The Leeds Mercury publishes the following correspondence relative to the

dismissal of Mr. Richard Oastler by Mr. Thornhill, of Fixby Hall-

Ma.Erwroa.

Sir—H iviog seen a printed paper this day, which invites persons to join in a pro- cession to accompany Mr. H. ()ostler upon his leaving my house, Fishy Hall and which paper appears to show that 1 parted with Mr. Oastler (my steward) upon the subject of the Poor laws; I think it is proper, in justice to myself, to state that I dis- charged Mn. R. Hastier because he converted my mosey to her own sue; and paid to little attention to my concerns, cm his duty, that the persons employed under hist have cheated see. Should any person doebt this. I am st Ming to prove it to his satisfaction it ho NitI call upon me at any time.

'' Yea u ill much oblige me by inserting this in:your paper.

" Your obedient Servant, THOMAS THORNHILL." " COD 09. nth August Ins."

"TO THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND.

Fellow Countrymen—I have this moment, for ihefird time, heard that my late master has not contented himself w ids taking my bread, bat that he lots ordered an advertisement to be inserted in ell the local papers charging me with cheating him, and ith neglecting his business. By my father's memory. believe me it is not true. I have ouly time to say, that, it' there be one human being, whom I dare meet in tho orld to come without fear, it is Thomas Thornhill. Esq.

'• Come to Fiala). on Saturday, and go down to Huddersfield with me. Thee I will tell you something which you do not know—and, afterwards, I will. in a series of letters to youtselves, show you what it is to be the steward of an absentee landlord. " Me cheat the sqeire ! I !MVO spent hundreds of my own in hie service! I will not, hoe ever, lose my character I You shall know all istout it in due time.

" I am, fellow countrymen, faithfully yours, " RICHAND OASTLER. " Fixity Hall near Huddersfield. Aug. 21. 1838. •• P.S. How delighted the Whigs w ill be! They will now sing • Oh, be joyful!' I dare refer all (west ions between myself and Mr. Thornhill to the greatest foe I have— ay, es en to a Whig. IL 0." The Illorniiig Chronicle gives some additional particulars relating to the parties in this dispute.

r, Ali.. Thornhill is, we understand, a rich and highly-respected Tory land.

holder of 40,000/. a year. He generally resides at Riddlesworth, Norfolk. The Yorkshire estate under Mr. Oastler's management has a rental of 18,0001. a year. Of Mr. Oastler as a politician we have always had but one opinion; arid that such a man should have been supported as a candidate for Hudders-

field reflected great disgrace on the Tories. Into tile private disputes between him and his late master, Mr. Thornhill, it is not for us to enter. Mr. Thorn- hill certainly expressea himself in a very plain and unequivocal manner ; and the charge is very serious. This is not, however, the first time that Mi. Oast- ler lias been placed on his defence. Many of our readers will remember a con- troversy between Mr. John Foster, of Leeds, the late Mr. Sadler, and Mr. Richard ()ostler, respecting an alleged deficiency of the factory funds of up. wards of 4,000/. with which Mr. Oastler was charged by Mr. Foster. On that occasion Mr. John Wood extricated Mr. Oastler. The latter had over and over again at several public meetings asserted that Mr. John Wood had subscribed 5,0001. to the fund in question, and on the faith of these assertions Mr. John Wood had enjoyed great popularity. It is but due to Mr. Oastler to state, that Mr. John Wood came forwatd at the twelfth hour to relieve him from his diffi- culty, by declaring that he had not subscribed 5,0001., though Mr. Oastler had again and again asserted this, and that he had been in the eujoyment of an um merited popularity. But Mr. John Wood found it convenient to shift his quarters front Bradford to the South ; and it is not understood that he and Mr. Richard ()ostler have been on the best to ma from the date of the public deck- ration in Mr. Oastler's favour."

Oastler left Fixby Hall on the 25th, escorted by a considerable num- ber of persons to Huddersfield; where he took up his ubode with his brother-imlaw, a Mr. Latham. He addressed the crowd in vehement language, from hustings erected for the occasion; and read the follow- ing note, as a second reply to his late employer, Mr. Thornhill.

" Thomas Thornhill, 49. Berkeley Squaw, London.

'• Sir—I have this morning seen your letter addressesl to the editor of the Leeds fa- teigetteer. in uhich you charge me with having converted your money to my own uses—witit hav jag neglected your interest and my duty—and stating that persons under me have cheated you. In the most positive terms which the English language can stipple, I assert, that so far as I tun concerned, the charges are untrue. I demand of you a plain straightforward anseer to the following gm:Miens—I. When did I uppro- priate any of your money to my uses? 2. Where did I appropriate any of your mune) to my °nu uses? 3. How much of your money have I appropriated to my own use ? 4. What parts or your business have I neglected to attend to ? 5. What part of myth:1y toe awls you It3S been neglected ? 6. Who employed under me has cheated yen? 7. When have they cheated you ? 8. Where have they cheated you ? 9. What is the amount of money of %%lads they base theated you?

" I might ask you airy you thought proper to discharge me without giving me either reason or notice ? I might ask you why you resolved to have your letter of the 17th of August insetted in all the lueal papers of the 25th of August, without my knossiedge. lust I will not ask you that question; every houest man can answer it without your aid.

You say that you have not discharged me on account of the new Poordaw. I am prepure to prove that you have. I require you now to publish the correspondence be- tureen yourself nod Mr. Frankland Lewis, the Peerless Commissioner. and portico- holy that letter IS hum, he tells you that the Commissioners are very much annoy ed

ith out steward in YothsIttre, and requesting you to put a stop to him, or words to that elect. It is of no use to say you hive no such letter. I know that sou have. "1 am " Iticae Oasat.ea. yoor discarded sersant, ert

Not from your hoes", Fixby Hall, but from the People's hustiugs, Iludders6eld.', The Times has since published a letter from this person, a specimen of which may be read in the following passage- " The new Poorlaw is to:constitutional ; it is declared to be so by Lord Brougham and all its snmeaters ; that is my case. On tire authority of Abiugdon, sharpe, Black- stone, Locke, Bacon, Ellys, Coke, Holt, Somers, Atkins, Fox, and many other of the highest authorities, I advise you to resist it. I formerly advised you to petition against it. You have done so by thousands and millions. our petitions have been spurned by her Majesty's Ministers and the House of Consmons; and they have virtually told a oit— ltov ids being their mouthpiece—to kill and burn, that your oppressors might bare a pletext for letting loose the dogs or ear upon you, as at Canterbury, and thus enthuse )(tn. I say petition no more ; but do not kill, do not burn : the MAU is mad or worse who does either. No, nu ; be peaceable—protect property—preserve life; but do not petition any more."

The Leeds Times reminds the good people of Yorkshire, that Mr. Feargus O'Connor, who now professes such ardent affection for the working classes and suffering poor, when he had a vote in Parliament supported the Corn-laws.

There have been fresh disturbances at Dewsbury. On Monday week, Mr. Ingham and Mr. Hague, Poor-law Uuardiuns, were escorted from the school-room to the Royal Hotel by the Police, but were pelted with stones : several of the Police were severely hurt. Six men :red one woman were taken and committed to prison.