The second reading of the Attorneys' Certificates Bill stitutional.-Mr. H. DRUMMOND disapproved of th was moved on the 15th, by Lord R. GROSVENOR, who commission: if the crown or the house assumed th reminded the house of the circumstances under which power to inquire how corporations used their property. the introduction of the bill had been carried against the what was to protect the queen from an inquiry how the government, and hoped that the house would adhere to queen used her property? He admitted that the uniits former resolution. The CHANCELLOR OF THE EX-versities had been negligent of their duties, but this CHEQUER, on moving the rejection of the bill, adverted was not the way to remedy the evil.-Mr. GLADSTONE to the canvassing out of doors, and observed that if the was certain that any investigation into the state of the house was prepared to repeal taxes to the amount of universities would redound to their honour, but any 100,000l., there were many other taxes much fitter for commission to that effect would violate the principle of remission. The general charges of the profession would local freedom to which Englishmen owed their capacity not be lowered by the repeal of this duty, so that the for self-government. Supposing that the colleges had public would derive no benefit from it.-Mr. Mullings lagged behind the age, state interference should be and Mr. Muntz spoke in favour of the bill; and Mr. Bass delayed until the fact had been established, and then and Mr. Goulburn against it.-Mr. BRIGHT said that the only proper interference was an act of parliament.though he had formerly voted in favour of the bill, yet, Lord John RUSSELL argued for the legality and expeas a general revision of taxation must take place next diency of a royal commission, and concluded by saying session, which would be the fittest time to consider all that if the house refuse to permit the crown to make this taxes of this character, he should at present vote with inquiry, it will do much to keep back the universities the government. The second reading was carried by in the course of improvement, which they themselves 239 to 122; a majority of 17 against the government. are willing to adopt. After some further debate Mr. Stuart withdrew his amendment.-Sir G. GREY then moved that the debate be adjourned for three months, which was carried by 160 to 138; the vote being in effect in favour of the commission. On the 16th, at the end of the morning sitting, Mr. F. SCOTT moved that the house should adjourn till the following day in token of respect to the memory of the late Duke of Cambridge. After some hesitation on the part of Mr. Labouchere, the motion was agreed to. The Copyhold Enfranchisement Bill was considered in committee on the 17th. Before going into committee, a motion by Sir G. STRICKLAND, that the bill be committed that day three months, was negatived by 49 to 40. In committee, several amendments were agreed to, and the chairman reported progress, in order to give Mr. Aglionby an opportunity of revising the measure; leave being given to sit again on Wednesday next. On the motion for the second reading of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Bill, Mr. S. CRAWFORD moved the second reading that day three months, and described it as one of several bills sent down from the other house, the object of which might be described as being to facilitate extermination; and this at a time when the tenantry of Ireland were calling for a just measure of relief and protection, which would not be granted." The bill was also opposed by Mr. Bright, Mr. Anstey, and Mr. Hume. -Sir W. SOMERVILLE defended the bill against the charge of being a landlords' measure. The present system of fraudulent removal of crops called for a remedy, but he was willing to modify, in committee, any part of the bill which might be thought harsh to tenants. The debate was interrupted at six o'clock, by the SPEAKER adjourning the house. The debate on Mr. Heywood's motion for an address, praying the issue of a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the State of the Universities, adjourned from the 23rd of April, was resumed on the 18th.-Mr. R. PALMER contended that there was no necessity for such a commission. There was no foundation for the assertion that the statutes of the colleges prohibit the introduction of new courses of study; and with regard to the birth preferences and local preferences in the election of fellows, &c., a just and liberal interpretation of the statutes would generally carry out the purpose of the founders. It ought not to be forgotten what the colleges themselves had already done in this respect. In the University of Oxford, within the last twenty or thirty years, no fewer than twelve out of the nineteen colleges had spontaneously adopted a sounder and more liberal interpretation of the wills of their founders and had opened the colleges to merit of every description; and the others, if a spirit of resistance were not created by ill-judged interference, would soon follow their example. The crown, without any commission or legislative interference, had a right as visitor of the colleges, to introduce improvements and correct abuses; but this power had fallen into abeyance through the neglect of the advisers of the crown.