech "on behalf of the whole Liberal party"
rendered it compulsory upon Mr. M'Neile to quote the
Whole Or it, :or upon us to believe the whole of it, we
are not so well convinced. " Not one word," says
the Mercury, " has been said against the amendment
of the system, the only difference being, whether it
shall be effected by the friends or the enemies of po-
pular rights." Our contemporary will pardon us for
saying, that the difference between Mr. M'Neile and
himself is, in reality, upon the question whether or not
the system is to be amended at all !

"Again," says the Mercury, " we find him quoting
a notice, filled up by his friend Mr. 'ferment, the re-
publican, repealer, Radical, Whig, Tory, and Orange-
man, for Mr. Crawford, and representing this as all
that would be required under the form of notice in
Lord Stanley's bill, and as what is practically done in
England." Admitted. Mr. M`Neile did quote a form
of notice,
.filled up by Mr. 'ferment, to shew that the
immense difficulty complained of in the notice is no
difficulty at all. .That notice was filled up in the name,.
and stated the qualification, of Mr. Sharman Crawford,
which happens to be a freehold. What, then, does
our contemporary mean by Mr. M`Neile's " represent-
ing this as all that would be required" by Lord Stan-
ley's bill ? Would more be required ? Oh, no ; but
Mr. Crawford is a freeholder—a fifty-pound freeholder.
Would any more, then, we ask, be required from any
other freeholder ? Reader, mark well the gross dis-
honesty of which we are about to convict our contem-
porary ! " This form, so quoted," says our contem
porary, " is that for £5O freeholders, who, with clergy-
men of the Established Church, are specially exempted
from the minute provisions enacted for other classes ;
and yet Mr. M‘Neile quotes this as applicable to all."
Now, in the first place, Mr. M'Neile never represented
this form as applicable to any other case than that of
a freeholder like Mr. Crawford ; and, in the next place,
£5O freeholders are not exempted from the minute pro-
visions enacted for other classes—that is, from being
required to state in their claim the precise particulars
which any other freeholder would have to state. Our
contemporary 'evidently wants us to believe that there
is one form of notice for the £59 freeholder, and ano-
ther, more minutely particular, for the £lO freeholder;
when the fact is, that there is only one form of notice
for both claimants ! Can impudence and fraud, we
ask, go further than this hold attempt to mislead the
public mind, and to calumniate private character ?
But we must leave the Mercury and his misrepre-
sentations. The supporters of Lord Stanley's bill can
very well afford to despise so trashy an opponent as
the Liverpool Mercury ; and that party which has the
honour of receiving his countenance will not, we dare
say, object to the weapons with which he fights in their
behalf. Farewell, good Mercury ! Most fitly art thou
named after the patron deity of fraud and falsehood !
Euge—Vale !

THE GREAT MEETING AT THE AMPHITHEATRE.—We
rejoice to find that the demand for Mr. Al'Neile's speech at
the great meeting of the conservatives in favour of Lord
Stanley's registration bill, has been such as to induce the
publishers of the LIVERPOOL STANDARD to issue it in the
Shape of a pamphlet. We have no doubt that it will obtain
an extensive circulation. Its intrinsic merits will constitute
its most powerful recommendation. It is right to add that
parties who may wish to purchase a number of copies for
distribution will be most liberally treated with. We know
of no publication which has emanated from the conservative
press within the last few years which is calculated to produce
more powerful effect than the admirable speech under no-
tice. It 14 a complete and masterly review of the whole
subject and we have no doubt that it has contributed most
materially to the recent triumph in the House of Commons.
AN ACCESSION. TO THE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS.—On
Tuesday last Mr. Joseph, of this establishment, purchased,
on board the Robert Fiume, Captain Beverley, from the
western coast of South America, a fine specimen of that
gigantic bird the condor, or Vulture Gryphus, a native of
the Andes mountains, the only one that has been imported
for many years. This noble bird measures from 12 to 14
feet from tip to tip of the wings. He also purchased from
Captain Crosby, of the William Jardine, from Calcutta, a
• fine tiger, of extraordinary tameness and docility. This
creature, generally so ferocious, played with the seamen like
a cat, and
was, when purchased, amusing himself in rolling
over an empty cask on the deck, by treading on it. He also
was successful in purchasing from the same vessel a Brahmin
cow, a great acquisition, there being a fine bull of the same
species before in the gardens. The latter is a fine animal,
and is the more interesting from the bull being an object of
worship amongst the ignorant Hindoos.
The Earl of Derby continues in pretty much the same
state of health. He rides about constantly in a pony-car-
riage, and still takes an interest in his delightful aviary, the
largest and most varied in England, and probably in the
world. Owing to the noble earl's feeble health, the aviary
is no longer as accessible to the public as it used to be.

