Debated anti proceetiinEng in 19artiament.

MISGOVERNMENT OF CANADA.

In a Committee of the whole House, on Monday, Lord JOSS

RUSSELL moved the following resolutions. " I. That since the 31st day ut October in the year 1532, no pi 0‘ j.j0ii 11,,s been made by the Legistai ore of the into hill. 01 boxer l'floatta r it deftly in foe eh ,,ges of the wiminist union of justice. mitt tar Ate support of th.• civil government an i.,11 the said province; and that there wiil, on the Will day 01 April now next et,stort?.. be required lor deli:tying iu Intl the charges utot,saitt to that day the stun of 142.1601. 14s. 6d. " 5. That at a session of the I ... gislatore of Lower Canada, holden at the city of Quebec. in the said Koehler, tit the months or sque,,,t,..r ;mu }).tuber 1536. the Governor of the said province, in compli.itice %stilt his Alajesty's c ..... ntantl•. 'crew mended to the atleutiUll of the House itt Assembly }herein the estimaies or the current year. and ;Os° the itretritits. showing the arrears due iu respect of the civil government. and signified to the said House his NI ajesiy 's confidence that they sumo accede to the application which he hall INI01 C011110■0101.0 to renew tar p.oy meld of the arrears (lite on account 01 the ',iodic sect ice, and Mr the funds necessary to carry

ou the civil government of the I owe.

3. Thst the said House to As.emIdy. on the 3t1 day of October 1836.4 an address to the Govertair of the Said province, declined to vote a supply for the pawn!, aforesaid; and by the said attire... alter referring 10 is former address et no! stet House to the Giver ul the said provaire. declared that the said House persated amongst other things, in the than:not ut an Elective Legislative Council. awl i.n de' mantling the repeal of a certain Art passe by the Parlianteut of the linnet' Knottiest

in favour of the North American Land Company ; I by the said address the said

House of Assembly further 110%,111.11 10 the demand made by the House of the see exercise of its control over all the lo ;undies of the Executive Government ; and ly tie

said address the said noose of A.sembly further declared, that it was i..c..011.eut OR them in the present conjuncture to adjourn their deliberations until hia Majesty's

Government should by its Aels, especially by rendering the second brooch ur tio Legislature couluramble to the wishes unit wants of the people, have commenced Ibs Brest work of justice and reform, and created a confidence which Mune ronld crown it

eitb *tweet'. That in the existing state of Lower Canada it is unadvisable to make the

Legislative Connell of that province an elective body ; but that it is xpedient that oposores be adopted for securing to that Insult of the Legislature a greater degree of public confidence. 6. That while it is expedient to improve the composition of the Executive Connell he bower Canada, it is nnadvisable to subject it to the responsibility den ended by the }fosse of Assembly of that province.

• th That the legal title of the North American Land Company to the land holden the said Company, by virtue of a grant from his Majesty. wader the public seal of eho said province. and, the privileges conferred on the said Compan by the Act *that purpose made in the 4th year of his Majesty's reign. ought to e maintained inviolate.

s That it is expedient, that so 80011 as provision shall have been made by law to as passed by the Legislature of the said province of Lower Canada for the discharge of leads therein from feudal dues and services, and for removing any doubts as to the incidents of tenure of land in free and common soecage in the said rovince, a cer. lain Act made and passed in the 6th year of the reign of his late Majesty King George the Fourth, comment!, called ' The Canada Tenures Act,' and se much of an- other Act passed in the 3d year of his said late Majesty's reign, con monly called The Canada Trade Act,' as relates to the tenures of land in the said province, should be repealed; saving nevertheless to all persons all rights in them vested under or by