-Sir G. GREY defended the course which the government intended to pursue, and which had been announced by Lord John Russell. The government would advise the crown to issue a commission of inquiry, though they could not support| Mr. Heywood's motion. Mr. J. STUART moved an amendment to the effect that any advice to issue a royal commission of inquiry into the management of any colleges not of royal foundation was illegal and uncon On the order for committing the Attorneys' Certificate Bill, the CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER moved that the committee be deferred for three months; but the motion was negatived by 105 to 103. The bill then went through the committee, several amendments being carried after considerable discussion. On the 19th in answer to a question from Mr. Foster, whether the Post Office Inquiry had commenced, Lord John RUSSELL said that it had, and that it was conducted by Lord Clanricarde, Mr. Labouchere and Mr. Grey.-The house went into committee on the queen's message respecting a Grant to the Family of the late Duke of Cambridge.-Lord John RUSSELL, after a variety of explanations, proposed to allow the present Duke of Cambridge the sum of 12,0001. per annum, and that the Princess Mary of Cambridge should have 30007. per annum.-Mr. HUME objected to the amount of the allowance to the Duke of Cambridge, and moved that it should be 80007. Mr. Bright concurred with Mr. Hume. The original proposition was supported by Mr. Disraeli, the Marquis of Granby and Sir H. Inglis; and the amendment was negatived by 206 to 53.-Mr. HUME then moved that the grant should be 10,0007., which was negatived by 177 to 55, and the resolution was agreed to. The house then went into a committee of supply and various sums were voted. The vote of 24,0801. for the Civil Establishments on the Western Coasts of Africa met with considerable opposition. It was objected to by Mr. COBDEN, as being an unnecessary extension of our colonial establishments and a further outlay on a fresh fruitless plan for exterminating the slave trade. Mr. Cobden was supported by Mr. Hume, Mr. M. Gibson, Mr. Hutt, and Mr. Jackson; the vote was supported by Lord Palmerston, Mr. Forster, Mr. Cardwell, and Sir E. Buxton. On a division it was carried by 138 to 42. On Monday the 22nd, Lord John RUSSELL intimated that he did not intend to proceed this session with the Oath of Abjuration (Jews) Bill, the state of the business of the house not admitting of it, but that he meant to go on with it at the earliest possible period next session. On the motion for going into a committee of supply, Mr. HUME moved for the production of all Despatches from British Guiana, since May last. He produced many allegations of grievance on the part of the colonists, which he traced to the constitution of the colony, where the casting vote given to the governor rendered him independent of local control.-Lord John RUSSELL declined to enter into statements founded on despatches not yet officially received, but denied the truth of the allegation that the governor by his casting vote constantly defeated motions for reform. The motion was then negatived. In the committee of supply a number of votes belonging to the colonial, the consular and the civil services were disposed of. The vote of 69147. on account of the settlement of Labuan, gave rise to a long discussion, in which the conduct of Sir James Brooke was impugned by Mr. Hume and Mr. Cobden, and defended by Mr. Aglionby, Mr. Drummond, and others. Mr. COBDEN objected to the vote for the consular establishments in China, and moved an amendment, which was negatived by 166 to 34.-Mr. C. LUSHINGTON objected to the vote of 1,6951. to distressed dissenting ministers, which was repugnant to the dissenting body itself.—Lord John RUSSELL said this was an extraordinary statement, seeing that the dissenters had been in the habit of receiving it ever since 1723. On a division the vote was agreed to by 147 to 72. The House having resumed, the Ecclesiastical Commission Bill was read a third time and passed, after some discussion on certain additional clauses. On the motion for the third reading of the Attorneys' Certificates Bill, the CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER moved the third reading that day three months, which was carried by 113 to 84, and the bill consequently thrown out. bill as opening a door to fraud.