Messrs. Thomas Turner and Son, of South Castle-street,
Liverpool, have been appointed boot-makers to his Royal
Highness Prince Albert.
EXPORT OF IRON EOATS.—The ship Canton, belonging
to Mr. Lairdman, which sailed on Tuesday last from the
Victoria Dock, for Demerara, took' on her deck a number of
iron flat-bottomed boats or punts, to be used for the con-
veyance of sugars and other commodities in the rivers and
shallow waters of that colony. Each of these boats is in two
pieces, for the convenience of carriage. The pieces are made
to fit amid-ships, and have but to be rivetted together to be
fit for use. There are iron sockets at the sides interiorly for
the insertion of stancheons, either to raise a wooden bulwark
round them, to give them greater depth, if required, or, for
the spreading of an awning or tarpaulin for the protection of
the goods from rain, or the excessive heat of the sun.
Couar OF PASSAGE.—This court was held yesterday
before Charles Crompton, Esq., assessor, but all the cases
were totally uninteresting.

CHURCH OF ENGLAND ASSURANCE AND TRUST INSTI-
TUTION.—It must greatly gratify the friends of the Church,
to find that such has been the distinguished success of this
very valuable Institution, that the shares are to be allotted on
Monday, the Ist of June next, after which, the business will
commence in all its branches. There is little doubt that this
Institution, while itwill be the most benevolent of the Insur-
.4nee Offices, will also be the most profitable to its share-
lioldike.—See add:

MEETING OF THE DOCK COMMITTEE.

The first meeting of the Dock Committee at wind

reporters for the public press were present, was held in the
Dock Office, Custom-house, yesterday, at twelve o'clock.
The following members of the trust were present :—Mr.
Booth, Mr. Thos. Tobin, Mr. T. B. Barclay, Mr. William
Smith, Mr. Bulley, Mr. Seager, Mr. J. B. Yates, Mr. H.
Holmes, Mr. T. Holt, Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Dixon, Mr.
Martin, and Mr. Ripley. Mr. BOOTH took the chair in
the absence of Mr. Leathom, the official chairman, who,
with a deputation, is in London on the subject of the new
dock bill.

The proceedings of the last meeting were confirmed, and
the payment of a number of accounts ordered, without ex-
citing any discussion.

The CilikiitNL4.;;ead a resolution of the Pilots Committee,
passed on the 18th instant, stating that a letter, signed by
the master pilot, was read, expressing his regret that the
Marine Surveyor should alter the position of any buoys with-
out giving public notice, and it was requested that the com-
mittee should require the Marine Surveyor to give the re-
quisite notice in all future cases.
The CHAIRMAN said he understood the buoy in question,
which was stationed in the North Patch, had been removed
only a very short distance; but the marine surveyor might
be called in.
Mr. YATES, whilst the committee were waiting, would
take the opportunity of asking the chairman whether any
communication was intended to be made at this meeting
with reference to the dock bill now before parliament
The CHAIRMAN replied that he had no official communi-
cation to make.
The MARINE SURVEYOR (Mr. Lord) was then called in,
and he stated that the buoy in question had been moved only
a hundred fathoms, in order to get it clear of the bank, and
that he had not thought it necessary to give public notice of
such a trivial alteration.

Mr. TOBIN said it would be advisable when any buoy was
either altered or removed to notify the change immediately to
the Pilots Committee.
The MARINE SURVEYOR replied that the Pilots' Com-
mittee were acquainted with the alteration, as he had
addressed a letter to them, and also to the agent of her Ma-
jesty's ships.
Mr. TOBIN asked when this was done?
The MARINE SURVEYOR replied, the day after the change.
The CHAIRMAN.—We request you to give as much notice
as you can of any alterations on any future occasion.