virtue of the said recited Acts. 6'8. That for defraying the arrears due on account of the established and customary charges of the administration of justice and of the civil government of the said pro- vince, it is expedient that, alter applying for that purpose such balance as shall on the 10th day of April 1837 be in the bands of the Recerver-General of the raid province. Diking from his Majesty's hereditary. territorial, and casual revenue, the Goveruor of the said province he empowered to issue from autl out of any other part of his Majesty's revenues in the hands of the Receiver-General of the said province such further sant as shall be necessary to effect the payment of the before-meutioned sum of 142,1601. lie. 6d. .9. That it is expedient that his Majesty be authorized to place at thedisposal of

the Legislature of the said proviuce, the net proceeds of his Majesty's hereditary, ter- Modal, and casual revenue arising within the same, in case the said Legislature shall see fit to grant to his Majesty a Civil List for defraying the necessary charges of the administration of justice, and for the maintenance and unavoidable expenses of certain If the principal offices of the civil government of the saidprovince. • 10. That great inconvenience has been sustained by his Majesty's sithjects inhabit- ing the provinces of Lower Canada and Upper Canada, from the want of some ade- quate means for regulating and adjusting questions respecting the trade and commerce of the sal provinces, and divers other questions wherein the said provinces have a common interest ; and it is expedient that the Legislature of the said provinces re- speetiselv be authorized to make provision for the joint regulation and adjustment of such their common interests."

In commencing his speech, Lord John Russell said, that he bad never made a proposition to the House with so much reluctance as that which it became his duty, as the representative of his Majesty's Go- vernment, to make that night. It was, however, a consolation to him that the people of Lower Canada were in fact represented in the Bri- tish Parliament, and that their case would be stated with as much abi- lity as they could desire. It was also a consolation to him, that the Assembly of Lower Canada stood alone in the pretensions which they set forth ; that neither Upper Canada, Nova Scotia, nor New Bruns-

wick demanded an elective Legislative Council ; for, with respect to those colonies, communications had taken place which encouraged the hope of a satisfactory adjustment of all difficulties. He did not in- tend to cast any censure upon the conduct of the House of Assembly in Lower Canada-- " I consider," said Lord John, "that this course so much resembles the course which other popular assemblies have on similar occasions taken, that instead of its being an act of self-twill or caprice, or presumption it seems rather to be the obligation of a general law which affects all these disputes between popular assembly on the one hand and the executive on the other ; and the course of the proceedings which generally take place strongly impresses this lesson, that popular assemblies are hardly ever wrong in the beginning, and hardly ever right at the conclusion of these struggles. They are generally struggles that commence with right, and end with the establishment of wrong. They are generally struggles which begin with seeking a remedy of well-founded and existing grievances, and end with a declaration of suspicion and distrust of all authorities at present existing, and endeavour to set up some new and unknown government by which they suppose there will be an outlet to the remedy of all future grievances. But if they succeed in their attempts, they Beldam indeed end in conferring the benefits that are expected from them."

He adverted to the history of Canada since it came into the pos- session of England ; and especially to the Constitutional Act of 1791, by which Mr. Pitt, from an idea of analogy to the British constitution,

endeavoured to establish a second chamber, similar to the House of Lords,—although Lord John agreed with Mr. Roebuck that it was not in the power of any one to create such an assembly in Canada, where there was no class of persons who could claim to be an hereditary aris- tocracy, which should have any thing like the influence held by the

House of Peers in England. The constitution of the Legislative' Council, however, had not been the subject of complaint for any great length of time. On the contrary, the grievances of the Canadians were those of maleadministration—had reference to the nomination of judges, the disposal of public money, the prosecution of defaulters, and various other matters. They complained especially, that by an Act of the British Legislature in 1774, certain duties were appro- priated to the Government and put out of the control of the Assem- bly. In 1831, this act was repealed, simply and unconditionally; although the Committee on the affairs of Canada, which sat in 18.28, recommended that a provision for the Judges and other officers should be made one of the terms on which the Act was to be repealed. The House of Assembly having gained possession of the duties, made no provision for the Judges, and was not disposed to make any now. To the supply bills the Assembly tacked conditions respecting salaries and the holding of offices, which caused the rejection of those bills. In 1834, it passed ninety. two resolutions, with which the House was familiar. In 1835. Commissioners were sent out to Canada to investigate the state of affairs there: the Report of these Commissioners was now in the