-Sir G. GREY said the bill came entirely within the spirit of the reforin act; and Sir E. N. Buxton also supported it. The bill was read a second time, by 80 against 24. The second reading of the Sunday Trading Prevention Bill was moved by Mr. C. PEARSON, who said that the measure was not intended for the rich or the middle class, but for the working poor, whose day of rest it guaranteed from interruption, and saved them from the hardship of giving seven days' labour for six days' wages. He admitted that some of the details of the bill were objectionable, but they could be struck out in committee. The bill was read a second time. On the 25th, Mr. BAILLIE went at some length into a statement respecting certain proclamations alleged to have been issued by Captain Watson during the disturbances in Ceylon, the signature to which had been declared by him to be a forgery; and asked Lord John Russell to lay on the table a report received from the commissioners On Tuesday the 23rd, the Medical Charities (Ireland) appointed to inquire into this matter, who had proBill was considered in committee, and several amend-nounced the signature to be genuine.-Lord John ments were agreed to. RUSSELL said that the report of the commissioners was hurried and incomplete, but was to be followed by a fuller report accompanied by documents. When this was received the whole would be produced. Colonel DUNNE moved for leave to bring in a Bill to amend the Irish Poor Law, explaining, that the principal design of the measure was to limit the power of giving out-door relief. Mr. P. Scrope and Major Blackall opposed the motion, and Mr. French supported it. Sir G. GREY consented to the bill being brought in, guarding himself from being supposed, on the one hand, to be wholly against the principle of out-door relief, or, on the other, to recommend the resumption of public works on a large scale, such as were formerly commenced during the pressure of famine.-Mr. STAFFORD, in supporting the motion, expressed his regret that there was little room to doubt the failure, to a considerable extent, of the present year's potato crop in Ireland. After some further observations, leave was given to bring in the bill. Colonel SIRTHORP moved a resolution that the Income Tax on Tenant-farmers should be removed after the present year. The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER said that the cause of the farmers should not be separated from that of other industrial classes. The motion was supported by Mr. Buck, Mr. Newdegate, Mr. Wodehouse, and Mr. Disraeli.-Mr. BRIGHT adhered to his general objections to the income tax, but saw no special grievance in the case of the farmer, and looked upon the motion as a mere topic for agitation. The motion was negatived by 50 to 32. Mr. ADAIR, having moved, on the 24th, the second reading of the Poor Relief (Cities and Towns) Bill, was prevailed upon not to press his motion at this period of the session; it having been stated by Mr. Baines and Sir G. Grey that the whole subject was under the consideration of the Poor Law Board, and would undergo the careful consideration of government during the recess. Lord NAAS moved an address, praying Her Majesty to order measures to be taken to insure immediate Steam Communication with Australia, and adverted to the great inconveniences of the present length of the voyage, generally 120 or 130 days, while by steam it could be accomplished in 70.-The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER could not consent to the motion, though he admitted the importance of the object. Government had been anxious to make an arrangement with the East India Company, but it had not been accomplished. The Peninsular and Oriental Company had made a tender to extend the steam communication to Singapore, Hong-Kong, and Australia, but the East India Company who were parties to the existing arrangement, had declined to ratify the arrangement proposed, which could not, therefore, be effected till the termination of the existing contract.-Sir J. HOGG complained that this statement was unfair to the East India Company. After some further discussion the motion was negatived. Mr. HUME called the attention of the House to the present restrictions on the Admission to St. Paul's Cathedral, and observed that a more liberal system had been adopted in Westminster Abbey.-Sir G. GREY said that this subject was under consideration, with a view to the removal of these restrictions. In committee of supply a number of votes were agreed to. The third reading of the Charitable Trusts Bill, after opposition from Mr. Turner and Mr. Goulburn, was carried by 96 to 53, and the bill, with some amendments, passed. In moving the second reading of the Compound Householders Bill, Sir W. CLAY explained that its object was to remove a grievance affecting a numerous class of householders. At present, if the owner of a house compounded with the parish officers for the pay-members of the City of London; long before twelve ment of the parochial rates, the overseers had no power to return the name of the occupants to the returning