74 : 
THE GARDENERS’ 
CHRONICLE. 
[Fex 4, 
7 
Esq. Pembrokeshire.—G. L. Phillips, of 
M. Guizot has been unmoved by these 
and has again announced his determination to abide by 
the treaties, and to stake the existence of the Cabinet on 
their loyal execution.—From Spain we have little news ; 
the elections still occupy attention, but the result is doubt- 
ful and the Government is by no means certain of a 
majority. In Barcelona, the extreme measures adopted 
by the Captain-General have caused great sensation, and 
many of the inhabitants, fearing to be delivered up to the 
military commission, have submitted to the war contribu- 
tion—From Portugal we have unfavourable accounts of 
the tariff negotiations ; the concessions proposed by Portu- 
gal are so slight, and are coupled with such conditions, that 
the British Government is not likely to accept them, and it 
is generally believed that the Convention is virtually 
at an end.—From the United States we learn that the 
last debate on the Oregon territory took place on the 12th 
ult., and that after a long and warlike discussion in fa- 
vour of its appropriation, the bill providing for its im- 
mediate occupation and settlement had been engrossed.— 
The accounts from Canada report more favourably of the 
health of the Governor-General than we were led to an- 
ticipate by the last advices, and state that his Excellency 
will shortly return to England. 
Wome News. 
Court.—Her Majesty, Prince Albert, the Prince of 
Wales, and the Princess Royal remain at Windsor, and 
continue in good health. The Queen has taken her usual 
walking exercise during the week, and the Prince has 
enjoyed the diversion of shooting in different parts of the 
Park. On Tuesday the Queen held a Privy Council at 
Windsor, at which Her Majesty’s Speech on opening the 
Session of Parliament was arranged. The list of Sheriffs 
was pricked for the present year, and Sir Charles Metcalfe 
was sworn into office as Governor General of Canada. 
Major-General Wemyss has been succeeded by Colonel 
Arbuthnot, as the Equerry in Waiting on the Queen; Lord 
Hardwicke has succeeded the Earl of Morton as the Lord 
in Waiting ; the Countess of Charlemont has succeeded the 
Duchess of Norfolk as the Lady in Waiting; the Hon. 
Misses Stanley and Hamilton have succeeded the Hon. 
Misses Liddell and Lister as Maids of Honour on Her 
Majesty; and Colonel Wylde has succeeded Colonel 
Bouverie as the Equerry in Waiting on Prince Albert. 
Official Appoi Mr. Steph junior secre- 
tary to the Premier, has succeeded Mr. Drummond as 
Chief Private Secretary, and Mr. Arbuthnot of the Trea- 
sury has been appointed junior secretary in the room of 
Mr. Stephenson. Mr. David Pollock ‘has received the 
ppoi of C issi of the Insolvent Debtors’ 
Court, vacant by the decease of Mr. Bowen. 
Parliamentary Movements.—The election for an Trish 
Representative Peer in the room of the late Lord Gort 
terminated on Monday night, at 120’clock. There were 
two -candidates—Viscount O'Neill, Conservative, and 
Lord Oranmore, Whig. The numbers were for Lord 
O’Neil, 46; Lord Oranmore, 1; Lord Trimlestown was 
the only peer who voted for the Jatter. 
New Sheriffs.—The following is a list of the New 
Sheriffs chosen by her Majesty in Council, at the Court 
held on Tuesday, at Windsor Castle. Bedfordshire.—W. 
Sutcliff, of Great Bramingham, Esq. Berkshire.—Sir 
R. G. Throckmorton, of Buckland House, Bart. Buck- 
inghamshire.—J.. Trevor, sen., of Broughton House, 
Aylesbury, Esq. Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire. 
—E. H. Greene, of Hinxton, Esq. Cumberland.—R. 
Hodgson, of Salkeld Hall, Esq, Cheshire.—J. Dixon, of 
Astle, Esq. Derbyshire—W. Mundy, of Markeaton, 
Esq. Devonshire.—W. J. Clarke, of Buckland, Esq. 
Dorsetshire.—J. C. Dale, of Glanvilles Wootton, Esq. 
Durham.—E. Shippersden, of Durham, Esq. Essex.— 
H. J. Conyers, of Copped Hall, Epping, Esq. Glouces- 
tershire, R. S. Holford, of Weston Birt, Esq. Here- 
Sordshire.—Sir E. F. S. Stanhope, of Holme Lacy, Bart. 