The MARINE SU RVEYOR.—Yes,
The CHAIRMAN asked the Marine Surveyor if he could
explain the cause of some damage done to a sixty-fathom
chain at the Beacon buoy (as we understood).
The MARINE SURVEYOR said he thought it must have
been cut on purpose.
Mr. TOBIN suggested that if it had been done from mis-
chief, it would be well to offer a reward for the discovery of
the offender.
The CHAIRMAN said there were already rewards offered
for the discovery of any party who damaged or stole the pro-
perty of the trust.
Mr. Tonis was aware of that, but in the present case the
public had no knowledge of its occurrence.
The CHAIRMAN said, if it was the wish of the Committee
they might advertise a reward for the discovery of the chain.
The subject then dropped, with the understanding (as we
inferred, but from the manner of taking the decision of the
committee we cannot speak with certainty) that a reward of
£lO should be offered.
A very long investigation then commenced into the con-
duct of the North Harbour master and the Prince's Dock
master, under the following circumstances. There was an
American ship, called the Victoria, in the dock, the owner-
ship of which was disputed by a Mr. Sharp.
,Capt. Lennox,
the commander, was preparing to take the vessel out of the
dock and go to sea, at high water on Monday. Mr. Sharp,
bein., aware of this, served a notice on the dock master, to
the effect that he was part owner of the ship, and that if the
dock master allowed her to leave the dock he would be held
responsible for any loss that might arise to Mr. Sharp. The
dock master consulted the solicitor to the trust, who advised
him that he had nothing to do with the question. In the mean
time forty or fifty men, in the interest of Mr. Sharp, had
collected on board the Dido and the Victoria, with the view
of preventing the latter from going to sea. he police, hav-
ing information that a disturbance was threatened, were on
the spot ; some commotion took place, and eventually the
pilot refused to take charge of the vessel, on the ground that
from the state of her sails, and it being then 10 minutes past
high water, it would be unsafe. Superintendent Macdonald,
who had the command of the police on the occasion, now
charged the harbour-master and the dock-master with wilfully
neglecting their duty, because they refused to interfere when
he requested them, and the dock-master, he alleged, was not
on the spot, as he ought to have been, when the Victoria was
prevented leaving the dock by the men in the Dido. The
superintendent, the harbour-master, the dock-master, the
master pilot, the pilot who was to have taken charge of the
vessel, and another pilot, were severally examined. In the
course of their examination, there appeared a material dis-
crepancy as to the time of the dock-master's presence at the
transaction, between the statements of Macdonald and those
of the others ; and eventually the committee unanimously
came to the conclusion, that no blame whatever attached to
the officers of the dock, and that Superintendent Macdonald
was mistaken.