officer as entitled to vote in the election of members to serve in parliament. The tenants of proprietors who, under local acts, compounded for their rates, though they occupied tenements to a higher value than 10%., were not allowed to be placed upon the register only after payment of the existing rate; consequently after every rate they were obliged to make a fresh application. The effect of this system was that great numbers of persons in the metropolis and other places who, according to the spirit of the reform bill, were entitled to be upon the register were disfranchised. This bill would obviate the necessity of parties so placed making incessant claims; in short it would place them, in this respect, upon a par with county voters who, having once substantiated a claim, were not under the necessity of renewing it so long as they remained in the occupation of the same house. They were, however, relieved from none of the conditions of residence or payment of rates which were required by the reform act.-Mr. Newdegate, Mr. Spooner, and Sir H. Willoughby, opposed the On the 26th, in consequence of the general understanding that it was the intention of Baron Rothschild to present himself at the table of the House of Commons and require to be allowed to take bis seat as one of the o'clock the lobbies of the House of Commons were crowded to excess by members of the Jewish persuasion, anxious to witness the arrival of the Baron. This anxiety was also manifested on the part of the members, who flocked in crowds to the house in order to be present at the novel ceremony of one of the Jewish nation presenting himself at the table of the house as one of its members, and desiring to be sworn on the Old Testament. Baron Rothschild appeared in the lobby at twelve o'clock, and was loudly cheered. The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'clock, when there was an unusually full attendance of members. - Baron Rothschild appeared at the bar of the house, introduced by Mr. Page Wood and Mr. John Abel Smith. As he advanced up the floor of the house to the table he was loudly cheered by members on both sides. The clerk at the table placed the customary oath in his hands and was about to swear the honourable gentleman upon the New Testament, when he was interrupted by Baron ROTHSCHILD, who said in a loud and clear voice, “ I desire to be sworn on the Old Testament."-Sir R. II. INGLIS— I protest against that. Baron Rothschild was then mittee.-Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Universities; adjournment of debate carried by 160 to 138-Attorneys Certifi cate Bill; motion for commitinent carried against ministers; passed through Committee. ordered to withdraw, and withdrew accordingly amid Poor Relief Bill passed through committee.-Mr. Ewart's motion. the cheers of the house.-Sir R. H. INGLIS then moved, against Death-punishment negatived. as a resolution; that it had been the practice of this 12th.-Medical Charities (Ireland) Bill considered in Comcountry ever since it had been Christian, to regard all mittee. New writs for Tamworth, Southampton, and Devonport.-Monument to Sir R. Peel. the members of its supreme legislature, whether Lords 15th.-Mercantile Marine Bill (No. 2) considered in Commitor Commons, as bound by Christian obligations; and, tee.-Attorneys Certificate Bill read a second time.-Ecclesiastitherefore, when any one approached that table to take cal Commission Bill considered in Committee.-Marriages Bill part in the deliberations of that house, he ought not to passed. be permitted to take such part without first having taken 16th.-Mercantile Mariné Bill considered in Committee. upon him the obligations of a Christian solemnity.—Mr.mittee.-Smoke Prohibition Bill thrown out on second reading. 17th.-Copyhold Enfranchisement Bill considered in ComHUME asked if the honourable baronet would have any 18th.-Mercantile Marine Bill further considered in Comobjection to embody in his motion the words, that Baron Rothschild had been chosen and elected by the citizens of London. This question gave rise to considerable uproar, in the midst of which Sir R. Inglis's reply, if he made any, was lost.-A debate ensued which was adjourned to the Monday following, and Mr. B. OSBORNE gave notice that on resuming the debate, he should move, as an amendment, that Baron Rothschild, one of the members for the City of London, having presented himself at the bar of the house, and having requested that an oath should be administered to him on the Old Testament, the form which he believed to be most binding on his conscience, that the clerk of the house be directed to administer to him the oaths of allegiance and supremacy upon the Old Testament. PROGRESS OF BUSINESS. House of Lords.--June 27th. Crime and Outrage Act Continuance Bill read a third time. 28th.-Drainage and Improvement of Lands Advances Bill read a third time and passed.