Hertfordshire.—C. J. Dimsdale, of Essondon-place, Esq: 
Monmouthshire.*— Sir D. Muckworth, of Glen Usk, 
Bart. Norfolk.— W. G. T. D. Tyssen, of Foulden, 
Esq. | Northamptonshire. — Sir A. de Capell Broke, 
of Oakley, Bart. Northumberland. — T. Anderson,' of 
Little Harle Tower, Esq. Nottinghamshire, —T, D. 
Hall, of Whatton, Esq. Oxfordshire.—W. H. Vandars- 
tegen, of Cane-End House, Esq. Rutlandshire.— 
G. Fludyer, of Ayston, Esq, Shropshire.—Sir A. V. 
Corbet, of Acton Reynald, Bart. Somersetshire. 
The Hon. P. P. Bouverie, of Brymore.  Stafford- 
shire.—J.-S. Manley, of Manley Hall, Esq. County 
of Southampton—W. Hughes Hughes, of Ryde, Esq. 
Suffolk.—W. Long, of Saxmundham, Esq. Surrey.— 
+ Sumner, of Puttenham Priory, Esq. Stssex.—M. 
Brisco, of Coghurst,Esq. Warwickshire.—A. F. Gregory, 
of Stivichall, Esq. Wilishire.—H. S. Olivier, of Potterne, 
Esq. Worcestershire. —W. Robins, of Hagley, Esq. 
Yorkshire.—Sir J. w. Copley, of Sprotborough, Bart. 
WaLeEs.— Anglesey, Roberts, of Tynewydd, Esq. 
Breconshire.—W, Maybery, of Brecknock, Esq. Car- 
narvonshire.—D. Jones, of Bodfan, Esq. Carmarthen- 
shire.—Postponed. Cardiganshire._F. T. Gibb, of Hen- 
drefelen, Esq. Denbighshire,—j, Townshend, of Tre- 
Mostyn, of Talacre, 
Bart. Glamorganshire.—J - Homfray, of Llandaff House, 
Esq. Montgomeryshire.—Sir J. Conroy, of Plasypen- 
nant, Bart. Merionethshire.—O. J. BE, Nanney, of 
i i 
| Lord Aberdeen and the English Advocate General, viz. 
‘Cersddeddd 
D 
Esq. ‘ec. —E. D. Thomas, of 
Wellfield House, Esq. Incranp.—His Excellency the 
Lord-Lieutenant has appointed the undermentioned gentle- 
men to the office of High Sheriff for 1843 :—Antrim.-—J. 
M‘Neile, Esq., of Parkmount. Armagh.—J.M. Stronge, 
Esq., of Tynan Abbey. Carlow,—T. T. Vigors, Esq., of 
Erindale. Carrickfergus Town.—E. Bruce, Esq., 0 
Scoutbush. Cavan.—W. Emery, Esq., of Ballyconnell 
House. Clare.—W. Skerrett, Esq,, of Finnevara. Cork. 
—Hion. A. G. Annesley, of Anne’s Grove. Cork City.— 
J. Morgan, Esq., of Tivoli. Donegal.—J. R. Boyd, Esq., 
of Ballymacool. Down.—P. J. Nugent, Esq., of Porta- 
ferry. Drogheda Town.—R. Smith, Esq., of Drogheda. 
Dublin.—C. Cobbe, jun., Esq., of Newbridge. Dublin 
City.—D. C. La Touche, Esq., Bank. F'ermanagh.—R. 
Hall Esq., of Innismore. Galway.—R. Gregory, Esq, 
of Cool Park. Galway Town.—N. Lynch, Esq., of Barna. 
Kerry.—P. Mahony, jun., Esq., of Kilmeany. Kildare. 
—J. La Touche, Esq., of Harristown. Kilkenny.—R. 
Tyndal, Esq., of Oakland. King’s Cownty.—H. Trench, 
Esq., of Newtown. Leitrim.—J. R. Godley, Esq., of 
Killegar. Limerick.—R. Maxwell, Esq., of Tslandmore. 
Limerick City.—J.N. Russell, Esq., of Limerick, Lon- 
donderry City and County.—W. H. Ashe, Esq., of Ash- 
brook. Longford. —W. S. Ball, Esq., of Abbeylara. 
Louth.—S. M‘Clintock, Esq., of Newtown. Mayo.—M. 
Pratt, Esq., of Ennisco. Meath.—J. Farrell, Esq., of 
Moynalty. Monaghan.—J. Hatchell, Esq., of Bess- 
mount. Queen’s County.—M. S. Cassan, Esq., of Shef- 
field. Roscommon.—C. Molloy, Esq., of Oak Port. Sligo. 
—A. B. Cooper, Esq., of Cooper-hill. Tipperary.—A. 
