The Welshman

FOR THE WELSHMAN. What gag deceiver in the poet line D <th in the Journal of last Friday < shine ? Tile modest IWU¡ Jpciin.o; in t\¡ll to see His name, though all in town must know J. B. Jul.n. Roa on tiir* cent, we must entail, J\>r like so-n,- hideous Serpent he doth trail His lasy length along, and from his jato y-ui frothy flattery o'er our sex doth throw ]\ doubt with vile intent to gorge hi* maw Witii some sweet virgin, who doth still recline Upon her mother's breast, and there confine llur 1OVP; her joy, her hope, yet infantine — AI nic that lov„- so pure should e'<:r be changed, And by ru m's selfish passions be deranged. Th'.> gallant Adam blam'd poor mother live But the old Viper vile did her deceive- A male he wa* and filthy flatterer too, Like this constricting wretch, who would undo Some youthful victim, still in innocence Auii clinging to her own dear name for sense — Mais cela n' importe if she has savoury pNtCP. Flavoured with which she'd make our Bo i smack Hid slavering !ips as if his jawi would crack. C.irtn irthen iadi--s would be rank'd as geese Werf they to bolt his pills of gilded grease better to his Muse's mansion carry it, And grease the wheels of her vile creaking chariot- H.1 then may wipe his hands upon her hair- With such a wench Macassar mast be rare For her trade the churn to spla.sh Who deals her dear such buttery balderdash. He says that "woman's voice qtlelJ p..¡si()n! hot"- Has he 30 soon Dame Caudle's scenes forgot? H" says the path of this uncertain life T T nb>st by woman would be constant strire"- ••ere ut iii exti.net 'twould tear be to the knife Next verse lie makes his female quite a God; Dress'd en cidotte she mends hearts with a Hod- Many melt's hea rts hath vixens changed to clod And then he says that wives have all the courage! If' that's the case, what is the use of marriage f f al ways thought that we frail women kind, Entered that holy state support to find. Now. dismal darkness clouds our hero's scene, Repiring" woman's guiding light" I ween.— I wonder if the feiiow means to say That we go stalking out on th" hiih — With lanterns in our hands jonng Deaux to catch, Lib;e cU;-¡ilinC{ glowworm on her nightly watch.— Suck your cigar poor niaii and kiss your beer (If you've got wherewithal to pay the cheer) And learn to be u little more sincere— That heart of thine' must be indeed divine Since Goddesses and Angels round it twine lie wise, John Boa I warn you to be wise And don't court ladies with such monstrous lies, Los: they scratch out your staring goggle eyes. A RE AX. WOMAN*. I hope, kind Editor, you'll not refuse These simple lines, though I've no friendly muse— John will be joyous to be critised; 'T;s oettcr far than being advertiscd- And then the critic being a heavenly troman Oh 'twill twine round" his blessed heart uncommon. The above was unavoidably omitted last week.

THE RUSSELL AND PEEL MANIFESTOES. I [From the Times.] For two rival statesmen win have come to very much the same practical conclusion, and cannot at present find an occasion of difference, Sir Robert's address and Lord John's speech to their respective constituencies are more than usually abundant in contrasts. It is not the first time that they have presented themselves to- gether in the arena, and contended for the prize of the hour. The last competition of this sort was when Sir Robert was known to be struggling in the depth of his Cabinet with his impracticable colleagues, like a man in mortal combat with his prey at the bottom of a pitfall, for some measure equal to the emergency of an expected famine. Lord John was not so unequally yoked, and had only his own free soul to consult; so he put out a letter which anticipated the Ministerial decision, and succeeded in imparting to free trade a more Whiggish air than it had usually worn. Their manifestoes are again side by side, and very different they are. Lord John has the second turn now, and makes the best use of it. Sir Robert writes a letter, or rather a pamphlet. Lord John makes a speech. Both are excellent in their way, but there is something in meeting men face to face, in exchanging glances and thoughts, that midnight oil, and no pen of a ready writer, can supply. Sir Robert ad- dresses the electors of a small provincial borough which, if not absolutely in his pocket, is at least quite as safe; and he informs his select and faithful band of supporters that for their sake he has declined "offers of support from more than one place of the first importance in respect to commercial enterprise and wealth and to the numbers of the constituent body." Lord John throws himself upon the most important civic constituency in England, and has the opportunity of saying with tolera- ble grace, I believe nothing would more conduce to the harmony of our constitution than that persons possessing the confidence of the Crown should seek for the suffrages of large bodies of the people. I can con- ceive nothing more advantageous to the Crown than that persons representing large communities should be ably to carry the wishes, the opinions, and the requests of those communities to the foot of the throne." One cannot quite to.get an unfortunate circumstance con- nected with the Health of Towns Bill but still it must be said, that the large and popular constituencies of the Whig statesmen, and even their occasional failures, present a sort of romantic contrast to th- caution of the other party. To pass on,—Sir Robert takes credit with his constituencies for hating quieted titles to Dis- senting places of worship, repealed many penal statutes in matters of religion, and having recently expressed an opinion in favour of comprehending Roman Catholics in any system of public instruction. Lord John Russell does more. He stands side by side, and permits his name to be associated with a distinguished man who is neither Church of England, Roman Catholic, nor Dis- senter, but who is about to fight for his creed the battle which Mr. O'Conneli fought and won for his. What is more, he expressly sanctions the attempt, and without, of course, giving an opinion as to the question of law, implies a promise of assistance. Sir Robert points to certain great acts, which are undoubtedly his own, but are his own much as a conquest of an empire will surije- I times fall to an adventurer hitherto more known for his broken fortunes or disputed title. He has mastered the result, whatever came before. He also refers wi h just pride to a short but splendid career of restored prosperity and successful arms, national honour vindicated, empire established, confidence restored, quarrels adjusted, bur- dens remitted, treasury replenished, debt diminished, commerce emancipated, and every other blessing which a country can owe fo its rulers and to Heaven but he is forced to contract the field of observation, and to state his merits in their barest simplicity. Lord John has the advantage of greaUr "breadth" in his case. From the beginning of my political life I have always followed that great doctrine of Mr. Fox, that acts, and not opinions, ought to be the subject of punishment." 1, was upon that ground—taking my stand upon that principle—that, now near twenty years I proposed to the House of Commons the ab.oration of those civil disqualifications which barred the way to office to Pro- testant Dissenter?." I remember declaring in this room, that I thought if a weaver in Lancashire produced a piece of cloth, and a husbandman on the banks of the Ohio grew a quarter of wheat, these two men ought to be at liberty to exchange their respective products, and that no law ought to prevent such an interchange. The principle which I asserted here in 1841. I proposed in the House of Commons in 1S42. As in former days I have had the honour of opening to Manchester, to Leeds, to Birmingham, and to a vast proportion of the householders of this country, the power of the franchise, while, at the same time, I succeeded in disfranchising Gatton, Old Sarum, and other seats of corruption—in the same spirit I hope in future, if I should be elected by your suffrages, to promote the best interests of this empire." Without laying claim to absolute consistency j -without suppressing that his own views have been developed both in clearness and in boldness—he is able to particularize with very great effect the various occa- sions oil which the rival party has been obliged to eat its pledges whenever a wise Minister" thought fit to command. A brilliant consistency, a certain oneness and simplicity of political career, is Lord John's strong point, and that he knows how to bring out. The choice which seems presented by these two addresses is one for which not even the fertility of ancient fable will afford an illustration. On the one hand we have a mixed and questionable policy crowned by a brilliant career, and producing the greatest results; on the other a simple theory, and almost heroic consistency, either not so favoured or so wise, and enjoying rather an ultimate triumph of opinion than the present reward of prosperity. Not to carry the figure too far, we might compare the latter to a fine healthy frost, the former to a genial but too softening thaw. Can no union be imagined between theoretical bounty and practical power ? It is true that Lord John Russell is found right in the long run, and is embodied at last into law; but so was John Lockp, so was Paley, so, even in some degree, is Jeremy Bentham. But when the nation is tired of contemplating the dis- tant triumph of abstract truth, and wants a good spell of plain earthly prosperity, with a tight hand on the Exchequer, then it goes to the hon. member for Tain- worth. When it is palbd with gross sublunary joys, and sielz of the tergiversations and treacheries incidental to iheir attainment, then back to the Liberals, who are always the same, equally honest, equally truthful, equally good to one another, equally magnificent in their de- signs but, perhaps, we might add, equally compelled to prove the unkindneso of fortune in 18-17, as in 1841 and 1S06.