Mr. RIPLEY said the discrepancies as to time between the
statements of the witnesses in the complaint just heard, con-
vinced him that a clock was indispensably necessary at the
north end of Prince's Dock. Mistakes were perpetually
arising from the want of this public convenience.
The CHAIRMAN said the suggestion should receive atten-
tion. The next business, he continued, referred to the com-
pensation claimed by the owners of the ship Tweed, during
the discussion of which the reporters must retire.
Mr. YATES, before that business came on, had a motion
to propose. He had already asked the chairman whether he
was prepared to report to the committte the state of the dock
bill now pending before parliament, and had been told that
he (the chairman) knew nothing about it.
The CHAIRMAN.—Nothing officially, I said.
Mr. YATES.—Yes, nothing officially. All the informa-
tion, then, which he (Mr. Yates) was able to glean was from
the newspapers ; and he observed from them that an inquiry
was going on on three most important topics, one especially
with regard to the warehouse question, another to a clause
or clauses affecting the constitution of this committee, and a
third upon the subject of the rates payable by ships not
using the docks. These were matters of such vital impor-
tance, that it struck him the committee ought to be made
better informed than they were as to the wishes of the rate-
payers, who were mainly interested in them, affecting, as they
did, most vitally, the interests and the trade of the port. It
appeared to him that there ought to be a meeting of the rate-
payers called immediately, for the purpose of discussing these
questions. With regard to the payment of dock rates by
strangers, he had frequently, both in the committee and else-
where, expressed a strong opinion that it was unjust and im-
proper that ships not using the docks should be compelled
to pay any rates except those for lights, dredging, and so on.
•His impression was that this claim ought at once to be thrown
overboard .by the committee. As to the question of ware-
houses on the dock quays, he believed if the sense of the rate-
payers was taken, two-thirds or three-fourths of teem would
be found opposed to them upon the present plan.
The CHAIRMAN begged to say that the question of the
sense of the ratepayers could not be discussed in the com-
mittee. Did Mr. Yates mean to propose that the committee
should call a meeting of the ratepayers ?
Mr. YATES did most expressly and especially mean to pro-
pose that the committee should call the leypayers together,
and he would add, that it was their express and bounden duty
to convene that meeting.
The CHAIRMAN thought the committee had no such
power given them in the act of Parliament.
Mr. YATES replied that on the occasion of the last bill the
committee then called a meeting of the ley-payers, whether
they had power or not.
The SECRETARY.—You have no such power.
Mr. YATES.—You must know very well that the Dock
Committee did summon a meeting of the rate-payers about
three years ago.
The SECRETARY repeated that that meeting was not called
by the Dock Committee.
Mr. BARCLAY (we understood) said the meeting alluded
to was called at the request of the several public associations,
and that the Dock Committee acquiesced and joined in the
request.
Mr. ToBIN said that, however desirable he might consider
a public meeting of rate-payers, he could not for a moment
bring himself to suppose that it was the duty of the Dock
Committee to call one. The power lay in another body.
Mr. YATES was sorry to differ from Mr. Tobin. He con-
ceived this to he the proper body, more especially on ac-
count of the relation in which it stood to the public ; there-
fore he was determined to bring the resolution forward whe-
ther any one voted with him or not. It was most inconsis-
tent for the Dock Committee to go to an enormous expense
in Parliament, upon points vitally affecting the interests of
the port, without calling for the opinion of the rate-payers
whom they represented. He should, therefore, move, " That
this committee call forthwith a general meeting' of rate-
payers, for the purpose of laying before them the heads of
the Dock Bill now before Parliament, and taking into consi-
deration the important clauses now under discussion." He
was induced to bring this motion forward, because, up to
this day, the committee bad not had a copy of the bill laid
before them, nor even of the heads of the bill ; because the
several vital clauses of the bill had not been. submitted at any
time ; and because, up-to this hour, the committee had never
been informed, in that room, within what period the pro-
posed warehouses should be erected, or what expense it
was proposed should be incurred—a matter affecting the
property of all the ratepayers. They had, indeed, heard out
of doors how the blanks left in the clauses had been filled up.
They had heard, according to common rumour, that some of
the warehouses were to be built in two years, and all of them
in five years, but they had heard nothing officially. It was
high time that the members of the committee should know
what they were about, and whether they were indulging in
these very serious expenses contrary to the wishes of the
ratepayers, or with their assent.
Mr. Toutiv should be very glad if the ratepayers them-
selves would hold a meeting, but he could not approve of this
committee convening one.
Mr. GLADSTONE Must certainly confess his surprise that
the bill, involving as it did, most momentous interests,
should have advanced so far, without the committee having
received up to this period either explanation or report of its pro-
gress from the deputation in London, who were prosecuting
it. He would not say what he thought of this mode of pro-
ceeding; but he would say that it wes, at least, highly irre-
gular.
Mr. TOBIN thought that of the members of this committee
more ought to be appointed by the ratepayers than there
were.

Mr. YATES repeated, that all the information he was in
possession of, respecting the present state of the bill, had
been collected from the public papers. He would ask any
man of common sense, whether it was right for the members
of the committee to be compelled to obtain their knowledge
from such a source upon a bill of such magnitude and im-
portance? The motion not having been seconded he should
withdraw it, but he still retained his opinions.
Mr. RIPLEY said Mr. Yates was under a mistake when he
said the bill had not been read before the committee. The heads
of it at least were read before the committee. Mr. Yates had
expressed an opinion that if the sentiments of the rate-payers
were taken, three-fourths of them would be found opposed
to the building of warehouses on the quays. Now so far from
believing that estimate correct, he (Mr. Ripley) believed that
three-fourths of the rate-payers would be in favour of thg
building of warehouses on the quays.
Mr. YATES.—That was matter of opinion, the accuracy of
which might be readily ascertained ; but to proceed with the
bill without having ascertained that opinion, was like enact-
ing Hamlet with the part of Hamlet omitted. The blanks
were not filled up in this committee, but the whole matter
was left to the deputation. If the erection of the warehouses
were spread over a period of fifteen years, it might do no
harm to the owners of existing property of that description,
but the haste to build them in five years was calculated to do
great injury.
The SECRETARY having referred to the minutes of the pro-
ceedings of the committee said, that on the 23d January the
bill was submitted to the committee and read. Every clause
was read. Mr. Yates was present. The clauses which it was
thought required alterations were read a second time.
Mr. YATES admitted the clauses were read in brief.
The SECRETARY.—The most important were read in full.
Mr. YATES repeated that he withdrew his motion.
The reporters then retired, and the committee proceeded
the consideration of the question already stated.