Going, Esq., of Ballyphilip. T'yrone.—R. Gordon, Esq., 
of Florida. Waterford.—C. E. Kennedy, Esq., of Jobns- 
Waterford City.—R. W. Morris, Esq., of West 
Westmeath.—G. A. Boyd, Esq., of Middleton- 
park. Wexford.—J. Goff, Esq., of Horetown. Wicklow. 
—R. Hudson, Esq., of Spring-farm. 
a 
Sforetqn. 
Francu.—Chamber of Deputies.—The debate on the 
Address in the Chamber of Deputies commenced last 
Friday, and has continued exclusively to occupy the atten- 
tion of the public up to the present time. The four 
orators who commenced the debate, and whose speeches 
occupied the entire sitting of Friday, are men of what the 
French call esprit, brilliant and imaginative, but deficient 
in the practical qualities of statesmen. M. Gustave de 
Beaumont commenced by declaring that he saw no Ministry 
before him at all, because M. Guizot did nothing that he 
wished himself, and wished nothing that he did. A Minister 
was no Minister who obeyed a majority, without having a 
will of his own; and M. Guizot being in this position, 
ought to withdraw. He declared that he was, at first, 
rejoiced at the non-ratification of the treaty of 1841; but 
that, afterwards, his rejoicing was turned to discontent, 
because the English seemed quite satisfied and made no 
noise or complaint. After some observations from M. de 
Carné, M. de Lamartine occupied the tribune, and dedlared 
that he should fling aside henceforth all allegiance to the 
Conservative party. The opposition in this country, said 
M. de Lamartine, is not the anarchic, democratic party 
that people would have it believed. It is like the English 
Whigs, a party of liberal ideas and progress, yet fraught 
with every really useful Conservative principle, and with 
all that is necessary to order and good government. “ We 
will be the modern Whigs of France,’’ he exclaimed. He 
dwelt more on French than on foreign policy, and accused 
not merely M. Guizot, but his predecessors, including 
M. Thiers, of having taken a wrong direction. e de- 
nounced the fortifications of Paris as liberticide, and he 
remarked that it was not till the fortifications were in 
progress, that they had dared to broach the doctrine of 
moral complicity in order to crush the press. He sur- 
prised the Chambers by declaring that the system (a new 
word with French political writers, to mean the King him- 
self) is answerable for all the political mischief of the day ; 
and he did not shrink from declaring that all national and 
liberal interests were sacrificed to dynastic ones. The 
Minister of Public Instruction replied to M. Lamartine, 
refuting and deprecating the chief measure of foreign 
policy recommended by him, viz., intervention in Spain. 
M. de Rochejaquelin and M. de Gasperin followed ; the 
latter declared that the Right of Search was the best 
mode of suppressing the Slave-trade. He was succeeded 
y M. de Tocqueville, who laboured to show that the 
entire cause of the difference and irritation between Eng- 
land and France layin M. Guizot. He characterized him 
as the great culprit, the great. firebrand, and great stirrer 
of quarrel. He accused M. Guizot of making the great 
mistake of supposing that French anger against England 
could cool. M. Guizot’s policy was altogether based on 
this supposition: but it was a mistaken one. However 
slight the original cause of the present difference between 
the nations, so slight that such causes of difference must 
be expected to arise every day between two countries of 
such vast interests, influence, and ambition—nevertheless 
the hatred of the French has gone on increasing every 
month since 1840. Hia chief reason for breaking the 
treaties was that the country desired it ; and his second 
reason was, that he thought England would put up with 
the injustice. M. St. Mare Girardin, the second in the 
Ministry of Public Instruction, declared that he was for 
other modes of putting down the Slave-trade, One was’ 
for France to abolish slavery in her own colonies, and 
then to aid England in closing and putting an end to 
the slave markets of Brazil and Cuba, Another mode 
which he approved of, was that so lightly abandoned by 
the destruction of slave factories on the African coast. 
He regretted to find that English cruizers were forbidden 
to persevere in that humane and rightful task. On Mon- 
lay M. Ducos, of Bordeaux, spoke violently against 
England. M. David, ex-consul at Smyrna, then pro- 
posed an amendment on the paragraph respecting the 
East, requiring that France should claim and resume 
all the rights that she enjoyed in the Levant in 1835. 
