The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1835-05-01 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL , STAND ARD.

catholic might swear that he had no intention to substitute a
Roman catholic establisment instead of the protestant church,
and yet that he might attempt to subvert the latter if he had no
such intention of substitution. To meet this objection, I make
the Roman catholic swear positively that he has no intention to
subvert or injure."
Again replying to other members he said :
" I beg to ask whether the oath, as it now stands, is not suffi-
cient, recollecting that it is to be taken by members of parlia-
ment, for we are now only speaking OR in that view ?"
Again, when rejecting another distrustful amendment, he
said, with The same delicacy and confidence towards catholic
feeling and sincerity as marked the whole course of his observa-
tions :

" To call on the Roman catholics to swear, as I propose, is
going to the extreme point to which I think that we can go with
a person who is not of our religion—we are now speaking of the
oath to be tendered to Roman catholics claiming seats in parli•
meat."

In the same spirit of confidence and delicacy towards catholic
members, Mr. Secretary Peel objected to two other modes
which had been proposed at other times, as securities against
their hostile interposition; one was that they should be express-
ly excluded from taking part in discussions or measures affecting
the establishment; the other was that catholics should be per-
mitted to speak, but not permitted to vote, on such questions.
lie rejected both as being unnecessary, on account of the oath,
and also as being impracticable without offering offence.
In the 7th section of the declaration of the British Roman
catholic bishops, it is expressly stated on the obligation of an
oath, " He who takes au oath is bound to observe it in the obvi-
ous meaning of the words, or in the known meaning of the per-
son to whom it is sworn." Which declaration was adoptei in
and circulated with " an address from the British Roman catho-
tics to their protestant fellow-subjects ;" to which are affixed
the signatures of some of the most exalted and most estimable
members of the whole British community.
If it could be truly alleged that my construction of the intent
of the oath would place it in opposition to the views and expec-
tations of the catholic body, some difficulty might be raised in
reconciling it with the declared objects of the relief bill
generally; but so far from being opposed to those -views and
expectations, it was, on the contrary, in perfect unison and ac-
cordance with them. And here I may refer to the extract of a
letter from an Irish Roman catholic peer, read by Mr. Wilmot
Horton, in the course of the debate on the bill on the 18th of
March, 1829, and who read fully at the same time the seventh
section of the address of the British catholic prelates, to which I
have referred, in refutation, as he stated, of any calumnious
charges of the disregard of oaths by catholics. The right hon.
gentleman is reported to have said, that noble person observed,
in reference to .a proposal of restriction by Mr...Horton,—
" That, in prohibiting the catholics from legislating upon the
affairs of the established church, he (NIL. Horton) would exact
no sacrifice, but, on the contrary, afford them a relief from a
most disagreeable and irksome duty ; were it possible, indeed,
(continuer' the writer,) to suppose that the catholics --should be
admitted to parliament unfettered by any restrictions or disqua-
lifications, I should feel it my duty to act under the influence
Or such an opinion, and abstain from taking any part in the
discussion, when the subjesct of the privileges of the established
church came under consideration." (Hear, hear.)

In the year 1757, a declaration of principles was published by
the catholics of Ireland under the superintendence of the truly
illustrious Charles O'Couor, of Belenakire, Dr. Curry, a popular
Irish historian, and Mr. Wyse, of Waterford-, a catholic gentle-
man in every stay worthy to be associated with such colleagues.
The address was framed by Dr. O'Keefe, catholic Bishop of
Kildare. It commences thus : _ _ _