Commissions signed by the Lord Lieutenant of the County
Palatine of Lancaster.-2nd Regiment of the Duke of Lan-
caster's Own Militia—Thomas Blades Molyneux, Gent. to
be Lieutenant ; Oct. 21. Robert Johnson, the younger,
Gent. to be ditto ; Feb. 25.

LIVERPOOL EASTER SESSIONS.--(YEsTERDAY.)

THE QUEEN AGAINST HUGH EDWARDS.
In this case the defendant, who was out on bail and sur-
rendered, was indicted on a charge of having stolen, on the
7th of March, a purse containing fifty-one sovereigns, the pro-
perty of John Shannon. The case excited very considerable
interest, from the peculiarity of the circumstances, and we
therefore devote to it more space than on ordinary occasions.
Mr. HENDERSON stated that the prisoner was a person of
some property in this town. The prosecutor went into the
public-house kept by the prisoner, and had with him a can-
vas bag containing 51 sovereigns. The prosecutor treated
two women who had come in, and afterwards fell asleep, and
on awaking found that his money was gone. The subsequent
circumstances were detailed by the learned counsel, but the
whole may be derived from the evidence.
John Shannon being sworn, said I am a lumper, and rent a
house of the prisoner, who keeps a house in Flint-street,
called Greenfield House. On the 21st of March, after 12
at night, I knocked at the door. The bar is amid-ships. I
called for some whiskey, in a room on one side of the bar. I ,
fell asleep. No one was .in the room when I went in but
myself and he. He was on his way with the whiskey when
two girls entered. One of them that I knew stood at the
bar door, and the other was going inside the bar. Neither of
them came within three yards of me while I was there. The
prisoner pushed them out and barred the door. I had 51 sove-
reigns in gold; £4O in Bank of England notes and some silver.
The notes and silver were not touched. They were in my
inside waistcoat pocket. I took out a shilling to pay, and in
doing so had to take out the bag of sovereigns which were in
a chamoi leather purse. I put back the bag and the notes.
The landlord came into the bar after turning the women out.
1 fell asleep on a settle. I was wakened by the prisoner, but
Ido not know at what time of the night. I felt for my
money. The pocket-book and silver were there, but the bag
of sovereigns was gone. Nobody was there but the prisoner.
I had heavy words with the prisoner about it. I insisted on
his searching me. When I awoke 1 found my waistcoat
opened all but one button. He did search me. He wakened
me by shaking me by the waistcoat: He came to the mouth
of the entry with tee, and we had heavy words about the
purse. I went home and told my wife. Between nine and
ten o'clock next morning I went to the prisoner's house. The
two girls were there, and others. When I first went in I was
in a great rage, and I struck one of the girls and bled her
nose. The prisoner was there, and he then went into the
bar. He came back with his hands in his trowsers pockets ;
he walked within a yard or two of my sister-in-law, and he
stooped down. There are two cellars or rooms on each side
the bar. One is called the House of Lords and the other the
House of Commons. (A laugh.) I lost my money in the
Commons ; the room Edwards now came into was the Lords.
He stooped down, and picking the bag up, said—" Don't be
so angry, is this yours ?' " Yes, said I' • but there is not the
weight in it that it had when you took it from me this morn-
ing." I emptied the bag into the hands of a man named
Griffiths, . and he counted it back into the bag, and it only
contained twelve sovereigns. Griffiths swore with an oath
that he would prosecute the prisoner. He (Griffiths) did not
say this at the 'Change. -I sent for the police.
-Cross-examined by Mr. wiLotls.—l struck one of the
girls in the morning, and would hate struck my own wife if
I had met her, I was so aggravated. I had been drinking, at
my brother's, who keeps a public-house in Norfolk-street.
I had five glasses of ale that day, and a glass of spirits at my
brother's that morning, at six o'clock, which 1 have every
morning. (The witness, a robust, coarse-looking man, in a
blue dress, prevaricated on the question being put whether
he had spoken to the girls in question, or had called any other
girls across the street.) To my knowledge I did not see the
policeman. I paid eightpence out of a shilling. I don't

know who it was for, Or whether it was for whiskey for him.
I emptied the bag of sovereigns or the table. I did not drop
one of them, nor did One of the girls pick it up, and would
not give it back. I counted my money (the sovereigns) at
my brother's house before I went to Edwards's. A man
named Beattie and another were present. When I found I
had lost my money I sent my wife for the police, and went
quietly to bed. 1 struck the aid and knocked her down. I
said I would have knocked my own wife down I was so pro-
voked, but I did not knock her down that night. I treated
one of the girls, named Connolly, on account of respect for
her father, who had worked for me. I struck her in the
morning. That was not out of respect for her father. Grif-
fiths works at timber.