-Australian Colonies Bill reported. -Metropolitan Interments Bill and Board of Health Bill read a second time. July 1st.-Parliamentary Voters (Ireland) Bill considered in committee; Lord Dysart's amendment carried against ministers. 2nd.-Educational Grants, motion for select committee nega tived. time. 4th.-Metropolitan Interments Bill referred to a select committee. Larceny Summary Jurisdiction Bill read a second 5th.-Parliamentary Voters (Ireland) Bill in Committee: amendment carried against ministers.-Australian Colonies Bill read a third time and passed. time. 8th.-General Board of Health Bill passed through Committee. -Court of Chancery (Ireland) Bill, Factories Bill, County Courts Extension Bill, and Benefices in Plurality Bill, read a third 9th.-Parliamentary Voters (Ireland) Bill reported.--Electors (Ireland) Bill and Inspection of Coal Mines Bill, read a second time.-Metropolitan Interments Bill considered in Committee. General Board of Health Bill read a third time and passed. 11th.-Benefices in Plurality Bill read a third time.-Inspection of Coal Mines Bill committed pro forma.-Larceny Summary Jurisdiction Bill passed through Committee. 12th.-Court of Chancery Bill, Metropolitan Interments Bill. and Parliamentary Voters (Ireland) Bill, read a third time and passed.-County Courts Extension Bill referred to a Select Com 19th.-Mercantile Marine Bill further considered in Com mittee.-Provision for family of the late Duke of Cambridge.Committee of Supply; vote for establishments on Coast of Africa. carried. 22nd.-Mercantile Marine Bill passed through Committee.— Jews Oath of Allegiance Bill laid aside this session.-Committee of supply. Ecclesiastical Commission Bill read a third time and passed.-Attorneys Certificates Bill thrown out on third reading. 23rd.-Medical Charities (Ireland) Bill considered in Committee. -Irish Poor Law Amendment Bill brought in. 24th.- Poor Relief (Cities and Towns) Bill withdrawn.-Compound Householders Bill, and Sunday Trading Prevention Bill, read a second time.- Copyholds Enfranchisement Bill thrown out. 25th.-- Mercantile Marine Bill, and Medical Charities (Ireland) Bill considered in Committee.-Committee of supply. General Board of Health Bill and Charitable Trusts Bill read a third time and passed. An illustration of the abuses in the exercise of the Right of Petition is to be found in a parliamentary document just issued. The Liverpool Corporation Water-Works Bill, now pending before the House of Lords, has been keenly opposed, and a petition, purporting to proceed from 18,000 rate-payers, was presented against it. In consequence of some suspicious appearances, this petition was referred to a select committee, who have reported that a great number of the names attached to the petition are spurious, and that the petitioners have no locus standi, and are not entitled to be heard. The following facts are extracted from the minutes of evidence:-Mr. Uriah Phipps, a lawstationer, swore that from 900 to 1000 of the signatures were in the handwriting of some copying clerk who had been employed in his own office. Mr. Arnaud, the keeper of a spirit vault, described the proceedings of five agents employed to procure signatures. He stated that these persons did their day's work in his premises. They filled up the required number of sheets with the first names that came into their heads; and then took the sheets into the yard, and threw a bucket of water over them, and over their own hats, to make it appear that they had been out, carrying the papers from place place in the rain. Between forty and fifty agents were employed at 4s. 6d. a day each, and a diligent agent was expected to bring in three sheetsfuls of names in a day. One of these men was in the habit of going to the first house in a court, ascertaining the names of the inhabitants and putting them all down; another avowed that he never troubled himself about getting rate-payers to sign after the first day: "When I found the thing was so slightly slurred over, I thought it would be useless to take so much trouble." This man, whose name is M'Arthur, also gave evidence, which Mr.showed that his employers could scarcely have been ignorant of his mode of proceeding. This appears from the following extract:-"When you have been employed 4th.-Business of the Session.-Site of Exhibition; Colonel in getting signatures for other petitions in Liverpool, Sibthorp's and Sir B. Hall's motions negatived.-Home-made have you acted in the same manner as this case ?—Yes; Spirits in Bond Bill read a second time. it is quite a common custom. To draw upon your 5th.-Repeal of Malt Tax; Mr. Cayley's motion negatived.-imagination?-Yes. It is a common custom, when you. mittee. considered in Committee. 15th.-County Rates Extension Bill reported.-Factories Bill 16th.- Landlord and Tenant Bill thrown out on second read-to ing.Elections (Ireland) Bill reported.-Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Bill read a third time and passed. 