" Whereas certain opinions and principles, inimical to good
order and government, have been attributed to the catholics, the
existence of which we utterly deny; and whereas it is at this
time peculiarly necessary to remove such imputations, and to
give the most full and ample satisfaction to our protestant
brethren, that we hold no principle whatsoever, incompatible
with our duty as men or as subjects, or repugnant to liberty,
whether, political, civil, or religious—
" Now we, the catholics of Ireland, for the removal of all
such imputations, and in deference to the opinion of many re-
spectable bodies of men, and individuals among our protestant
brethren, do hereby, in the face of our country, of all Europe,
and before God, make this our deliberate and solemn declara.
It proceeds to disclaim several imputed doctrines, almost in
the terms subsequently adopted by Dr. Duigenan in 1793, in the
formation of the Roman catholic oath, contained in the relief
bill of that year. It concludes in the following terms ;
" 9th. It has been objected to us, that we wish to.subvert the
present church establishment, for the purpose of substituting a
catholic establishment in its stead. Now we do hereby disclaim,
disavow, and solemnly abjure any such intention; and fiirther,
if we shall be admitted into any share of the constitution, by
our being restored to the right of the elective franchise, we are
ready, in the most solemn manner, to declare, that we will not
exercise that privilege to disturb and weaken the establishment
of the protestant religion, or protestant government in this
country."
This declaration was afterwards republished and circulated
in 1803, 1825, and 1829; arid, in fact, upon every occasion when
the claims of the catholics were brought before parliament and
the public.
On the 23d of January, 1792, a petition of the Roman Catholics
of Ireland was introduced into the Irish House of Commons by
Mr. O'Hara. It contained the following declaration :
With regard to the constitution of the church, we are, in-
deed, inviolably attached to our own : First, because we believe
it to be true ; and next, because, beyond belief, we know that
its principles are calculated to make us, and have made us, good
men and good citizens. But as we find it answers to ns, indi-
vidually, all the useful ends of religion, we solemnly and con-
scientiously declare, that we are satisfied with the present con-
dition of our ecclesiastical policy. With satisfaction we ac-
quiesce in the establishment of the national church ; we neither
repine at its
.possestions, nor envy its dignities; we are ready,
upon this point, to give every assurance that is binding upon
than."

• In 1783, the Irish parliament passed an " Act for affording.
relief to his majesty's popish or Roman catholic subjects of
Ireland." It is stated to have been framed, particularly the
oath, by the late Dr. Duigenan, of anti-catholic notoriety; and
this fact would, of itself, - attach a 'character of cautious and
zealous restriction to that obligation. The part of the oath now
referred to is the following
"I do swear that I will defend, to the utmost of my 'sewer,
the settlement and arringement of property' in this country as
established by the laws now in being; I do hereby disclaim,
disavow, and solemnly abjure any intention to subvert the pre-
Sent church establishment, for the purpose' of substituting a
catholic establishment in its stead; and I do solemnly'swear,
that I will not exercise any privilege to which I am or may
become entitled, to disturb or weaken the protestant religion
and protestant government in this kingdom.—S6 help me. God."
This oath has been ever since embodied or referred to, as a
proof and pledge of our principles, in almost every speech that
has been made by our friends in parliament, and every catholic
petition to the legislature, address to the crown, or to our pro-
testant fellow subjects, speech at public meetings, pamphlet,
tract, or letter to a .public journal, or evidence before parlia-
Mentary committees.
' April, 1812, the petitions of the Roman catholics of Ireland
were presented to the lords and commons, containing the follow-
ing declaration:—
We beg leave humbly to state to this honourable house that
we have publicly and solemnly taken every oath of fidelity and
allegiance which the zealous caution of the legislature has, from
time to time, imposed as tests of our political and moral prin-
ciples. By those awful tests we have bound ourselves, in the
presence of the all-seeing Deity, whom all classes of christians
adore, to be faithful and bear true allegiance, &c. And by the
same solemn obligations, we are bound and firmly pledged to
defend, to the utmost of our power, the settlement and arrange-
ment of property in Ireland, as established by the laws now in
being. That we have declared, disavowed, and solemnly ab-
jured any intention to subvert the present church establish-
ment, for the purpose of substituting a catholic establishment
in its stead. And we have solemnly sworn that we will not
exercise any privilege to which we are or may become entitled,
to disturb and weaken the 'protestant religion or protestant
government in Ireland. We can, with perfect truth, assure
this honourable house that the political and moral principles
asserted by these solemn and special tests, are not merely in
unison with our fixed principles, but expressly inculcated by
the religion we profess. And we do must humbly trust that, as
professors of doctrines which permit such tests to be taken, we
shall appear to this honourable house to be entitled to the full
enjoyment of religious freedom under the constitution of these
realms. We can affirm with perfect sincerity that we have no
latent views to realise, no secret or sinister objects to attain.
Any such imputation must be effectually repelled, as we hum-
bly conceive, by the consideration of our numbers,
,our pro-
perty, our known principles, and character. Our object is
avowed and direct; earnest, yet natural; it extends to an equal
participation of the civil rights of the constitution of our coun-
try, equally with our fellow subjects of all other religious per-
suasions; it extends no further."
The speech of the present Lord Brougham, in the course of
the debate on that petition on the Nth April, 1812, will be found
to convey an unanswerable illustration of the correctness of my.
views.
To these extracts, for we must hasten to a conclusion,
we will merely add the evidence of Mr. O'conneil before
the House of Lords' committee, in 1825—the evidence
:of the Rev. Michael Collins before the same committee—
the sixth resolution for bringing in the ,Roman catholic
bill of 'lB2s—and Mr. Macdonnellis own suraming.up of
the argument : „
Daniel O'Connell, Esq., bitiiing been exam medlii&tre the
same committee of the House of-Lords on the 11th Maid, 1825,
deposed to the following effect (pages 537, 538)
I am quite certain there is no provision that the legislature
would think fit to make by law to prevent the possibility of 'any
danger of a catholic ascendancy, which would not be most
elteerfullyamd readily acceded to by the Irish catholics.
"Of what nature do you conceive any such provisions could
possibly be?—Only those provisions that would make the civil
liberties of the catholics depend upon this; the non-intioduc-
tion of any law, that would have a contrary tendency.
"Is there any
.species of pledge upon that subject which the
catholics, collectively or individually, would refuse to make ?
I am convinced there is not; there is no pledge which the legis-
lature would require upon that subject that the catholic% would
not be most ready to make; there is no provision which the legis-
lature could devise for that purpose that the catholics would not,
in my judgment, readily and cheerfully accede to, so as to secure
the state against any idea of a catholic ascendancy.
" Is it possible to suggest any provision beyond the oath by
which a catholic is now required to state that he will not make
use of any power he receives in the state towaris the overturn-
ing of the protestant establishment ?—I do not think there is,
except the connecting by interest with the protestant succession,
the catholic clergy as well as the catholic laity."
I shall now turn to the evidence of the catholic ecclesiastics.