Re-examined.--The fifty-one sovereigns was a large sum
for me to lose. I had worked for twenty-two years at the
docks, and the sum was nearly all I had. I pulled out my
bag of sovereigns at Edwards's to get at my silver, and Ed-
wards said, " Are these sovereigns, Jack ?" and I then threw
out my sovereigns. When I struck the woman I would have
struck any body, because Mr. Edwards said it was them that
took my money.
Hugh Beattie sworn.—l knew the last witness. His bro-
ther James keeps a public-house. It is about 200 yards
from his own house. 1 saw Shannon count out 51 sove-
reigns. He was not tipsy, but had had a drop of drink.
Cross-examined.—l am a labourer, but (he added, without
a question,) I never worked for Shannon. I don't know
why he counted his money. He did not assign any reason
for doing so, Griffiiths is not here.
John Moore.—Admitted that he had been in court during
part of the case, although the witnesses were all ordered to
retire. The counsel for the prosecution said he would not
examine him. Mr. Wilkins said he should object to his
examination for reasons which he should explain to the
jury.
Beattie recalled,by the Recorder.—There was no one pre-
sent when the prosecutor counted his money at his brother's
but myself and another.
Ann M'lntire said she was with the girl, Mary Cottony.
I went in, and Shannon, who was sitting in the window,
treated us to two-pennyworth a-piece. We afterwards had
two-pennyworth, which we paid for. The prisoner asked
me when I went, to come back and stop all night. Edwards
let us out, and I and Connolly went home to bed. The
policeman and Mrs. Shannon knocked us up, and we went
with them to Edwards's. We met another officer, an in-
spector, and he went with us. He knocked ; Edwards put
his head out at the window. Mrs. Shannon said he had got

her husband's money. He said that these were the girls that
were with Shannon, and he knew nothing about it. The
inspector told us to go home and be ready to come in the
morning at six o, clock. We both went to Norfolk-street,
to the prisoner's brother's, at that hour ; and we were told
to go and come at ten o'clock to Edwards's. We went at
that time. Shannon struck Mary Connolly, and she stag-
gered a little and fell on a seat. The prisoner went to the
bar, and stopped about ten minutes. He came back, drop-
ped a purse, stooped down and picked it up again, saying,
" What is this ?" Shannon said, " It's my purse, but it's
not the weight." The prisoner handed it to Shannon. If
the bag had been on the floor before, we should have seen it.
A girl had been washing and stoning the flagged floor, and
had finished that part when the purse was found.
Cross-examined.--I am an unfortunate girl. I have known
Maty Connelly about five years. I have known her as a girl
upon the town for two years. I did not speak to Shannon
that day, nor did Mary. Connelly. He did not beckon to
them in the street. I did not hear or see a policeman at
Edward's that night. I think it was a shilling Shannon put
down. He treated Edwards too. In the morning Shannon
struck Connelly, who wanted to speak to him ; but he did
not give her time. We were put into Bridewell on this
charge. I was not examined before the magistrates at all.
I have been before the magistrates I can't tell how often for
being tipsy. I have been before them for money—Xl 7s. Gd.
I got out, for the man did not come. The prisoner has a
son, a niece, and another girl in the house. I was more than
once before the magistrates for money. I don't know how
often. I got off every time. The men did not come. 1 did
not see him drop the purse. I only saw him pick it up. Mr.
Rushton asked us nothing, and discharged us.
Mary Connelly went with the last witness to prisoner's
house. Shannon was there sitting on one side the cellar.
He treated them and paid a shilling. They stood at the bar.
He was three yards from them. We went out, and the door
was bolted. Shannon was awake then. Witness gave, in
effect, evidence similar to the last, with the additic n that the
inspector informed Edwards, on knocking him up, that there
was a robbery. He said be knew nothing about us (the
girls), and did not open the door. There was a cry of fire,
and the inspector went away. She heard the purse fall when
it was dropped. (The witness did not know the difference
between a second and a minute, but said she thought that in
two or three minutes she could walk a foot !)
John Griffiths.—l was in the prisoner's house, when Shan-
non came in and struck Connelly. He was in a passion. The
prisoner came in after she was struck, and gave John Shan-
non the purse. She gave it to Shannon, and asked if it was
his. He said yes; but it is a deal lighter than it was this
morning between one and two o'clock. Shannon emptied it
into my hand, and it contained 12 sovereigns. When Shan-
non struck Connelly he said, " You d—d w— ! where is
my purse ? there are only you three for it." I did not know
where Edwards was when Shannon came in. I don't know
where he got the purse.
Cross-examined.—After Shannon got the purse, he said
one of the women had dropped it. Connelly might be 4or 5
feet off Edwards when the purse was given to Shannon.
Elizabeth Shannon, wife of Edward Shannon.—Was in the
house when the prosecutor struck Connelly. Edwards saw
the blow struck, and went into his bar, and was not five
minutes before he came out again with his hands in his
pockets. He pulled his right hand out of his right pocket.
I saw him drop the purse and heard it fall. He lifted it up.
I told my husband he was the man who had taken the money.
Griffiths said, with an oath, he could clear the girls of having
taken the money. I did not hear Shannon, when he swore
at Connelly, say that there were but those three for it.
John Curry, a police-officer, was present when the prisoner
was accused of taking the purse. He said he had only picked
it up, and that he supposed it must have fallen from the girl
Connelly's breast when she was knocked down. He searched
the prisoner's house, and found in a cloths-chest a purse con-
taining twelve sovereigns, and another containing £3los. Gd.
in silver.
Inspector Hamer was a short time at the door of the pri-
soner's house, early on the morning of the 7th of March, but
was called away, an alarm of fire having been given. He
saw no girls there while he remained.
This was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. WILKINS spoke at great length and with much elo-
quence in behalf of .the prisoner, contending that• some of
the evidence (which he commented on throughout) was sus-
picious, and the greater' part of it contradictory and false.
He contrasted the character of the prisoner, which had
hitherto been unblemished, with that of the abandoned
women who were the principal witnesses against him.