18th-Elections (Ireland) Bill read a third time and passed. County Courts Extension Bill considered in Committee. 19th.-Inspection of Coal Mines Bill and Factories Bill read a third time and passed. 22nd.-Breach of Privilege; parties committed to Newgate.County Courts Extension Bill read a third time and passed. 23rd.-Population Bills and Militia Ballot Suspension Bill read a third time and passed. 25th.-Marriages Bill withdrawn for this session. House of Commons.-June 28th.-Vote of Confidence; Railways Abandonment Bill read a third time and passed. 9th-Mercantile Marine Bill in Committee.-Mr. Locke King's motion on the County Franchise negatived.--Mr. Locke's motion on Sunday Post-office Labour negatived, and amendment carried. 10th-Marriage Bill read a third time. are employed in Liverpool to get signatures to a petition, to retire to a public-house, and make out an imaginary list ?--Yes. The parties employing us expect a physical impossibility. If they do not know that, common sense ought to teach them." The Lords' committee conclude their report by saying that " they were imperatively called upon to take measures that might have a tendency to deter, for the future, such shameful practices as would inevitably (if continued) render the right of petitioning 156 (so valuable to the subjects of this empire) a perfect farce." It will be seen in our parliamentary narrative that this matter was taken up by the House of Lords on the 23rd. A deputation of London weekly newspaper proprietors waited on the Marquis of Clanricarde, the PostmasterGeneral on the 3rd, to induce the government to rescind the last Post Office Regulations as to Sunday Deliveries. In reply to their representations the marquis said that his own opinion and that of the government was, that the arrangements in question would be inconvenient, yet there were objections to the crown opposing the wishes of the people, as expressed by their representatives; that though it might be said that the vote did not really represent the feeling of the country, yet it had not been hastily brought forward, and there had been sufficient time to oppose it; that, however, he believed the matter would be again brought forward on an early day, and if the House of Commons chose to reverse its decision, he individually, and he took it for granted, all the other members of the government, would agree that the original arrangement should at once be reverted to. The Criminal Tables for the Year 1849 have been laid There was a meeting at Reading on the 6th, got up to be considered as a war à l'outrance on the part of the The question of Smithfield Market is under discussion The Secretary of in the Court of Common Council. State having transmitted to that body the report of the royal commission, which recommended the discontinuance of that market and the establishment of a new cattle market in a place without the City; and having desire to know whether the corporation were willing to construct the new market and undertake its supervision; this communication was referred to the market improvement committee. At a special court on the 11th, the report of this committee was brought up. It objects, at great length, to the recommendation of Her Majesty's commissioners, and concludes as follows:-"Under all these circumstances, therefore, and upon every consideration, as well for the benefit of the public at large, as of the citizens of London in particular, your committee cannot but express their firm and unaltered opinion, that the suggestion for the removal of Smithfield market is, without any adequate reason, founded upon public considerations for the present, or any certainty as to its effect for the future." A debate ensued, which after adjournment, was terminated on the 23rd, when the report was agreed to. On the Conciliation Hall has been finally closed. 15th the weekly rent was only 47. 10s.; on which Mr. John O'Connell moved that the association should adjourn sine die, as they were in debt, and had lost all control over the hall. The motion was carried in solemn silence, and the meeting (a very small one) broke up. The annual dinner of the Society for the Reform of Colonial Government took place at Greenwich on the 17th. Lord Monteagle presided; and the principal speakers were Sir W. Molesworth, the Bishop of Oxford, Mr. Hume, Mr. Adderley, and Mr. Lowe, of New South Wales. The Royal Agricultural Society held its annual meeting this year at Exeter. The principal day was Thursday the 18th, when there was a great show of cattle and other farm stock and machinery, followed by a dinner, at which the chair was occupied by the Marquis of Downshire, the President of the Society. Among the numerous company were the French and American ambassadors, who both addressed the meeting, expressing their admiration of the state of agriculture in England. The National Reform Association held a great meeting on the 17th at Wymondham, in