ADVANTAGE OF COUNTY COURTS.—A case lately came under notice of the Bury County Cotrt LIOO was left to be divided amongst nine children, and an action was brought to recover the respective amounts. It was ohtained "ith a cost of :0s. Under tne old law, it would have been thrown into Chancery.—J err old'.s Weekly News.— [And would have remained in Chancery.] Boz's LAST WORK.—It must be a matter of surprise to the public generally to percei e how varied ire the opiniofls expressed t1 the leading newspapers, with respect, to Mr. Dicken s last publication. It may well be imagined that sonic adverse criticisms upon the works of this and other celebrated authors may succeed from personal f"p1iIJgs or euucational prejudices. These, however, could account for but a few. The majority, as we have the best medical authority for stating, may be ascribed to irritability of temper, generally arising from a deranged state of the Liver and othe: viscera, and which could easily be remedied by tha occasiona: use of Frampton's Pill of health, W;t¡c!; is gentle in its .1 .f.t ''f' ir. -it, pH'f.t

I CARDIGANSHIRE ASSIZES. I (Continued from cur last.) Jones v. .Jmzes.-This was at: aclion of trover, in w'¡je!¡ M -srs. J. Evans, Q C. and Daddson were for the plain- titf. Xo counsel appeared on brhalfof the defendant. Mr. Davidson opened the pleadings, saying that this was an action in which Ann J oues was plaintiff, and John .J ones was the defendant. The declaration set forth that the defendant took the plaintiff's cattle, and eon .rted them tu his own use. The defendant fir-t p:l'Ml2d Not Guilty, and then that the cattle was nut the property of the plaintiff. l1r, John E-.cms, \ol. C. S2lid that this cause was post- poned from the last assizes at the rquest oÎ the de- fendant, upon his paying • -c costs of the day, and now ¡h.; dirl not appear. It remained only fur hial (Mr. F..) to produce his evidence, which would entitle the plaintiff to a verdict. The plaintiff was a single woman living with her father at Berllan. He being an old man and very infirm, some years ago divided his property between his two children, the plaintiff and defendant, and resigned the management of his farm to them. Although it was so divided, no distribution of the property took place for some time. In 1839 however the son married, and took away his half of the property, leaving the remaining half for the sister. Amongst her share there was a pony mare, 12 hands in height, and of a. brown colour. In 1814 this mare was turned out to depasture on the com- mon, and one day it was missed from thence. Nothing more was heard of it until 1 year and 9 months after, when plaintiff was gratified to see the pony rnare come back to the common, accompanied by a foal Plaintiff brought her into the farm-yard and put a mark upon her in case she might stray again. Four or five days after, John Jones, of Ffoesfine, the defendant, came to her house when her father WAS not at home, and only the plaintiff and a little girl were in the house. He was very violent, and after using many threats, he took the mare and colt away. On the Wednesday following, plaintiff and her father met the defendant and said that if he had any claim to the pony, it had better be settled before two neighbours on the Saturday following, On the day appointed, plaintiff and her father attended, but defendant sent to say the pony mare was dead, and her skin had been sent to Mr. Morris, the tanner. Upon proceeding thither, they found the skin of the pony, which they identified, but they never had seen the colt since. He should call witnesses to establish these facts, which would entitle him to a verdict for the plain- tiff for the value of the pony and colt, which was esti- mated at £12. Evidence was then adduced on behalf of the plaintiff, and a verdict for the plaintiff given—damages, £10, Attorney for plaintiff, Mr. James Parry, Aberayron. Lloyd v. Davies and anothcr.-Thi3 was an action for excesive distraint, with a count ill trover, in which :\lc5,;r", John Evans, Q, C. and J. Wilson appeared for the plaintiff, and Messrs. Nichol Carrie and Benson for the defendant. Ir. AVilson opened the pleadings at great length, stating that the plaintiff was William Lloyd, and the de- fendants John Davies, a sheriff's officer, and Mr. Ellis Th omas. It was an action on the case for excessive dis- traint. having also a count in trover. The defendant had paid £10 into court upon the count in trover, and had pleaded not guilty as to the remainder of the sum sought to be recovered. Upon this issue was joined. Mr. John Evans, Q. C. addressed the jury, stating that this was a very simple case on the part of the plaintiff, who was a farmer named William Lloyd, residing at Tyr- vaynur-issa, and occupying the farm of Gellygarnedde, three-fourths of which farm belonged to Mr. John Jones, to whom the plaintiff had regularly paid his rent until he was interrupted in August, 1846, by the proceedings which formed the subject of the present action. Shortly before that month he received a declaration in ejectment, the lessor of the plaintiff in the ejectment being Ellis Thomas, who thus threatened to turn him out of the farm. No result however followed that threat, as the action of ejectment was abandoned. On the 1st of June, 1846, John Davies, a baiiiff, came to the farm of Gelly- garnedde, to distrain for rent—not for John Jones, but in the name of Ellis Thomas, as he alleged. In this way it was sought to take the cattle belonging to Win. Lloyd to pay rent to Thomas, which Lloyd nad con- tracted to pay Jones. Eight cattle were taken, and a man was left in possession of them. Five days after- wards Davies came to the farm, being accompanied by a person who was an auctioneer and appraiser. They cÜen took 8 cows again, seven of them being the same as were taken on the previous occasion, and one being a spotted cow, which had been brought to the farm since that period, and had not therefore formed part of the first seizure. These cows were valued at jE8 each, thus amounting to JE64, whereas the rent due was only £:30, The plaintiff, in order to get back his cattle paid the £:,5 to the defendant through the hands of Rees Augustus, a clerk to Mr. H. Lloyd Harries, of Llan- dovery, plaintiff's solicitor in this cause, making a pro- test however against the necessity which compelled him to do so. This sum he now sought to recover back at the hands of the jury. The defendants had pleaded not Guilty by statute, whereby they meant to say that Ellis Thomas had obtained judgment against John Jones, for debt, and had issued out a writ of eleget by which he took Jones's lands instead of the debt, and asserted that he was at liberty to distrain for rent. It had however been decided that a tenant by eleget cannot distrain, and was also decided by the statute of Ann that it was unne- cessary that any attornment of tenancy should take place. In the case of IJarrics v. Booker, it was laid down that a party cannot distrain by virtue of a writ of eleget which would nut entitle him to distrain as landlord. If the plaintiff could show that John Davies entered his farm bv the directions of Ellis Thomas, and took the plaintiff's cattle, he (the plaintiff) would be entitled to the verdict of the jury unless the defendant could shew that he was entitled to distrain for rent. Evidence was then adduccd for the plaintiff which proved that on the 1st of June, Davies went to Gelly- garnrdde, and having selected eight cows, drove them into the farm-yard, and gave them into the cus- todv of a maD. whom he left in possession. They were never in fact removed from the premises, and plaintiff milked thern ao,ó usual until fhc clays after, when Davies again called with an auctioneer, who valued the cows, and Rees Augustus to prevent their being sold paid £ •>•) under protest. In order ta connect Ellis Thomas with the case, the appraiser was called to prove that Thomas gave him a pot of porter for the share he took in the proceedings at Gellygamedde. The evidence upon this point however was not particularly clear. Mr. Carne then submitted to his Lordship that there was no evidence of a conversion by either defendant, and certainly not against Ellis Thomas, who never even saw the cows. The judge intimated that he was inclined to think that there was not sufficient evidence of a conversion, but he ,;hOldd not stop the case. He would however give tile tlefenclant leave to move hereafter tu enter a non-suit upon that point. As to Ellis Thomas he had great doubts whether there was any evidence at all to go to the jury. Mr. John Evans, Q.C. urged that it was the usual practices of judges to allow any scintilla of evidence, (however trifling,) to go to the jury, deeming it proper never to interfere with questions of fact. The Judge said that this was by no means the case, and that it was not at all necessary that every scintilla of vidence which would warrant a suspicion should go to the jury, but that only such evidence should be left to them as would he rational evidence, such as could warrant a jndicioll proceeding. Mr. John Evans said that when he had the honour of practising at the bar beside His Lordship, the Judges had invariably acted upon the plan of leaving any ques- tion of fact, however trifling, to the jury for consideration and deeis.u. The J ucige said that Lord Teuderden had distinctly laid down the doctrine he had just enunciated, and the whole Court of Queen's Bench had confirmed it only 3 weeks since. He would mention a trial which took place within his knowledge of an alleged infringement of a patent for making hexagonal blocks for wood pavement. The case was tried