hands of Members; and Lord John thought that any delay which had been occasioned by the Commission was amply compensated by the satisfaction that arose from the knowledge that now Parliament could legislate on Canadian affairs with the fullest information on the subject. Lord John then examined the several demands of the Assembly, for an elective Legislative Council, a responsible Executive Council, the repeal of the Tenures Act, the control of waste lands, and the repeal of the charter of the Canada Land Company. Iii conformity with the resolutions he moved, he opposed all these demands ; although he ex- pressed willingness to repeal the Tenures Act, provided the Assembly guaranteed the titles to land acquired under that act. He contended that the degree of independence which the concession of these demands

Would give, was incompatible with the condition of a dependent colony ;

and he pointed out many inconveniences which would result :row putting the Governor, who received orders from time seat of empire in England, at the mercy of a hostile Legislature, without whose aid those orders could not be executed. To grant them, would be destruc- tive of the peace and tranquillity of the country, and leave 120,000 in- habitants of British descent without any thing like legislative protection. He then proceeded to state to the House, the measures which Minis- ters proposed in order to relieve the Canadian Government from its financial difficulties. There was, he said, 148.000/. in the Canadian treasury ; and he proposed to order payment, out of this fund, of such sums as in their rejected supply bill of 1833 the Assembly bad agreed to pay under certain conditions. In so doing, he should be simply applying the revenue of the colony to the service of the colony. He quoted two passages from the evidence given by Dr. Franklin at the bar of the House of Commons, previously to the breaking out of the American War, to prove that this was a course of which the Canadians could not fairly complain. With respect to the constitution of the Legislative Council, he thought that judicious alterations might be made. Instead of selecting persons of British extraction solely, for the office of Councillors, he should propose that one of French :arid of British stock should be chosen alternately. Some modifications of the Execu- tive Council he should also recommend- " I propose that there should not be more than two or three official persons in that Council, and that the remainder of it should he made up flora the Legislative Council and the General Assembly. It is proposed also that they should not enter into the discussion of any subject not immediately nediately connected with the province, except upon advice of the thwernor. I propose further, that the Governor shall be at liberty to act contrary to the advice of the Exe- cutive Council if he think proper; but that on so doing he should make a minute of the occurrence."

Complaints bud been made of the state of the commercial relations between Upper and Lower Canada. The latter possessed the outlet of the St. Lawrence ; and the Upper province, by theAct of 1791, was allowed no communication with the sea except on the payment of heavy duties, whilst the Lower province put various impediments in the way of its commerce. To remedy this evil, he proposed that, with the assent of the Legislatures of the two provinces, a joint com- mittee should be appointed, to sit at Montreal, and whica committee should be composed of four meinbers of the Legislative Councils of each province, and of eight members of each Representative Assem- bly, making twenty-four persons in all, who should have the power to prepare laws and to compare results upon all those points of reciprocal policy. After diluting on the means of prosperity possessed by the Canadas, and the great advantages of the British connexion to that country, Lord John concluded by expressing his hope that the Cana- dians would recede from their demands, and not compel the Go- vernment to consider whether some other means of carrying on the government of the colony than those authorized by the Act of 1791 should not be adopted.

The resolutions having been read by the Chairman,

Mr. LEADER rose to give them his decided opposition. He was not surprised that Lord John Russell proposed them with reluctance ; for that noble lord was the representative of a Liberal constituency, and was the leader of a Liberal Government, and he must have felt reluc- tance in bringing forward the most arbitrary measure that ever was proposed to the House. It was, in short, a coercion bill. Lord John objected to an elective Legislative Council, because then the interests of the great body of the people would predominate : what an objection to come from the noble lord !