M. Berryer moved the omission of a portion of this new 
paragraph, and an animated debate took place, in which 
M. Guizot ably defended the Eastern policy of the Go- 
vernment. France, he said, had abandoned none of her 
former treaties with Turkey, nor any of the rights and 
privileges which she had hitherto enjoyed; the French 
flag continued to be hoisted on the churches and convents 
of Syria, and, even in 1840, during the civil war, it never 
ceased to afford protection to the Christian population of 
Lebanon. France could not, in virtue of those treaties, 
interfere alone to procure a better Administration for 
Syria; she could only use her influence ; she had laboured, 
in conjunction with England and Austria, to effect that 
purpose, and she had succeeded in compelling the Porte 
to acknowledge the liberties of the Christian population 
of Turkey. France could not have succeeded alone, and 
it was only when it found the great Powers unanimous in 
this demand that the Divan had yielded. M. Janvier then 
showed that, from 1840 to 1843, Russia has been un- 
ceasingly employed in resisting all the other Powers at 
Constantinople, and that whilst the English fleet was aid- 
ing the Syrians to fling off the Egyptian yoke, Russia was 
negotiating at Constantinople for a transference to herself 
of the Christian protectorate of Syria. He showed that 
all through 1842, Russia prevented the Porte from yield- 
ing to the views of the other Powers respecting the Leba- 
non, and only joined them at the last hour, and then only 
from the fear of being left isolated. M. Berryer admitted 
that the adoption of M. David’s amendment by the 
Chamber would be attended with inconveniences, but he 
could not concur with the committee in declaring that the 
population of Syria had received and obtained an Admi- 
nistration in harmony with their fate and wishes, since it 
was only a trial the Porte had consented to make at the 
invitation of the Powers. He maintained that it was 
England who had opposed the restoration of the Emir 
Beschir, whose family had possessed the Government for 
upwards of 200 years. He thought that France should 
not congratulate herself on the establishment of an order 
of things that was not her own work, for fear of ruining 
still more her influence with the population of the Levant, 
who should always be accustomed to look up to her ex- 
clusively for protection, The Chamber then divided, 
giving 206 for the amendment, and 203 for the address ; 
thus leaving Ministers in a minority of 3, This result is 
not so serious as to lead to their resignation, although it 
is important as showing the relative strength of parties. 
The discussion on the paragraph relating to the Right of 
Search commenced on Tuesday. M. Dumon, the re- 
porter of the Commission, M. de Valmy, and the Mar- 
quis de Langle spoke. M. Dumon said—‘“ That desiring 
the treaties, while they existed, to be executed, the Com- 
mission, nevertheless, expressed the wish of the Chamber 
that the moment should come when French ships would 
be under the surveillance of their own flag, and no other; 
but it left the Governmentits liberty and its responsibility.” 
Two amendments were presented to the Chamber in the 
course of the debate, differiug very slightly from each 
other. The first, that of M. Chasseloup Laubat, pro- 
poses to add and insert, in the last sentence, that the 
Chamber “ calls, by its vows, for the moment when nego- 
tiations, followed up with prudence and conviction, shall 
have replaced our commerce under the exclusive sur- 
veillance of our flag.’’ The other, by Colonel Lespenasse, 
is much the same, only more brief. In the debate on 
Wednesday, M. Guizot declared * that he would not open 
any negotiations for the modification of the treaties of 
1831 and 1833, until he saw fair prospects of obtaining 
that modification from England by a common accord, and 
with success.” This challenge to opposition was received 
by what the papers call profound agitation. The Minister 
was known to have staked his{continuance in "power on 
the rejection of M. Laubat’s amendment. The division 
was not expected to take place for a day or two, and 
the debate was still in progress at the date of the last 
advices. 
Sparn.—The arrivals from Madrid come down to the 
24th ult. They continue devoid of any intelligence pos- 
sessing general interest. The elections still occupied the 
public attention ; but the result of them is as uncertain as 
ever, and the Government is by no means certain of a 
Majority. Three of the Ministers were suffering from 
illness at the date of these letters—the Comte Almodovar, 
M. Calatrava, and M. Zumalacarregui ; though whether 
they were seriously indisposed or not is not mentioned. 
Arrangements had been made by the Spanish Govern- 
ment for paying the arrears due to the British Auxiliary 
Legion. The papers state that the provincial deputation 
of Burgos had followed the example given by that of 
Saragossa, and had issued a manifesto censuring the 
Government measures. It was not believed that any real 
Progress had been made in the commercial treaty. The 
affair of M. Lesseps was by no means arranged. The 
Duke of Gluckberg, French envoy, still insisted on repar- 
ation ; but, on the’ other hand, the Regent had received 
testimonies from Barcelona sufficient to prove the alli- 
ance between the French Consul and the result. The 
accounts from Barcelona are a mags of crimination and 
recrimination between the two political parties in that 
city—of complaints of alleged tyranny on the one side, 
ind of di ion on the other, Gen. Seaone’s measure 
of quartering the troops upon the inhabitants, which at 
| 