before Mr. Baron Parke and the blocks were produced, two witnesses bein? caUed who said that the cue was an infringement upon the other, which had been patented. Mr. Baron Farke said that there was no infringement and uo question of fact for submission to the jury. The blocks were before them, and two witnesses had told them there was a si- milarity, but he (Baron Parke) told them there was not, and that there was no evidence at ail for their consi- deration. He (Mr. Justice Cresswell) would, however, allow this case to go to the jury, believing that there might perhaps be some iota of evidence for them to decide upon. Mr. Carne addressed the jury for the defcnce, and charactised this action as the most impudent ever brought by a pettifogging attorney. The plaintiff said that he was the tenant of Mr. John Jones, and that '.he defen- dant, Ellis Thomas, took his goods for rent, and plain- tiff could not undeio.and why it was. Poor innocent man This distraint took place in June, and on the 18th of March previous, the Sheriff had held an inqui- sition for the purpose of issuing the writ of eleget. At this inquisition the plaintiff was a witness, ud hc was fully cognizant that the farm he occupied was to become the property of the defendant, Ellis Thomas, until such time as .J ohn Jones, the previous owner, paid his debt to him. The ground was as lIlueh Ellis Thumas's, as if he had bought and paid for it. Besides this, the plaintiff i was told to pay his rent to Ellis Thomas, and he promised to do so, A day W;13 then appointed on which plain- tiff was to pay the rent, hut he ùid not attend on that day, and consequently the distress was levied. He (Mr. Carne) would detail what it was probable was the conversation that took place, between the attorney for the plaintiff and his client concerning the distress. The attorney advised that in addition to the count for excessive distress, a count in trover should be put in, so that the plaintiff could recover damages if the defendant failed to prove his title. The defendant said that if his bailiff had made any trifling mistake in the seizure, he would pay £10 into court to cover it, and this was ac- cordingly done. At the last trial of this cause the defendants expected that the detail of the proceedings to obtain the writ of eleget would arrive by mail, but by accident they weie not sent ofi in time. This coming to the ears of the plaintifi's attorney, he aban- doned the count for excessive distress and relied upon the count in trover. The judge on that occasion dis- tinctly stated that if it could be proved" that any rent was due to Ellis Thomas, the action could not be main- tained. This could not be proved then as the writ of eleget had not arrived, but he (Mr. Carne,) was now in a position to prove it. A new trial having been granted, the defendant had to pay the costs of the former pro- ceeding solely in consequence of not being able to prove his title to the land in question, because of the absence of the writ of eleget. Having it now, however, the defend- ants would walk over the course, but for two notable crotchets on the part of the counsel for the plaintiff, who said that if Ellis Thomas owned the farm as tenant by eleget, he could not distrain, and to prove this he cited Harris v. Iinokcr, 4th Byngham. He (Mr. C.) found however that it was the case that a tenant could not be sued by a tenant by eleget, and he therefore argued that a tenant could not be distrained upon by a tenant by eleget. Whatever irregularity the bailiff might have committed í f the rent, was due and the plaintiff was tenant to Ellis Thomas, then IlO count in trover c01lld be sus- tained. But therp was another point on which the plaintiff's counsel strongly leiied. The defendant took c':nongtit the cight cOIn- allühcr cow, which was not one of those at first seized. He forgot, however, that there was an Act of Parliameut which proyiJed for mere irre- gularities, and which defined that a mistake was not a cir- cumstance waich could be taken advantage of as a uround for an action trover, lu point of fact, no conversion of this cow took place, as it was merely driven into a yard and looked at by tile bailiff, and was never out of the possession of the plaintiff. If Ellis Thomas authorised John Davies to take eight cows, he did not authorise him to take the wrong one at all. Then again, supposing there was a conversion of this spotted cow, what damages would the jury award the cow not having been detained in the yard 10 minutes, for which £10 had bepn paid into court. It was true the paid. but not. for the spotted now, and could the imagine that it was anything but a mistake, and that L'avies really meant to take the cow he had looked at on the first occasion. Why had not the plaintiff said at the time that the wrong cow had been taken, and then the mistake could have been rectified. Instead of which, however, he led the defendants into a trap. lIe (Mr. C) would shortly prove that Eilis Thomas was the owner or the land by virtue of the writ of eleget— that plaintiff was present at the iniquisition, under which the eleget was obtained, and that plaintiff agreed to pay Ellis Thomas the rent due on the 25th of March, 1846, which he did not ùo, but has paid Ellis Thomas the rent ever since, The only question was, was plaintiff to keep back the rent due in March, 1816, simply because there was a slight mistake in the distraint, which was a mere irregularity, and not an illegal conversion of property to his own use. This remark applied to the evidence as against John Davies, but with regard to Ellis Thomas, there was no evidence at all. If the jury felt themselves compelled to give a verdict for the plaintiff in conse- quence of the detention of the spotted cow, he trusted they would merely award a farthing damages. He had great hopes however that the verdict would be for both defendants. Mr. Simons, attorney for defendants, was then called, and deposed that the lent of the farm was £4-1 a year, and that £4 was to be deducted for dowry of the plain- tiff's wife. The plaintiff was present on the occasion of the proceeding before the Sheriff to obtain the writ of eleget. He had paid the rent up to the preceding Michaelmas, and promised to pay the rent up to March. He (Mr. S.) attended at Lampeter to receive the rent, but Lloyd did not come. A distress was then directed to be levied. He issued it without having had any com- munication.on the subject with Mr. Ellis Thomas. He (Mr S.) acted as he thought best for the interest of his client. Plaintiff had paid rent to him since the 25th of March last. On cross-examination Mr. Simons said that he had distrained for half the valuation of the value of the farm. There was however a mistake of his clerk in issuing the distress for instead of referring to Jones's statement of the value of the farm. No allowance was made for what Lloyd said he had allowed for Jones. A declaration of ejectment was served upon all the tenants by Mr. Ellis i honias's orders, and upon plaintiff amongst the rest. Mr. John Evans, Q.C., in reply submitted that the defendants were not justified in point of law in dis- training upon the plaintiff's cattle upon the plain ground that no one coulJ. distrain except thc landlord, the owner of a reversion, or one who claimed as the assignee of a reversion. Formerly it was even necessary to have an attornment by the tenant, but by a statute of Queen Ann's reign, this is nuw rendered unnecessary. He contended that the defendants were trespassers intaking plaintiff's cattle, and while he abandoned the first count —that for excessive distress, he relied upon the count in trover to obtain a verdict. His Lordship in summing up, said that the question was simplified by the a bandonment of the first count. The plaintiff said that the defendants had taken his cattle and converted them to their own use—he having sustained damages to the amount of £3J which he paid to redeem them. The defendants said that they took the cows under a claim of rent, ind clearly if they were entitled to the rent they were fully justified in what they had done If they had distrained excessively there was a remedy for that. If they had claimed too much rent there was a remedy for that, but there was no remedy for either of those wrongs under the present form of action. The case depended entirely upon Ellis Thomas's title to the ren t. His Lordship then recapitulated the evidence, and reiterated that the case depended upon the plaintiff's right to take the cattle for rent. As to the spotted cow he was sorry it had been introduced into the action, and he would remark that it was a very foolish practice to make two or more parties defendants when one would suffice. The plaintiff need not have made the bailiff a defendant at all, and the mention of the cow taken by mistake was an unworthy attempt to obtain a verdict for it, and gave the go-by to the real question in the action. If the cow was taken by mistake that did not amount to a conversion. There was no demand of restitution of the cow, and the defendant was never told of the mistake. The plaintiff was not entitled to a ver- dict with respect to that portion of the case. With respect to damages, if the jury was of opinion that the defendant Ellis Thomas was not entitled to the rent, the plaintiff would be entitled to a verdict for and if he sustained any loss by the detention of his cattle, they must give damages for that also. It did not appear however that any damage was sustained, as plaintiff milked the cows as usual. If on the contrary, they thought Ellis Thomas entitled to be paid his rent, their verdict would be for defendant. The Jury consulted for a few minutes, and then returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £:35. Attorney for the plaintiff, Mr. H. Lloyd Harries, Llan- dovery; for defendant, Mr. W. Simons, Carmarthen. Jenkins v. Hall.