" The noble lord said, if the Legislature of this country supported the reso- lutions, the people of Canada would be placed in a most enviable position : but the noble lord forgets one point —he forgets that if these resolutions are passed the independence of the Canadian Assembly is annihilated ; he forgets that the people are deprived of their constitutioual rights. That would he the result of the resolutions. That would be the enviable position in which the people of Canada would be placed. Now I would ask the noble lord, whether he is pre- pared to deprive that Colonial Assembly of the rights with which it is intrusted for the benefit of the people ? is he prepared to deprive that Assembly of their control over their finances, of their control over the Executive, and to tax the Canadian people without the consent of the national Legislature ? "

Mr. Leader reminded the House of the rule which Lord John Rus- sell, a few nights since, quoted with so profound a deference from Mr. Fox, in regard to the government of Ireland. He desired Lord John to apply the same principle to the government of Canada. In the Par- liamentary discussion of the Constitutional Act of 1791, Mr. Fox ridiculed the idea of a mimic House of Lords in Canada, and urged Mr. Pitt to make the Legislative Council elective. In conclusion, Mr. Leader moved, as an amendment on the fourth resolution, " That it is advisable to make the Legislative Council of Lower Canada an Elective Council."

Mr. ROEBUCK seconded the amendment.

Mr. ROBINSON warned the House against yielding to the demands of the Freud] Canadian; ; who had betri stimulated by firebrands sent from this country. lie expressed his strung satisfaction that the title of the Canada Land Company was admitted to be perfectly secure; and gave his earnest support to the resolutions.

Mr. O'CosNei.i. deeply regretted the course taken by Government on the affairs of Canada. The resolutions involved the worst political principles he had ever heard— The resolutions appeared to hint to involve two broad principles—first, the very principle which created the civil war between England and the present United States of America; secondly, the principle which had distracted Ireland for so many years. The analogy between the case of Canada and that of Ireland appeared to him to be perfect. Under one of these resolutions the home Government was to lay hold of the money of the Canadians. At pre- sent the Canadian tepresentatives had two functions—first, to raise the sup- plies; second, to appropriate. Those two functions could not be separated without destroying both. It was but a mockery to the representatives of the Canadian people to tell them that they should have leave to raise money, if, when they raised it, they were not to have the power of disposing of it. It was this that drove the A inericaus to resistance. It was a principle that ought above all others to be avoided in that House. It was a principle in which was involved the very spirit of resistance.

He demanded "justice for Canada "- Give them a Legislative Council, elected by themselves. Give theta justice—place them iu possession of all the rights and privileges which, as British subjects, they could reasonably demand ; and then, if they persevered in violent opposition to the views and wishes of the home Government, it would be time to think of adopting some such measure as that brought for- weed by the noble lord.

As in Ireland, so in Canada, the small oligarchical minority desig- nated all the rest of the people a factious party. Yet this party. em- braced so large a portion of the people as to be able to return eighty out of eighty-eight members to the House of Assembly. The Ca- nadas ought not to be governed with reference to merely British interests— Great Britain did not want the paltry surplus that could arise from the revenue . f the Canadas. There was not a man in the-House who would not scorn the idea of Great Britain being maintained on the surplus of a colony. In the government of the Canadas, then, the interests of the Canadas were the only interests we should have in view ; and if there were any thing in our mixed form of government which was found inapplicable to the different state of society iu those provinces, let the British Government generously and can- didly tree them from restraint, and say, " As we cannot govern you for good, we will not govern you fur evil." He implored the House in consideration of this question, to be careful of these two tlsiogs—first, not to create or support a Court party iu the Canadas; second, not to maintain in these provinces a miserable minority, which, when it came to the fair test of popular representa- tion hid its diminished head, but which around the Government house howled loud and violently. He besought the House not longer to suffer that party to plunder the pockets of the Canadian people. Justice required that the Cana- dians should have the distribution of all the money for which they taxed shealselves. At all events, until they were satisfied that the British Govern- ment was tuling them for their good, let no attempt be made to take from them any portion of their money.