Norfolk. It was estimated that 5000 persons were present, comprising many belonging to the agricultural classes. The Sheriff of Norfolk presided. The principal speakers were Sir Joshua Walmesley, Mr. G. Thompson, Mr. A. Mackay, and Mr. T. M'Enteer, who formed the metropolitan deputation, and two local members, Sir Thomas Beever, and Mr. Tillett, of Norwich. A meeting-described as an aggregate meeting of the clergy of the Church of England and the lay members of her communion-was held in St. Martin's Hall, LongAcre, on the 23rd. Its object was to protest against the decisions of the several courts of law in the Gorham Case; to address the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to take other steps to prevent the order of the Court of Arches to induct Mr. Gorham to the vicarage of Brampford Speke from being carried into effect. It is estimated that about 2000 persons were present. The chair was occupied by Mr. J. G. Hubbard; and the Bishop of Bath and Wells, Archdeacon Wilberforce, Archdeacon Thorpe, Archdeacon Bartholomew, Archdeacon Manning, Viscount Feilding, Earl Nelson, Lord John Manners, and the Rev. Dr. Pusey, were among the persons on the platform. The meeting was addressed at great length by the chairman, the Bishop of Bath and Wells, Archdeacon Wilberforce, and others; and resolutions in accordance with the objects of the meeting were unani mously adopted.-Owing to the overflow of St. Martin's Hall, a supplementary meeting was held in Freemasons' Hall, over which Viscount Feilding presided. Dr. Pusey addressed the meeting, and the same resolutions as those proposed in St. Martin's Hall were adopted. alderman cut short his oratory;-"You are one of three things, insane, mischievous, or seeking notoriety; I believe you are the two latter." He was ordered to find bail and removed in custody. The Court of Queen's Bench gave judgment, on the 6th, in the Case of Barber. This gentleman, it will be remembered, was tried in 1844 on several charges of fraud and forgery, in conjunction with a person of the name of Fletcher, and sentenced to trans The late Henry Robertson Hartley, Esq., of Southampton, has Left the Bulk of his Fortune, amounting to 80,000l., to the corporation of that town, to be applied in such manner as may promote the study of natural history, astronomy, antiquities, and classical and oriental litera-portation for life. In 1848, after enduring_great hardture, by forming the requisite institutions for those purposes. It is to be regretted that, from the inaccurate preparation of the will, a suit in Chancery will be necessary to give it effect. The building committee for the Exhibition of 1851, has accepted the tender of Mr. Paxton to erect in Hyde Park a building chiefly of iron and glass. It is to be of wood-work to the height of eighteen feet, and arrangements have been made to provide complete ventilation and secure a moderate temperature. The building is to be made in Birmingham and the neighbourhood. Messrs. Fox, Henderson, and Co., of the London Works, at Smethwick, have the contract for the iron framework; Messrs. Clance, of Spon Lane, will supply the enormous quantity of glass required; and the tubes are also entrusted to a firm in the district. These three materials constitute, in fact, the entire building. A meeting of Electors of the City of London was held on the 25th, summoned by Baron Rothschild, to consider what course ought to be adopted by him in consequence of the Parliamentary Oaths bill being laid aside for this session. After considerable discussion, in which Baron Rothschild himself, Mr. J. A. Smith, Mr. P. Taylor, Lord D. Stuart, Mr. Anstey, Mr. Wire, and others took part, it was unanimously resolved "That Baron Rothschild proceed to-morrow to the House of Commons to claim his seat." NARRATIVE OF LAW AND CRIME. MR. Wayse, a draper of Oxford Street, was summoned before the Marlborough police court on the 29th of June, for Assaulting a Customer. Mrs. Denning and a female friend, seeing a ticketed mantle in his shop-window, went in to buy it, reading the price to be one guinea. The mantle was produced, and a guinea and a half asked for it; on the lady's demurring, a ticket was shown, with one guinea in large print, and a very small subjoined, which, they believed, had just been written. High words ensued, and the tradesman pushed the customer out of the shop. A shopman deposed that he had put the ticket-one guinea and a half on the mantle; and the master declared that he had used no unnecessary violence, but was provoked by the accusation of cheating. The magistrate commented on the impropriety of exhibiting tickets so written as to mislead the public, and fined the draper twenty shillings. A respectably dressed young man, who refused to give his name, was charged at Guildhall, on the 3rd, with uttering seditious language in a public-house. Several papers were found upon him. One consisted of hints to those