— This was an action for defendant in which Messrs. J. Evans, Q. C., andG. P. Lewis appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Serjeant Jones and Mr. Benson for the defendant. Mr. Lewis opened the pleadings aId stated that Mor- gan Jenkins was the plaintiff, and Edward Crornpton Lloyd Hall the defendant. The declaration stated that the demand was for work and labour done, goods sold, money paid, and on an account stated. The defendant had pleaded that he was never indebted. Mr. J. Evans, Q.C. addressed the jury for the plaintiff, who he said was Mr. Morgan Jenkins, a highly re- spectable draper residing in Cardigan, while the de- fendant was Mr. Lloyd Hall, a gentleman residing at Newcastle Emlyn, well-known in the county, and of station in the profession to which he (Mr. E.) had the honorrr t9>s. The :lction was brought to recover £22, for goods sokl and delivered. On the llt'n of March, 1842, Mrs. Hall, wife of Mr. William Hall, defendant's brother, died having for some time resided in Cardigan, (lodging with Mr. Noott) on the following morning the defendant called upon plaintiff and gave a verbal order for goods for Mrs. AV. Hall's funeral. Mr. Jenkins said that he understood that Mrs. Waldron had given oders for the funeral to another draper, but Mr. Hall said that that did not matter, adding I give you orders for the articles." He then wrote down the various articles required, and added the names of the gentlemen who were to attend the funeral, and receive the goods. The articles supplied were 6 silk scarfs, 7 crape scarfs, 14 silk hatbands, 20 crape hatbandf 18 pairs of black kid gloves, & 10 pairs of Berlin gloves tiiese included 1 silk scarf, 1 silk hatband, and 1 pair oj. kid gloves, which were not mentioned in Mr. Hall's or- der. Mr. Jenkins was told by Mr. Hall that the funeral was to take place at Kilrhedin, and he then expressed his obligation for the order, upon which Mr. Hall took his departure. The goods were duly suppiied. Mr. Jenkins attending the funeral on the Monday following and pro- ceeding to Kilrhedin as manager. He likewise paid the drivers of the mourning carriages, but the driver of the hearse had not been paid yet. A year afterwards or rather in June, 1843, Mr. Jenkins wrote to Mr. Hall requesting a settlement of the account, and in reply received a note desiring him to look for pay- ment to the Rev. W. Lloyd, of Pembroke, who Mr. Hall alleged had adopted and varied the original order. He also added that a bill in Chancery was about to be tiled against the executor of the de- ceased lady, and that Mr. Jenkins, as a creditor, was welcome to join if he liked. Mr. Jenkins naturally did not relish this prospect of affairs, and applied to Mr. Lloyd for payment, but that gentiem.ui totaiiy repudiated Mr. Hall's orders, and said that he had no assets where- with to pay the demand. Thus Mr. Jenkins was driven from pillar to post, one party saying another was to pay, and the other reciprocating the observation. No one could say but that the plaintiff had been abstemious enough respecting his demand, for it was not until the years after the contraction of the debt that an action was brought. It could not therefore be said that he had acted rashly or precipitately. The case the plaintiff would have to prove would be that Mr. Hall u;ave the order without solicitation. The paper on which the order had beC'1l written codd not, he regretted to state, be found, but the young men who were in the shop at the time could testify that the order was given. Mr. Hall himself wore one of the hatbands and scarfs at the funeial, and he (Mr. E.) could not anticipate a satis- factory answer to the demand. It was true that the Rev. Mr. Lloyd was the executor, but Mr. Hall ordered the goods, and was trusted by Mr. Jenkins, therefore he .;hould not be at a 10s ill consequence of the qn:1.frds of tiie family of the deceased, and he hoped the jury would return a verdict for £22 4s. 3d., the amount sought to be recovered. The various witnesses were then called on behalf of the plaintiff, but upon his hooks being produced it was ascertained that Mr. Hall's name was not even men- tioned in them, the goods beill charged to the exc- cutors of the late Mrs. W. Hall." The ltev. W Lloyd was examinec1lJnd stated that he was the executor of Mrs. Hall's will, lie attended the funeral, and Mr. Hall also did. He had purchased some mourning for himself and family from Mr. Jenkins which he had paid for. He had never adopted the orders of Mr. Ihll, and having no assets from the estate he had declined paying plaintiffs bill. Ademandhad been wade tipon him for the sum claimed in the pre-sent action which he had refused to pay. Upon cross-examination Mr. Llovd said :—The Rev. Hugh Howell was also an executor, but he renounced, and I alone proved the will. The estate is left to Mr. Hail's lather, then to his son, the defendant's brother, and his issue, after which my children have the estate settled upon them. Mr. Hall derives no benefit under the will. I was present at the funeral, and was aware that there was a will, and that I was an executor to it, but the will was not found for some months after the funeral. This terminated the case for the plaintiff, when his Lordship intimated that there was no evidence that the plaintiff had paid the postboys or drivers of the mourn- ing carriages. Mr. Serjeant Jones addressed the jury for the defen- dant. He remarked that Mr. Hall had resisted this action on grounds which did him infinite credit, and so far from his conduct being open to any observation to his prejudice, the contrary was the case. The jury were not to imagine for a moment that he disputed that the goods were furnished or that the charges for them were fair and reasonable. He simply said that he was not the party liable. The law looked with peculiai indul- gence on tho- ■ who stepped in on the occasion of a death and ordered the arrangements for the decent interment even when the party who did so was no connexir^i of the deceased, and where the kind offices he performed were the mere common impulses of humanity. In this case Mrs. Hall died and Mr. Hall interfered and gave orders for the funeral. No will was at this time forthcoming as it had not been found. Mr. L!oy<i, however, knew of it and that he was an executor. Mr. Hall on the contrary, was not llwarc of this. and being a relation took the steps deposed to. Now, if the case rested there the defendant was clearly liable but before the funeral Mr. Hall as- certained that there was a will and tlrat )11'. L10yd was an executor. He would prove distinctly that upon as- certaining thi Mr. Hall in company with his brother, Mr. Cuthbert Coliingwood Hull, waited on Mr. Jenkins and stated that there was a will, and that Mr. Lloyd and Mr. Howell were the executors and t11;lt he must look to them for payment. This he should prove by Mr. Cuth- bert C, Half lie should also prove tllat (JU the luun!Îu6 of the funeral Mr. Jenkins asked Mr. Hall if Mr. Noott sho-sJd be furnished with a silk hat band and scarf upon which Mr. Ilall replied that he had nothing to do with the affair and that plaintiff must apply to the executors. He (Serjeant Jones) now said that the acts of Mr. Hall were adopted by the executors, and that he was relieved from liability. Why, the plaintiff's own bock shewed that he considered.the exect'ors liable, and did not con- tain Mr. Hall's name at ail. Mr. C. Hall had come from England at great expense, and he mentioned this to show that it was not a question of a paltry £ 20, which Air. Ilall combated, but he was determined no person should be saddled with the exp"nses of a funeral if he interfered of necessity. He should be protecti'd, and the undertakers should look to the executor Mr. Hull took nothing under the will, but Mr. Liovd's children eventually received the whole estate. Some one had evidently paid for the coffin and other matters, and they should also pay this account. Mr. Hall felt that his sister in law should be buried in a manner becoming her station, but he had repudiated his order before the funeral. To whom did Mr. Jenkins give credit ? His own books showed that it was to the executors. The book too showed an amount of £29 .1s. 6d.; where were the orders for the remaining sum which was thus en- tered, and who had paid it since, for it was evident it had been paid, as it was now unclaimed. This was the clearest case of adoption by the plaintiff of the executors as his debtors instead of Mr. Hall. Mr. Hail, too, kindly put the plaintiff in a way to recover his money from the executors by joining in the equity suit, and he (the learned counsel) was of opinion the defendant had acted in a very friendly manner by giving that information. Mr. Cuthbert Collingwood Ilall, was then called to prove the facts stated by the learned counsel for the de- fendant. Mr. John Evans then replied, after which His Lordship summed up briefly. The Jury consulted for a short time, and then retuFned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages E24) 16-i. 6d. Attorney for plaintiff, Mr. R. D. Jeukins, Cardigan; for defendant, Mr. B. Evans, Newcastle mlyn. Richards v. Bowen.