The Rev. Michael Collins, then parish priest of Skibbereen,
and afterwards catholic Bishop of Cloyne and Ross, was ex-
amined:—
" Do you think, with respect to the establishments of the
country, with respect to the existing protestant church establish-
ments, that that would not remain a cause of complaint and
grievance ?—Not at all; the church establishment is a temporal
establishment, as connected with the constitution of the coun-
try; they have no jealousy on that score.
" Do von sincerely believe that, generally speaking, in the
minds of the Roman catholic clergy there is not any disposition
to disturb or dispossess the protestant hierarchy ?—1 do most
sincerely believe it, and would make the most solemn declara-
tion to that effect; I can undertake to say, that not a single
catholic clergyman in Ireland will contradict what I aver, that
they, as catholics, have no views whatsoever to the disturbance
of the establishment."
Again (page 75).
~" Do you think, when the disabilities were removed, that the
Roman catholics as a body would acquiesce in the present settle-
Went of' church property ?—I am satisfied they would."
.Sixth resolution—" Resolved that such act of repeal and
explanation should be accompanied with such exceptions and
regulations as may be found necessary for preserving unaltera-
bly the protestant succession to the crown, according to the act
for the further limitation of the crown, and better securing the
lights and liberties of the subject, and for maintaining invi-
olate the protestant episcopal elm ich of England and Ireland,
and the doctrine, government, and discipline thereof; and the
elthreti of Scotland, the doctrine, worship, government, and'

discipline thereof; as the same are by law respectively esta-
blished."

lst.—lf those declarations of catholics, collectively and indivi-
dually, lay and ecclesiastical, commencing in the year 1757,
and carried down uniformly till 1829, were not made for the
purposes which I state—Query, for what purpose wete they
made?
2nd.—lf those declarations, addresses, copies of catholic oaths,
petitions, tracts, and other publications of catholic societies,
and catholic individuals, were not circulated for the purposeS
which 1 state—Query, for what purposes were they circu-
lated ?
3rd.—lf the evidence given by catholics, lay and ecclesiastical,
before committees of parliament, was not given and circulated
for the purposes which 1 state—Query, fur what purposes was
it given and circulated?
4th.—lf the catholic oaths of 179:3, and 1829, were not framed
for the purpose which I state—Query, fur what purpose were
they framed ?
sth.—lf the object of government and parliament, In 1829, had
been to frame an oath in accordance with the declarations,
petitions, addresses, publications, and former oaths of the
catholics of both islands—Query, must they nut have framed
a form of oath conformable to the views which I profess to