who thought of suicide, urging that they might as well be hanged or take the chance of it with the alternative of a comfortable provision for life-as drown themselves; and that they might manage this by killing a policeman, a duchess, or a countess, and then pleading insanity. Another paper said the writer would like to kill five hundred of the aristocracy, and a third contained a plan of setting fire to ladies' dresses in Kensington Gardens, at a time "when the aristocracy are congregated to hear the band play." Before the alderman the prisoner admitted that these writings were by him, and said that merely to explain how an unlawful act might be committed, was no offence. He was remanded that inquiries might be made. He was brought up again on the 10th, when Mr. Maule, the solicitor of the Home Office, was in attendance, who requested the alderman to deal summarily with the case by binding the prisoner over to keep the peace. He seemed much disappointed that he was not to have a regular trial, and made a nonsensical speech about his plan for thinning the numbers of the aristocracy. The ships in Norfolk Island, he received a free pardon, in consequence of enquiries made into his case, and returned to England. He applied to the Court of Queen's Bench to be allowed anew to take out his certificate to practise as an attorney; but this being opposed by the Law Society, a rule nisi was granted, and the matter was fully argued before the court. In giving judgment, Mr. Justice Patteson, after taking a review of the various transactions in which Barber had been implicated along with Fletcher, said in conclusion, that looking at all the circumstances of all these cases, and endeavouring to make all reasonable allowances for the difficulties in which Mr. Barber was placed in explaining his conduct, the court regretted to say that it could not but see such proofs of complicity with Fletcher as rendered it an imperative duty to decline complying with the application for the renewal of his certificate to practise as an attorney of this court. The rule was therefore discharged. In the Court of Queen's Bench, on the 6th, an action of Slander was tried, at the instance of Mr. Barry, the architect, against Dr. Reid, the ventilator of the new Houses of Parliament. It appeared that in 1845 there were meetings between the plaintiff and defendant, at one of which the defendant admitted that his principle of ventilation would not act in accordance with the plaintiff's arrangement that the Houses of Parliament should be fire-proof. A Mr. Meesom, who was present at the meeting on the part of Mr. Barry, reported, by the directions of the plaintiff, Mr. Reid's admission to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests. At a subsequent meeting, at which Meesom was present, Dr. Reid refused to proceed, saying, "I'll transact no business in a meeting in which Mr. Meesom is, because he and Mr. Barry sent in a forged document to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests." These were the slanderous words complained of. The Chief Justice said that the plaintiff had no case, because the communication was privileged, and suggested that the matter should be settled, a suggestion which was adopted. An Irishman named Fahy attempted to Rob the House of Mr. Swetenham, near Congleton, on the afternoon of Sunday the 7th, while the family was at church, but was prevented by the intrepidity of Ann Tranter, the maid servant. The man pretended to be deaf and dumb, and begged for alms; the servant gave him some bread; then he attempted to push past her into the house; on the girl resisting his entrance, he assailed her with a stick; she took it from him; then he beat her with his fists; the girl grappled with him, and being tall and stout, managed to throw him on the ground, and kept him there for some time. When the man succeeded in overpowering her, and rose, she ran to a bell and pulled it to give an alarm. Again she baffled Fahy's attempts to enter the house, pushed him into the stable-yard, and locked him out. The bell had attracted a gamekeeper's notice, and he hurried to the house; where he found the courageous girl in a fainting state. The keeper seized Fahy on the road a short distance from the place, and had him committed on a charge of assault with intent to rob. The Congleton magistrates highly commended Ann Tranter for her conduct. The Court of Exchequer gave judgment in the Gorham Case on the 8th. This is the third decision of precisely the same question in three different courts of law. The Bishop of Exeter first applied to the Court of Queen's Bench for a rule to prohibit the Court of Arches from giving effect to the decision of the privy council in favour of Mr. Gorham. On its being refused, the bishop made a similar application to the Court of Common Pleas, by whom also it was refused, and he then brought the matter in the same form before the Court of Exchequer. |