—This was an action for trespass on a close of land in the parish of St. Dogmell's, involv- ing a dispute as to a right of way. Messrs J. Evans, Q.C., and E. Lloyd Hall were for the plaintiff, and Mr. Ser- jeant Jones and Mr. Grove, appeared for the defendant. Mr. Hall opened the pleadings and said that the plain- tiff was Ann Richards, and the defendant Geo. Bowen. The action was brought to recover damages for a trespass on a close in the possession of the plaintiff, in the parish of St. Dogmell's, and for cutting down and destroying a gate and a quantity of barley. The defendant pleaded first that he was not guilty, ndly, that the close was not the property of the plaintiff, and 3;dlv th it the defendant had a right of way granted him for 2 lives, from Mr. Webley Parry. The plaintiff denied that there was this right of way, and upon these pleadings issue was joined. Mr. John Evans, Q C., said that the pliintiff is the widow of an old master mariner, who resided for many years in St. Dogiiiells. The defendant was a master mariner living near the plaintiff, and the action was brought to recover damages for a trespass in a field in the possession of the plaintiff, called Parkrhwyngyddoiparc, situate near the Tivy. There is a gravelly beach on the banks of the Tivy, which at high water is covered by the tide, and over this beach there runs a road from Pwllgam through St. Dogmell's. Adjoining the road are two fields belonging to W. H. W. Parry, Esq., of Noyadd, and on the north west of these two fields is the small field on which the trespass was committed. This field belonged to the plaintiff and to her father and father's father before her. The trespass complained of was that in 2 places the defendant had made gaps in the hedges and had entered and cut down some barley. There had been an entrance into the defendant's two fields from the high road through a gate, from time immemorial. There had been a number of disputes between the plaintiff and defendant, and the son of the plaintitf gained an action against defendant for an assault at the last Assizes. The conduct of defendant had not been such as to try a right of road, but was of a character to oppress a lone widow. He not only made an entrance into the field but he wantonly cut down a quantity of unripe barley and oats. The questions would be whether defendant had any right in the field at all ?-did the defendant commit the trespass alleged?—was the field the property of the plaintiff?— had the defendant a right of way through it ?-and did he, in exercising that right, use more violence and do more damage than was necessary for the assertion of his right ? Witnesses were then called to prove the case for the plaintiff; His Lordship several times rebuking the quarrelsome spirit of the plaintiff and defendant respect- ing an acre of land, and characterising the action as a very stupid quarrel. Mr. Serjeant Jones addressed the jury for the defen- dant and contended that the question "for the jury was of a compound character. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had destroyed her property. The defendant, however, said that the parties from whom he holds his fields had a right of way over the field in question from time immemorial, and that right having been given to him he had been obliged to cut the barley down to obtain it. He asked if more unsatisfactory evidence than that given by the plaintiff could be adduced. The defen- dant was now on a voyage to Russia, and had in fact nothing to do with the action. The person most inte- rested was Mr. AArebley Parry, the Lord of the Manor. In 1703, Mrs. Gwynne devised the estate to Mr. Webley, who afterwards took the name of Parry Mrs. Gwynne had previously leased the fields adjoining to Margaret Richards, and she had underlet them to her son, George Richards, the father of the plrdntiff. At that time the field in question was open common land. It had been lately called Parkrhvvngyddoiparc, signifying the field be- tween the two fields, but formerly its name was Rhos- rhwngyddoiparc, meaning the common between the two fields. Thirty years ago old George Richards made a fence in that field, leaving a small space for carts to pass, but he was compelled to widen it. He continually showed a disposition to make the road less, but OIl fre- quent occasions he was compelled to widen it He would call witnesses who would say that for more than 50 years the road to Penrallt had been through that field, and he would prove that the road was the property of Mr. W»L.Iiy Parry. The Judge here interposed, and said thar. if the road belonged to Mr. Parry, how was it neees.,ary that he should prove a right of road over his own property ? Mr. Serjeant Jones admitted that there would be no necessity for that, and proceeded to call witnesses for the defence. Mr. John Evans replied briefly, and his Lordship hav- ing ably summed up, the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff on all the issues, damages £ 1, thus establishing that the defendant had no right of way, and that of course he had exercised unnecessary violence. Attorney for plaintiff, Mr" George Thomas, Carmar- then for defendant, Mr. R. D. Jenkins, Cardigan. Ecans v. Evans, Clerk, and another, executors.—In this action, which was a special jury cause, the record was withdrawn. This terminated the business of the Assizes. His Lordship left Cardigan on Saturday morning and pro- ceeded to Llysnewydd, the seat of R. G. Thomas, Esq., to breakfast, and afterwards Mr. Serjt. Jones started to Brecon, in order to open the commission for that county.

THE LAST FOURTEEN BRITISH PARLIAMENTS.— First dissolved June 29,1802 second began November, 1.5, 1802, dissoh-ed October 24, 1806; third began De- cember lo, 1806, dissolved April 29, 1807 fourth began June 22,1807, dissolved September 29, 1812 fifth began November 22, Hil2, dissolved June 10, 1818 sixth began January 14, 1819, dissolved February 29, 1820; seventh began April 21, 1820, dissolved June 2, 1826; eighth began November 14, 1826, dissolved July 24, 1830; ninth began October 26, 1830, dissolved April 23, 1831 tenth began June 14, 1831, dissolved December 3, 1S32; eleventh began January 19, 1S33, dissolved December 30,1831 twelfth began February 19, 1835, dissolved July 17, 1837; thirteenth began November 1-5, 1837, dissolved June 23, 1811 fourteenth began August 11, 1S11, dissolved July 23, 1847. Dur- ing the above period we have had 15 Premiers,—viz., Mr. Addington, appointed March 7, 1 SO 1; Mr. Pitt, May 12, 1804; Lord Grenville, January 8, 1806 Duke of Portland, March 30, 1807 Mr. Perceval, June 23, 1810; Earl of Liverpool, June 8 1812; Mr. Canning, April 11, 1827 Viscount Goderich, August 10, 1827 Duke of Wellington, January 11, 1828; Earl Grey, November 22, 1830 Lord Melbourne, July 16, 1831; Sir R. Peel, December 10, 1831; Lord Melbourne, April 18, 1835; Sir R. Peel, August 30, 1811; Lord John Russell, June 29, A COMEDY IN REAL LIFE.—The residents of the Sixth Avenue, near Thirty-second-street, were, on Wed- nesday, treated to a very effective comedy by a couple of amateur performers, who went through their patts so well that it is generally believed they have had con- siderable practice in the same line. The main incidents of the piece are as follow :-A gentleman went home to dinner, and, having suffered a trifling loss from a fall in the stocks, was disposed to make up for it by venting his disappointment upon the unoffending members of his family. This a very old practice among married gentlemen, and wives ought by this time to be used to it, as lobsters are to be boiled alive. But the wife of this gentleman didn't exactly understand the mission and, when he remarked that there was too much pepper in the hot pie, and that the dinner generally was not fit for a hog, she replied, that if she had known it was to be eaten by a hog she would have made it fit for him. This, of course, led to a spirited reply and the lady at last, forgetting the humility so becoming in a wife, jumped up in a passion and dashed her plate on the floor. "Oh, oh," exclaimed the husband, if you are going to play that game, I will be up with you." So he seized a tureen and smashed it against a crimson sofa. The lady, not to be outdone, upsets the table, and so smashes all the crockery at one blow, and then dares her husband to go on. 'fo show that he was as full of spirit a-i Iiis wife, the gentleman flings a water-goblet at the French clock on the mantelpiece, overturns his wife upon the floor, and darts the chair on which he was sitting through the window into the street, and then tosses the mirror which hung in the room after it. Having finished the work of destruction inside, he rushed into the street, and began to demolish the chair and tie remains of the mirror. While engaged in this work, a body of M.P.'s, who had been sent for, made their appearance, and took the spirited gentleman into custody. He asserted his right to destroy his, property, and remonstrated with the M.P.'s on their impertinent iiiter eretice. The otticers of the law admitted his right to destroy his property, but denied the lawfulness of his doing it in the street; and for that off'nee they took him sff to the station-house, where we lost sight of him, and remain in profound ignorance of the winding-up of the comedy. From the turbulent and unhappy conduct of this piece, we see the wisdom of the old dramatists in endiig their comedies with a marriage, instead of begin- ning their dramatic personations in that blessed con- dition. ]\~ew York Mirror. UNHEALTHY CALLINGS.—SWORD MAKING.—Mr. Morin has stated at the Academy of Sciences Amongst the numerous professions which shorten the duration of human life, that of the knife-grinder is one of t ie most murderous. In the sword manufactories of Frasce, almost all the workmen die before the ages of forty or forty-ifve."—Soldiers, it seems, are not all that fall by the sword.