entertain?
fith.—lf the object of government and parliament in 1829 had'
been also to frame an oath calculated to remove the honest
alarms and calm the apprehensions of opponents, and to pro-
vide some security by form of oath, to be taken by catholic
members of parliament, against the hostile exercise of their
privileges, es such members, in interfering with the rights
and privileges of the church establishment—Query, is not it
unreasonable to suppose that they must have intended that
the oath which they framed should be interpreted according
to my construction of its obligations ?
7th.-11 the catholics had required that the oath of 1829 should
be so framed as to enable catholic members of both houses to
speak and vote iu support of measures for the severance and
appropriation of the church property, or of any portion
thereof—Query, is it likely that the Duke of Wellington, Sir
Robert Peel, and the other members of the government at
that time, would have framed and proposed to parliament an
oath that would be intended by that government to admit of
such interpretation ?
Bth.—lf the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel had can-
didly stated to the King and the two -houses of parliament
that such was the intent and object of the oath, as, no doubt,
they must and would have done, if they had contemplated
such a construction—Query, is it probable oecredible that the
King or either house of parliament would have adopted any
form of oath framed for such purpose, or have passed any bill
of relief in which it would have been embodied ?
I own that, if I could feel justified in pressing these queries
upon the attention of some the catholic, nembers of the two
houses of parliament, I should be much tOmpted to intrude one
step farther, and to suggest that they might, with some advan-
tage, review their station with a degree of consideration not far
removed from caution, lest it may, some day or other, and that,
too, perhaps not a very distant day, be Made appear that, while
they fancied themselves exercising the authorities and enjoying
the dignities of command, they were, after all, really filling the
parts, not of masters and directors, but of` follovrers and instru-
ments; and that their advanced positiOn, at the head of the
legions of the movement, was not so much that of chieftains as
of pioneers.
I sin disposed to guard any obstinate or ill-advised opponent
to my views against holding the notion, that an acquiescence in
my sentiments would connect us with the maintenance or re-
vival in any degree of the old ascendancy.. Such a statement
or insinuation would be opposed to justice and to truth. The
catholic oath did not originate with protestants; it was not pro-
testant, either in its conception, its birth, or its growth. It is
substantially, literally, purely, emphatically, a catholic oath ;
suggested by catholics, desired by catholics, conceded to catho-
lics, framed in the spirit, and almost in the terms, proposed by
catholics, and taken by catholics. The declaration of 1757 em-
bodied that spirit and tuggested the oath, as we have already
seen, nearly forty years before the oath was enacted by the pro-
testant parliament of Ireland in 1793: The petition of 1792
also aided in the suggestion. And as to the oath of 1829, it was
preceded not only by that declaration 0ff757, hut by every one
of those pledges, declarations, petitions, and other publications
voluntarily emanating from catholics of both countries to which
I have referred; and, I am well convinced, I could truly add,
by hundreds, nay, thousands of others of similar import. The
fact being, that the protestant connexion of that oath of 1829,
"bath this extent, no more," that a protestant parliament re-
duced to the form of an oath, the professions, pledges, disposi-
tions, and declarations of the catholics. •
I conclude, therefore, with the repetition of my early declara-
tion, that if I were a member of either house of parliament, I
should not feel myself at liberty to vote or speak in support of
any measure having for its object the severance of any portion
of the church property from the establishment, for any purposes
whatever; and I should, of course, feel equally bound-to decline
being, directly or indirectly, connected with any resolution or
other proposition involving, expressly or by implication, a re-
cognition of the principle of such severance. Indeed, the more
vague and indistinct such resolution or proposition might be, the
more direct and resolute should be my abstinence from any
participation in its support. Ido not presume to direct the
conduct of others, but I desire to possess myself, as I now do, of
the means to prove, if necessary, at any future period, for the
vindication of my own consistency and good faith, or the fame
of my country, that he who had been, for some years, the agent
of the catholics of Ireland, if he did not control what he con-
scientiously considered to be the erroneous course of others,
had, at least, raised his warning voice against a course which,
in his opinion, tends, directly and expressly, to justify, not the
confidence and promises of friends, but the distrust and predic-
tions of enemies : a fact, inglorious and gallin though it be,
which a perusal of the debates in the House of Commons, even
for the single month of March, 1829, would most painfully, but
not less unquestionably, establish.
So far as to the Roman catholic members of the two houses of
parliament. One word, now, as to the proteitant members, or
rather, to speak more correctly, I should, perhaps, say, those
members who are not Roman catholics. Nothing could be more
simple or speedy than the course which it is in the power of any
one of them to pursue, who may question my Views ; moreover
he would possess the enormous advantage is having the most
recent precedents in favour of that courso. 444 u mcmuor (not
Roman catholic) give notice, on the reassembtbig of parliament,
in each house, that he will, on an early day, to be then fixed,
" call the attention of the house" to the $o to catholic oath,
and that he will move, also, for a "call of the house," and all
that sort of thing, in the way of awful note of preparation. Let
him, accordingly, on the day appointed, propose a resolution to
the following effect:—" That the Roman catholic oath contained
in the catholic relief act of 1829 was not intended to be any
security to the church establishment, or to
,CPntrol Roman ca-
tholic members, of either house or parliatnent, in the exercise
of their privilege of voting or speaking in parliament ; or to
guard against their introducing or supporting, any resolution or
other measure for altering the present settlement of the church
properly, or severing any portion thereof from the church esta-
blishment." -4