. .
.•
Mr. James Dempsey, merchant, had known the prisoner
for 17 years, and said he had borne a very excellent character.
Mr. Laurence Frost, had known the prisoner for 15 or 16
years, and also said he had been a good character.
Mr. Frost, who had known him for twelve years, also
spoke of him in high terms.
Mr. Hughes also said he had borne an excellent character
during the ten years he had known him.
Mr. Davies, a smith, had known him for thirty years, and
during all that time he had known him to bear the best of
characters.

Two others spoke equally favourable.
Mr. Laurence, brewer, said he had known him for ten
years, had never heard any thing against him, and so far as
he himself knew, he had found him to be a very respectable
man in his station in life.
The RECORDER then summed up the evidence. The jury
retired at half-past five o'clock, and in about an hour found
a verdict of Not Guilty. The prisoner was discharged.
Four cases of felony and six of misdemeanour remain to
be tried.'

TIIE TWELFTH REGIMENT OF FOOT.-011 Wednesday
forenoon last the " depot" of this regiment (which is now
stationed in the Mauritius) embarked on board the Actaeon
steamer for Glasgow, where they will relieve a portion of
another regiment, order ed elsewhere. They arrived here on
the previous day, from Brecon, in South Wales, whence they
marched in seven days, by. journeys of from sixteen to twenty
miles a day. The popr fellows appeared to be a good deal
fatigued on their arrival here. They were upwards of two
hundred strong, and were under the command of Mawr
M'Neill. About high water the vessel went out of dock, and
steered for her port of destination. The Twelfth Regiment
belongs to the county of Suffolk.
MONS. DoHLER'S GRAND CONCERT.—Mons.
whose fame as a pianist has spread throughout England, has
announced his intention of giving a grand concert at the
Royal Amphitheatre, on the evening of Tuesday next. He
will be supported in his exertions by Miss Birch and Miss
Dolby, two ladies who have established their reputation as
vocalists, by Signor Zuchelli, from the Italian Opera, Lon-
don, and the Teatro Valle, Rome, and by Herr Molique, a
foreign violin player, of surpassing merit. Mons. Miller's
taste and execution are of the very highest order, and, with
the popularity of the instrument on which he is such a pro-
ficient, there can be little doubt that few wl:o are themselves
players will lose the opportunity of bearing so splendid a
performer.