I"I'l'1>I '\1 I) VI T "TT:'1'T'1' I IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT, HOUSE OF LORDS.—THURSDAY, Juy-y 22. Their lordships sat to-day at half-past t-o o'clorl,. Tiie roval assent was given by commission to a num- ber of puhlicand private bills, amongst them were—The militia ballot suspension, juvenile offenders, railways (Ireland) No. 2, pici-s harbours (Ireland), drninage of lands (Ireland), stock-in-trade exemption, joint-stock companies, poor relief supension (Ireland) herring fishery (Scotland), polling at elections, tithe commutation, turnpike actscontinuance, bankruptcy and insolvenc"y, Great AVestern Railwey amendment and "Xtension, Taw-Yale railway and dock (deviations and Bid:• ford and South Molton blanches), Duffryn, Llynvi, and Cawl ond LlYiivi-Vuiiey railway amalgama- tion, Exeter -uul Exmouth railway, London-bridge railway termini (general enlargement), South Devon railway (extension and amendment), London and South Western railway, Bathwick church, South Wales Turn- pike Roads, and Swansea harbour bills. On the motion of Lord Brougham, returns were or- dered of the evidence taken before the commission on the conveyance of property. EDUCATION. In reply to a question from Lord Stanley, the Marquis of Lansdowne entered into an explanation of the sup- plemental minute on education recently issued. lie said the effect of the minute would be to enable them to extend aid to a very numerous class of schools, in connexion with most religious persuasions, to which schools they could not give any aid under the previous resolutions. The Bishop of London expressed the strongest dissatisfaction with the explanation that had just been given. Lord Beaumont was rather inclined to help the govern- ment out of the difficulties in which he saw it involved on the question. After some further observations from Lord Minto and Lord Brougham, Lord Stanley again rose, and expressed himself strongly on yielding to what were termed the conscientious scru- ples of dissenters but which he would designate sophistical quibbles. Earl Grey expressed his regret that any man in that house should style the opinions of a large body of their fellow-citizens sophistical. After some further conversation the matter dropped. POOR-LAW. The amendments made in the poor-law administration bill by the House of Commons were then brought under consideration. The Earl of. Stradbroke moved that their lordships insist on their own amendments; and a protracted discussion ensued upon the clause for the admission together in the workhouse of poor couples over 60 years of age. A division took place, when the clause, as passed by the Commons, was carried by 29 to 11, and the re- mainder of the Commons' amendments were agreed to. The Commons' amendments to the bishopric of Man- chester hill were also agreed to. The New Zealand Bill, No. 2, was read a third time, and the house adjourned. FRIDAY, JULY 23. I PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT. I The session of 1817 was closed this day by Her Majesty in person, and with the last words of the speech from the Throne virtually ended the existence of the Par- liament in 1841. The double interest thus imparted to the form of prorogation was greatly increased by the fact that the ceremonial assembled together the three estates of the realm for the first time in that magnificent hall of the New Palace at Westminster," destined, it may be hoped, to be the theatre of their combined and harmonious action for centuries to come. It has been said by a good authority, that nothing we do knowingly for the last time is done with indifference, that we cannot see broken the last long chain of associ- ations and remain unmoved. But it is with still deeper feeling we witness an event that will be the first of a series stretching far in to futurity, and note an occurrence that begins a period of which we shall see but the smallest fraction. The first meeting of the Sovereign with the Peers and Commons of England, in the place where they must act together for ages, and whose future tenants will look back to the present time as we think of the days of the Henries and Edwards, is certainly an event sugges- tive of many thoughts and rife with an interest far beyond that of the antique pomp and stately pageantry of the hour. Standing on the site of the palace of the Confessor, scarcely separated from the apartment where he died, the mind naturally connects the present with the past, the hour of the inauguration of the new palace of Victoria with the days when the Legislature and the Courts of Law always exercised their power under the Sovereign's roof. The influence and weight thus given to the locality have en d ure d f"ol- niaiiv a?es, have endured for many ages, and, though the monarchs ^111' have long ceased to reside there, Westminster i•V s still the fountain-head of legislation and the adminis- tration of justice; it is still from Westminster that the realm is governed, and so it has been through all the changes that fill the records of centuries, from the day c that Sebert the Saxon built his church in the Isle of Thorns," to this h?ur that sees Mr. Barry rearing the fabric whose threshold the foot of Victoria has just crossed to exercise for the first time beneath its roof the prerogative that has descended to her through a line of kings" from the Conquest. What the lapse of eight centuries may bring with it to these walls, and those who may tenant them, is a speculation too vast to be more than hinted at as one of the elements in the feeling of interest attaching to the proceedings of the day. If we may judge by the anxiety to be present on the occasion, that interest was unprecedented. AVith less perfect arrangements there might have been crowding and confusion, but everything was admirably managed. The advantages of greater space in the approaches and interior were evident to those who remember the make- shift expedients necessary to render the old house to- lerable even for the ordinary attendance of peers and strangers. All the company yesterday were admitted at the Queen's portico only, and, going forward to the cor- ridors and lobbies surrounding the House of Lords, passed in to the body of the house or reached the several galleries with tiie greatest facility. The peers' benches to the left of the throne were reserved by named tickets laid on the seats, and the peeresses and ladies entitled to them could afford to be late without running any risk of finding them occupied; but the seats to the right of the throne were appropriated by the first comers without distinction. This portion of the house began to fill as soon as the doors were opened, at 12 o'clock; arrivals continued to be frequent from that time till 1. At 1 o'clock the seats on both sides were filled, but not as yet to overflowing. At this hour the Earl of Shaftesbury, preceded by the mace, entered and took his scat on the woolsack. Order having been called, prayers were read by the Bishop of St. Asaph. From this time the arrivals came in rapid succession, and by half past 1 o'clock every place in the body of the house, with the exception of the front benches and the seats near the woolsack in the centre of the floor, was occupied. The peers, who had retired to robe, now began to arrive in their costume of u state and ancientary." The Duke of Wellington arrived at half-past 1 o'clock. His appcarance excited some attention, for he wore a light summer paletot over his uniform; he entered into an animated conversation with Lord Campbell. A few minutes after the noble duke arrived the Lord Chancellor took his seat on the woolsack and, there being a judgment left on the paper to be disposed of, he proceeded immediately to business. Silence was obtained, and the parties in Irving v. Manding called in. The ladies, who had not come piepaied for a Bishop and Divine service, were yet more surprised at finding themselves in a court of law, and sat quite attentive, as if curious to see what would happen next. The Lord Chancellor very briefly confirmed the judgment of the courts below. Lord Campbell at greater length concurred with his noble and learned friend the only fact stated was that the case had been balancing in the scales of justice for some 0J years. AVhen the spectators settled down at the conclusion of the judicial business it was evident all were present to whom tickets had been issued. The nobly propor- tioned apartment was completely filled; the eye could find no vacant space except just in front of and beside the throne in every other direction it rested on beauty of form or face, rich costumes, state robes, or military and diplomatic uniforms. The body of the house on either hand presented a mass of light and elegant colour, above which rose snowy feathers, wreaths, head diesses of a single Hower, disposed with exquisite taste, or, more rarely, diamonds and gems. The peers were forced to sit together in a close line on the front benches, and on the seats near the woolsack, forming, with their scurlet and crmined robes, a rich centre to the tableau. The splendid uniforms of the corps diplomatique, and the helmets and breastplates of two or three officers of the Guards varied and relieved the view, the effect of which, combined with the gold and massive carved work of the wails and roof, was that of a magnificent picture enclosed in a gigantic and gorgeous frame. At 10 minutes past 2 o'clock the first gun was heard announcing the approach of Her Majesty; at a quarter past 2 o'clock the heralds entered the door to the right of the throne they were followed by the oiffcers of the Royal household, the Lord Chancellor, preceded by the nilice the Duke of Wellington, carrying the sword of state: the Marquis of Winchester, with the cap of maintenance, and the Lord President of the Council, with the crown. They were immediately followed by Her Majesty and his Royal Highness Prince Albert. Her Majesty having taken her place on the throne, requested the peers and all present to be seated. His Royal Highness occupied the chair on Her Majesty's left hand; he wore a Field Marshal's uniform. The Queen (who looked