Without inconveniently embarrassing the House of Lords, by
any reference to their judgment on the matter, it might, perhaps,
be considered just as well to lecve it altogether to the commons
and the crown ; and an address to his majesty might be moved,
or, at least, threatened, humbly, most humbly, of course, sub-
mitting the above resolution to his majesty's most gracious
consideration, and soliciting, but not at all demanding, the
royal assent thereto.
!'here are some very peculiar reasons why I should look for-
ward with more than common curiosity to the speeches of some
of his majesty's present ministers on the occas►on, and to the
royal reply which would be given, under their advice.
We will not add a word, because we cannot add a word
that will not weaken the force of Mr. Macdonnell's rea-
soning. This pamphlet must settle the question as be-
tween the ehristians of England on one side, and the per-
jured (perhaps innocently, because from religious feeling
perjured) Roman catholics, and their oold and flagitious
suborners on the other. We hope that pains will be ta-
ken to place Mr. Macdonnell's pamphlet in every hand
before a week shall have passed away. So important do
we consider it, to the permanent mural interests of the
country, as well as to th%,interests for the time in jeo-
pardy,that we should affhost wish the learned gentle-
man's address to constitute until every one of its state-
ments and arguments shall be indelibly impressed upon
the minds of 'the people, almost the exclusive reading of
our fellow subjects.

Imports.
•
WEST INDIES AND MADEIRA.
Royal Mint, Rossall; fm Jamaica, with 3.59 hds 12 tcs sum, 56 pns
rum, 15 tcs 3 hf tcs coffee, 4 tcs pimento, abt 171 t logwood, abt 15 t
ebony, 80 lancewood spars, 48 dry hides, 1 bx arrowroot, 2 kgs tama-
rinds, 700 coco nuts, J B Yates and co-10 hds • sugar, J Redmavne-
-13 lids rum, J Cartmel-30 tes coffee, J Ridley-30 do, Order —5 pkgs
wearing apparel, abt 10 tlogwood, J Ridley-6 pns ruin, Order—a eke
sugar, 2 tea coffee, 50 lancewood spars, It Sproat—Cg Dk
Lima Packet, Cunningham, fin Trinidad-, with 299 lids 110 brls 12
tea sugar, W Carlisle-26 hds do, G and J Smith 3 hds I brls hf brls
do, 3:1 ps Bgnum vita:, 2 hf brim coffee, I'bx ginger and jelly, 2 has ar-
rowroot, 1 bx cocoa paste, 2 jars tamarinds, 1 cse sweetmeats, 1 jar
pickles, Ibx peppers, Order—a cords dunnage wood, For Exportation
—Q Dk •
SOUTH -AMERfCg.,.• •
Reform, Guild, fm Buenos *Ayres 'stud yore. Video, with (from
Buenos Ayres, 1585 salted ox hides, 50'1lninz Ary ox hides, 55 bales
mixed horse hair, 35 bales sheep skins,.:l 1%114a5-horse hides, 1 bale
biscacha and 4 baks natri,a Order—Misled ox hides, .1 Green
and co-1073 do, 3 hxs B minitifactures,ll Carbile and co-20;a00 ox
hones, C and J C Shaw—(from Monte Video) 30 bales horse hair, 15
bales horse hides, Order —K Dk
UNITED STATES.'
Mulgrave Castle, Wlldredge, fin New York, with 1 hd sarsaparilla,
F Rea-6 es conts unkn, Order—lo bales wool, Baring, Bros arid co—
abt 88 t Cam peachy wood, Order-881 t fustic, 'J Hobson and Sons-
-173 bales cotton,' liathbone, Bros and co-93 t Cuba fustic, S Boult-
-20 t fustic, 20 chts coots unkn, 1 bls jalap, 6 hales sarsaparilla, Leech
and Harrison-4 cs conts unkn, Durand and M.Farlane-1 ppe wine
cased, H Muire-65 t Savanilla fustic, Rathbone, Bros and cu-2 chts
,clothing Mrs Crane—Q Dk
Mary'Hudson, 'Johnson, fin Charleston, with 10596 bus paddy,
Watson, Simpson & co-115 bags cotton, W Stewart-20 do, W Bower
and Sons-101 do, J Greaves-8 do, A Taylor and co-1 brl grist, C
Simpson—G Dk

g-.bippinq Etnalignite.