exceedingly well) wore the Royal robe over a dress of white satin, with a stomacher, necklace, and tiara of diamonds. Her Majesty was attended by the Duchess of Sutherland, as Mistress of the Robes. The Usher of the Black Rod was directed to. summon the Commons. After the lapse of a few minutes, the Speaker of the House of Commons, attended by a great number of mem- bers appeared at the bar, and the three powers of the constitution met for the first time in the new house of Parliament. The Speaker immediately addressed Her Majesty in the following words Most Gracious Sovereign,—We, your Majesty's faithful Commons, attend your Majesty with the bill by which the supplies are completed for the present year. They have been granted with a strict regard to economy, but with every disposition to make ample provision for all branches of the public service. During the progress of the session which is now about to terminate, we have maturely considered various mea- sures for the practical improvement of the law, and for the amelioration of the moral and social condition of the people; and where it has not been possible to bring these measures to a satisfactory conclusion, we hope to have prepared the way for sound and useful legislation in future sessions of Parliament. We have passed acts to regulate the disposition and transfer of land in Scot- land, while, by carefully adhering to the established principles of law, we have given increased facilities for dealing with real property in that country, which must tend greatly to increabe its security and value. We have found it necessary to place a further limi- tation on the hours of labour of young persons employed in factories and, by giving more time and opportunity for their moral and religious instruction, and for the ex- ercise of their domestic duties, we have cbvated the character and condition of a large and industrious class engaged in manufacturing operations. :s, however, one subject of paramount impor- tance to which your Majesty was ;raciously pieased to direct our attention at the commencement uf the session, and which called for long and anxious deliberation. For many months past your Majesty's subjects in Ireland have been suffering from the combined effects of famine and its too frequent consequence—disease, requiring large pecuniary aid, and pronlpt and "nergetic measure s to arrest their fatal effects, and to prevent an almost total disorganization of society in many parts of that kingdom. No exertion has been wantin3 on our pari to met-u this terrible emergency. Every restriction upon the importation of food has been suspended every re- source of legislation has been employed to mitigate, what no human wisdom could avert, this awful visitation of Divine Providence. Nor have we, in providing for this exigency, been unmindful of the permanent welfare of that important part of the united kingdom. We have encouraged the development of its vast capabilities and the industry of its inhabitants, by giving every possible stimulus to public and private enterprise, whe- ther directed to the improvement of land or to the es- tablishment and construction of fisheries and harbours and, profiting by past experience, we have extended and rc-ndcred more effective the provisions of the law for the relief of the destitute poor, thereby bringing into new and closer relations, and connecting by the ties of mutual intere ,t, the proprietor and cultivator of the soil. "To tht ■ measures for the temporary relief and permanent improvement of Ireland our labours have been unremittingly devoted, and nobly and generously have those efforts been responded to by all classes of your Majesty's subjects, who, following your Majesty's gracious and benevolent example, from the highest in the realm to the humblest, have made every sacrifice which the urgency of the case demanded to alleviate the sufferings, unexamp!cd in intensity, and borne with a fortitude and resignation equally unexampled by that brave and loyal people." The Speaker concluded his address by presenting the Consolidated Fund Appropriation Bill, to which he asked the assent of Her Majesty. The following bills then received the Royal assent in the usual form :-The Consolidated Fund Appropriation Bishopric of Manchester; Poor Law Administration Poor Removal; Commons Enclosure Amendment; New Zealand; Drainage of Lands (Scotland); Leith Har- bour and Docks Sutton Harbour Improvement; and London-bridge Approaches Bills. The Lord Chancellor then, in the usual form, pre- sented the speech, which Her Majesty read as follo ws — "MY LORDS AND GENTLEMEN, I have much satisfaction in being able to release you from the duties of a laborious and anxious session. I cannot take leave of you without expressing my grateful sense of the assiduity and zeal with which you have ap- plied yourselves to the consideration of the public in- terest. Your attention has been principally directed to the measures of immediate relief, which a great and unpre- cedented calamity rendered necessary. I have given my cheerful assent to those laws which, by allowing the free admission of grain, and by affording facilities for the use of sugar in breweries and distilleries, tend to increase the quantity of human food, and to pro- mote commercial intercourse. "Ircjoice to find that you have in no instance pro- posed new restrictions, or interfered with the liberty of foreign and internal trade as a mode of relieving distress. I feel assured that such measures are generally ineffec- tual, and in some cases aggravate the evils for the alle- viation of which they are adopted. I cordially approve of the acts of large and liberal bounty by which you have assuaged the sufferings of my Irish subjects. I have also readily gi ven my sanction to a law to make better provision for the permanent relief of the destitute in Ireland. I have likewise given my assent to various bills calculated to promote the agricul- ture and develope the industry of that portion of the united kingdom. My attention shall be directed to such further measures as may be conducive to those salutary purposes. My relations with foreign Powers continue to inspire me with confidence in the maintenance of peace. It has afforded me great satisfaction to find that the measures which, in concert with the King of the French, the Queen of Spain, and the Queen of Portugal, I have taken for the pacification of Portugal, have been attended with success, and that the civil war, which for many months had afflicted that country, has at last been brought to a bloodless termination. I indulge the hope that future differences between political parties in that country may be settled without appeal to arms. "GEXTLEMEK OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, I thank you for your willingness in granting me the necessary supplies they shall be applied with due care and economy to the public service. I am happy to inform you, that notwithstanding the price of food, the revenue has, up to the present time, been more productive than I had reason to anticipate. The increased use of articles of general consumption has chiefly contributed to this result. The revenue derived from sugar, especially, has been greatly augmented by the removal of the prohibitory duties on foreign sugar. The various grants which you have made for educa- tion in the united kingdom will, I trust, be conducive to the religious and moral improvement of my people. MY LORIIS AND GENTLEMEN, "I think proper to inform you that it is my intention immediately to dissolve the present Parliament. I rely with confidence on the loyalty to the Throne and attachment to the free institutions of this country which animate the great body of my people. Ijoin with them in supplications to Almighty God, that the dearth by which we have been afflicted may, by the Divine blessing, be converted into cheapness and plenty." Her Majesty returned the speech to the Lord Chan- cellor, who then declared the Parliament prorogued till Tuesday, the 21st day of September next, to be then hclden and it was accordingly prorogued to that day. Her Majesty, Prince Albert, and the Royal attendants immediately left the house in the order in which they came, and the proceedings terminated; but from the great nuryil, present some time elapsed before all the company hai1 left. The beautiful quality of Her Majesty's voice was never better proved than in reading the speech in the new house. She delivered it in her usual manner, and with- out effort, yet not a word was lost in any part of the im- mense hall; the profound silence kept during the time no doubt contributed to this result.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—THURSDAY, JULY 22. I POIiTUGA JJ. I Sir Dc Lacy Evans expressed his regret that the liberty of the press had not been re-estaolished in Por- tugal, and that the government in that country had not been changed in conformity with the terms guaranteed by the British government. Lord Palmerston said that he was happy to be able to state that the whole of the prisoners had been liberated, and as the quarantine (as we understood) on the liberty of the press would not terminate till the end of the pre- sent month, he hoped that by that time the liberty of the "press would be re-establisaett. The Speaker, accompanied by several members, pro- ceeded to the House of Peers.—On the return of the Speaker he informed the house that he had been to the House of Lords to hear the royal assent given to several public and private bills, for which see our Lords' report. The house then adjourned. 1-1 F;UI>AY, JULY 23. H took the chair at one o'clock. Lord Marcus Hill appeared at the bar of the house, and stated that her Majesty had, in answer to the ad- uiess of the Commons, on the subject of a speedy com- pletion of that portion of the new palace at Westminster, to be devoted to the use of the Commons, graciously ex- pressed her intention of causing the buildings to be pro- ceeded with as speedily as possible. ,y EST- I:\D! COLONIES. Lord G. Bentinck gave notice that it was his intention, at an early period of the ensuing session, to move for a select comraitfee to inquire into the condition and pros- pects of the West-India colonies, with respect to their ability to compete with slave-holding countries in the production of sugar.

AGRICULTURE, MARKETS, &c. (From the Mark Lano Ezprms.j The weather retains its favourable chfMraoter since the thunde:storm of the 16th inst. tnere appears to han; boen no rain in any part ,f the kingdom, aud having had hot sunshine daily, the growing grain crops have been forced rapidly forward. In the southern counties, harvest operations have been partially com- menced, and if the weather continues dry for another week some grain will probably be secured in the more forward localities. The reports respecting the probable yield of Wiieat ara extremely conflicting and though we have spared no pains in collecting information on the subject, we irust confess that, as yet, we are wholly unable to arrive at anything like a definite conciusiou. TÍlat1110re or less injury was done to the Wheat by the frosty nights experienced in June we have no doubt, but whether the mischief is so extensive as to detract materially from the productiveness of the crop appears questionable. Many eminent agriculturists express themsel ves perfectly satisfied that the yield will be good, whilst others as positively state that there will be a serious deficiency. If these contradictory acoounts came from localities widely removed from each other, the matter might be capable of explanation but such is not the case. Some heavy pieces of Barley and Outii have been beaten down and otherwise injured by the heavy rain which fell in different parts of the country about the close of last week, but in every other respect these crops are highly spoken of. The reports as to Beans and Peas are almost universally bad; and in regard to Potatoes, complaints have greatly increased within the last week or two. The main or late crops is said to present the same appearance as it did last year, and we much fear that a portion will again be lost. After carefully investigating the letters from our numerous correspondents, the impression left on our mind is that, if the weather should prove auspicious for the ingathering, Wheat would not fall short of an average; that Barley and Oats would exceed an usual produce. Beans and Peas are decidedly short, probably to the extent of one-fourth As respects Potatoes we must confess our inability to form even a guess. Unin- terruptedly fine weather experienced throughout the week has had the effect of allaying excitement and though the accounts from the agricultural districts have certainly been of a character to give rise to some uneasiness, the trade has, on the whole, remained in a quiet state. Of English Barley none has come to hand having, however, received 21,899 qrs. from abroad, there has been no scarcity of this grain. At this time of the year, when the maltsters and distillers are out of the market, the finer sorts are very little asked after, and the business done has been coniined to grinding qualities. Quotations of Malt have undergone no change, and the sales of the article have been on a strictly retail scale. No increase has taken place in the arrivals of English Oats. s. s. s. if. AATheat, red 67 to 72 Oats, Engl, feed 28 32 White 72-801 Yoti,Ilall Black 23 25 Norfolk &■ Suffolk G7 72 Scotch feed 33 3-3 White. 72 78 j Irish Galway 23-24 Barley, Malting.. 61 Duhlin. 25 Chevalier 4:2 Londonderry 37 48 Grinding 35 — 40 Waterford White 23 Irish Clonniel 34- Scotch. 4:3 47 Potatoe. 30 32 Beans, Tick new 44 — 16 j Seed, Rape. 30t. 321. Harrow. 47 — 48 Irish -1. — per last Pease, B0iling 50 -52 Linseed, Baltic 48 — -50 White 56 Odessa 47 — 50 Blue 71 — 78 j Mustard, white 8-10 Maple 48 — ,50 Flour, Town made Malt, Brown t,3 65 and best country Rye, new 57 60 i niirks GO Indian Corn ,12 H I Stockton 50 — LONDON AVERAGES. ;E s. d I t. s. d. AVheat..2,793 qrs. 3 16 0 | Rye 0 qrs. 0 0 0 Barley.. 6.5 1 19 3 I Beans 380 2 G 6 Oats 817 1 o 8 i Peas.. 32 2 11 6 GENERAL AVERAGE PRICE OF CORN. Week ending May 15. — Imperial—General Weekly Average, -Wheat, 74s. Od. Barley, 46s. lid.; Oats, 29s. 7d. Rye, 67s. 9d.; Beans, 52s. Id.; Peas, 53s. 3d. Aggrcgate Average of six weeks which governed Duty -Wheat, 8.5s. lOd.; Barley, 50s. 8d.; Oats, 32s. Od. Rye, 67s. 3d.; Beans, 52s. Is. Peas, 58s. 6d. SMITIIFIELD MARKET The following statement shows the imports of live stock from abroad into London during the past week Beasts 817, Sheep 2855, Lambs 293, and Calves 446. A cargo of Oxen has been received from Spain at South- ampton and about 2,200 head of Beasts, Sheep, Lambs, and Calves have been landed at the northern outports, mostly from Holland and Germany. The supply of foreign stock here this morning was very extensive, namely, 800 Beasts, 1,893 Sheep and Lambs, and 187 Calves, in somewhat improved condition, yet a total clearance was not effected. From our own growing districts the arrivals of Beasts fresh up to-day were somewhat oil the increase, but, on the whole, of middling quality. Although the attendance of buyers was by no means numerous, there was a steady inquiry for the best Scots, Devons, &c., at prices about equal to those obtained on Monday last, the very primest qualities of the former breed producing 5s., though the more general top quotation did not exceed 4s. lOd. per 8ibs. The iniddling and inferior kinds of Beef met a sluggish inquiry, and in some instances the currencies had a downward tendency. The supply of Sheep, notwithstanding it was larger than that exhibited on this day week, was short, the time of year considered hence the Mutton trade was very firm, and last week's currencies were readily supported in every instance. With Lambs we were fairly supplied, but their general quality was by no means first-rate. All breeds were in good request, but we can notice no improvement in value. The best Down qualities sold at 5s. 4d. per SIbs. There was more than an average number 1-f Calves on offer; yet a good business was transacted in that description of stock, at Friday's improved quota- tions. The Pork trade was in a sluggish state, but prices ruled the same as last week. A COMPR1SON of the PRICES of FAT STOCK. sold in SMITHFIELD CATTLE MARKET, on Monday July 27, 1846, and Monday, July 26, 1847. Per 81bs. to sink the oflal. July 13, 1846. July 12, 1817 s. d. s. d. s. d. s. d. Coarse & inferior Beasts..2 6 to 2 83 8 to 4 0 Second quality do 2 10 3 2..4 2 4 4 Prime large Oxen 3 4 3 846 4 8 Prime Scots, &c. 3 104 04105 0 Coarse and inferior Sheep 30 34..42 44 Second quality, do 3 6 3 846 4 8 Prime coarse woolled, do.. 3 10 4 04105 0 Prime Southdown, do 4 0 4 2.5"5 4 Large coarse Calves 3 6 4 0.. 4 4 4 10 Prime small do. 4 2 4 6..5 0 5 4 Large Hos 38 4 640 4 6 K eat small Porkers. 4 8 4 104S5 0 BUTTER, B^tCON, CHEESE, AND HAMS. t-. „ s, s- Cheese, per cwt. s. s. Dorset ,-Br, ut.t. er, p. fir. 98 Double Glo'ster 60-68 F rcsh Dutter, Us. Gd, Sing-]e ditto. 48 52 per dozen j Cheshire 56 76 Irish, do., per cwt. Derby. 62 66 American 54 60 Sligo. 80 — j Edam and Gouda.. 45 56 Cot-k, 1.,it 84Bacon, Dew Waterford. 80 —j Middl Foreign Butter, cwt. i Hams, Irish ô6 80 Prime Friesland 98 _V estmoreland 88 Do. Kiel. 92 York 98 PRICE OF TALLOW, &c. 1813. 1844. 18'5. 1846 18H. Stock this day 17,076 16,343.. 12,511.. 8,513.. 7,253 Price of P.Y.C. 42s. Od. 40s. od, 38s. 6d. 41s. fid. 48s. 3d. WEEKLY CALENDAR. THE :\Ioo:s's Cit.-t-GFs. -List Quarter on the 3.1 of August, at lh. 42m. afternoon. HIGH WATER AT THE FOLLOWIXG PLACES FOR THE EXSL INO WEEK. Carmar- Cardigan Teiiby A,b, cT, .Ays.?? anS ?'?- Llanelly. Bristol. ,Nlilford. with. Llanelly. Bristol. Milford. ??' 'Aucr?T. ?j[. M. H. M. II. ?. H. M. Saturday 31!! 8 21 1 9 6 7 51 9 36 Sunday i;j 9 J 9 50 8 35 '10 20 Monday 2! 9 52 '10 37 9 :¿2\1l 7 Tiieqday 11) 41 ,11 26 10 11 11 7 Wednesday 4jill 33 j 0 11 It3048 11 19 j 0 4 11 49 Friday. <i;; 1 12 i 2 3.5 | 1202 5

LONDON GAZETTE. BANKRUPTS.—FFriday, July 23.)—T. H. Pinder, Southampton, tailor -Thomas Perry, AVestminster-road, builder.—C. Martin, Darlington, Durham, plumber, -II. AVanstall, Durham, grocer.-H., Rich, Bodmin, Cornwall, currier.—G. Winnill, Worcester, coach buildc-r.-AV. F. Westall, Manchester, wine merchant.—J. Jewry, Cardiff, boot and shoemaker.—G. Coombs, Bedminster, builder. -J. Smith, Kendal, worsted spinner -R and S. Wat- kins, Manchester, tailors.—G. Wilson, Salford, Lan- cashire, ironft)uji(le)-R. Kippax, Colne, Lancaster, cotton spinner.—T. Marriott. Moor-street, Seven-dials, victualler.—J. Donaldson, Wigton, Cumberland, brewer. -1-1. Tamlvn, Tatton, Hampshire, coal merchant.—C. Houghton, Dudlev-grove, Paddington, ironmonger. BANKRUPTS.—(Tuesday, July 27)—G. Duplan, tea dealer, Regent's-plaee, Westminster.—J. Kirkland, grocer, New-street, Covent-garden,T. Priestley,grocer, Bedford.—G. Westrip, cab master, Saint Peter-street, Nevvington, Surrey.—J. S. Archer. tallow chandler, Paternoster-row.-C. Burtt, chemist, Lower Miteham.— F. AAlgijins, horse contractor, Union-street, Bridge- street, Blackfriars.—AV. Jackson, joiner, Tranmere.—II- Evans, builder, IIeanor, Derbyshire.—J. H. Dcnncr, pawnbroker, Nottingham.—F. C. Ilusenbeth, wine merchant, Bristol.—D. Watkins, shoemaker, Aber- gavenny.—J. Gale, wine merchant, Chapel-hill, Mon- mouthshire.—G. Henwood, carver and gilder, Leeds.

ADVERTISEMENTS AND ORDERS RECEIVED BY THE FOLLOWING AGENTS: — LONDON Mr. Barker, 33, Fleet-street; Messrs. New- ton and Co., Warwick-square; Mr. G. lleynell, 42, Chancery-lane; Ir. Deacon, 3, AValbrook, near the Mansion House; Mr Hammond, 27, Lombard-street W. Dawson, and Son, 71, Cannon-street; Mr. C- Mitchell. Red Lion Court, Fleet-street Mr. NV- Thomas, Catherine-street, Strand; Mr. II. Clarke. 22, Charing Cross; Mr. G. II. Street, 11, Serle-street, London. THIS PAPER IS REGULARLY FILED by all the above agents, and also in London, at Peel's Coffee-HousCi No. 177 and 178, Flect-street.-Deacon's Coifee-IIouse. AValbrook, and the Auction Mart. n- _u_n_ Printed and Published in Guildhall Square, in the Parish of 8t. Peter, in the County of the Borough of Carmarthen. hY the Proprietor. JOSKFH UEUINVOTOM, of l'icton Terrace t'1 (';Ul1Ia rthen FRIDAY, 30, 1817.