TUESDAY, APRIL 2S.—Noon, Wind E.—Fresh breeze.

ARRlVED—Elizabeth, Gibson, from Ardglass—Ballinasloe, Jones,
Dublin—Nancy, Sloane, Dublin—Wellington, Evans, Cardiff—Catha-
rine, White, Dundee—Tiger, M'Alpir), Glasgow and Greenoek—Wil-
liam and Mary, Donaldson, linapdale—Marys, M•Garven, Drumore
—Flora, Duff, Port William—Shawtield, M'Gilvray, Islay—Zephrr,
Gentle, Glasgow—John O'Gaunt, Park, Lancaster—Queen Adelaide,
Watterson, Campheltown—Woodcock, Wright, Chester.
- -

. - - • -
Samtn—Racer, Dunn ; and Boyne, Forster, fur Madeira—Parsee,
M•Kellar, Bombay—Aretbusa, Hutchinson, Barbados—George Cabot,
Martin: and Charles Ferdinand, Nl•Kenzie, for Havana—Christopher
Columbus, Huelin, Bay Chalet:T.—Robert, Gardner; and Mary Laing,
Shearer, for Montreal—Lian Rumney, Mosey ; and Camperdowtr,
Farrage, for Miramichi—Quintin Leitch, Mackay : Samuel, Jameson ;
Catherine, Cowan ; and John, Raisbeck, for Quebec—Reward, Tickle,
Restigouehe—Transfer, Wakehain ; Eliza Ann, Carruthers Camilla,
Corkill ; Maria, Blake ; Eaveretta, Skinner; and Quebec Packet,
Brough, for Newfoundland—William, Lamour, Charleston—Arcadia,
Donaldson ; and Elizabeth, Wilson, for New Orleans—Matchless,
Bence, Vera Cruz—lris, Watts, Bahia—Arethusa,Turner, Ancona,
&c—Amphitrite. Davie, Leghorn—Mariotc, Storey, Charente, &c
Gesina, Truly. Amsterdam—Maria Brandt. Grotian, Archangel—
F.dmond. Monk, Copenhagen—Wilhelrnine, Hammer; and Antonio,
Spelman, for Elsineur—WO-hitahrt. Kruger, Hanzburgh—Thomas Ba-
ring, Payne, Marva—Andrea, Christen, Ostend—Acorn, James, Riga
—Vigilant, Langdon ;.Flora, Rooderkirk ; Vier Gebroedera, Bakker;
Hoop, Guyt; and Industrie, Vander Duenbooden, for Rotterdam—
Flora, Knutson, for Tonsberg.

The Cestrian, Killock, from Bombay, at Calcutta, the 29th Dec.
Magnet. M'ltlinn, hence and Rio de 3nneiro, at Calcutta, do.
Fuerie Qucene, Snipe, from the Mauritius, at do.
Brian Born. Harrison, from Manilla, at Singapore, rd sailed 4th
' December for this port.
-Rival, Briscoe, hence, at Jamaica, in 42 days,
Isabella, Tait, from Demerara, at Leith.
The Paddy of Cork, —__—, from Trieste for this port, off Milford.
WRECK•PJEAR RHYL—At four this morning, the flat Thomas. of
Liverpool, John Pye, master, sunk in the Channel, near Rhyl. The
crew, consisting of three men, took to the rigging, where they re-
mained until eleven, when they were rescued" from their perilous
situation by the Point of Ayr life-boat. At the time a messenger
arrived at die life-boat station, requiring assistance, the boat was at
the West Hoyle, where she was sent at six o'clock in the morning to
the assistance of the No. 1. Liverpool pitot-boate which had a very
narrow escape from being lost.

OPHTHALMIC INFIRMARY, SLATER-STREET,
Established A.D. 1820.

New Patients admitted during the month of April
Patients prescribed for, and who have received•surgical assist-
ance during the month of April
Number since the commencement 19,222

Consulting Surgeon. Mr. Christian.
Surgeons. Mr. Edwards and Mr. Neill.—Treasurer.:Mr. J. Knowles.
Visiters, Rev. T. Bold and Mr. liannier.