Mr. P. M. Stemmer spoke in favour of the resolutions.

Sir WILLIAM AIOLESWORTH strongly denounced them, as arbitrary, unconstitutional, and certain to drive the Canadians into a resist- ance, to which he could not but wish success. He hoped Lord John Russell would fail to coerce Canada, supported as he was by those worthy allies, "the foes of freedom and its falsest friends."

" I contend," said Sir William, "that the House ought not to entettain the question—first, because we are not constitutionally entitled to judge the con- duct of the house of Assembly, for it is not responsible to us, but to its con- stituents; secondly, because we are not constitutionally entitled to interfere with the control of the House of Assembly over the public purse ; and lastly, because such an attempt must lead, under the most favourable circumstances, to a separation of the two countries—under unfavourable circumstances to a dread- ful civil war."

Colonel THOMPSON advised Ministers to adopt the counsel given in the Scriptures, and "agree with their adversary quickly ; " because be had not heard one reason why the people of England should sup. port the Government against Canada.

On the contrary, he had been struck with some strong reasons why their wishes should be exactly opposite to the wishes of the Government. " If we could but lose Canada, what should we gain in a commercial way ? Would not every man in England who lives in a house gain a substantial sum which be might add to the amount of his enjoyments? Is not Canada kept as a breeding pen or a warren to which to send that part of the population which is not allowed to live at home? Du not our young couples marry with a cer- tainty that they are to breed for exportation? (Loud laughter.) Will the people of England think it worth their while to struggle for the mainte • nance of that system ? We are told also that we are to struggle for the present Legislative Council, lest there should he an eketive one. Why, what do we want ourselves but an elective Legislative Council? Is not that one of the objects which the hearts of a vast majority of the people of England are visibly at this moment fixed upon ? (Loud cries of" Bear !" and " No!") Is this to be our recruiting cockade against Canada-4 Don't let Canada have an elec- tive Legislative Council, for if you do, them will be an elective Council here?' I certainly think that the reasons fur an elective Legislative Council for Canada are stouger than they are for one in this country, strong as they may be with us."

Mr. ROEBUCK said, that a few nights ago lie had found himself in that very place contending in conjunction with Ministers for justice to Ireland-

" I did so, and I would fain have hoped that they did so, not in obedience to any pleasing exigency, not for the sake of present expediency, but in accordance with great, lasting, and universal principles of legislation—with those prin- ciples which teach us, that if we desire the people to be well governed, we must allow them to govern themselves. This hope, however, has been raised only to be disappointed : a week has not passed before my illusion has been destroyed ; and I am compelled to see that we in vain desire such conduct from men in uffice amongst us, fur they have neither the capacity nor the courage to be con- sistent. We have now before us a case in all its leading, all its important par- ticulasa, parallel to that of Ireland. We have, as I shall immediately prove, the Sallie difficulties to overcome, the Same prejudices to face; and yet I now find new and very different principles invoked, a very different conduct pursued. England,' said the noble lord a few nights since, ' has justice because she is inhabited by Englishmen ; Scotland, because inhabited by Scotchmen.' Let sne finish his sentence—' Canada has justice denied her, because inhabited by Canadians.' The same necessity dues not press upon the Government, in the case of Canada, as now bears them down with regard to Ireland. They render jwtice upon compulsion ; and, not dreading any pressure from without to force them to be just to a distant colony, they follow their usual habit, the natural bent of their inclinations, and refuse justice to Canada. I appeal, however, from the decision of the Government to the People of England. I appeal to the People of Ireland—to the honourable Member for Kilkenny and his friends in this House I also appeal. We have fought their battle, the battle of Ireland, manfully—and without flinching. That fight still rages! If we are to hope for success, we must prove, by our steady love and pursuit of justice, that we deserve it. If we desire justice for Ireland, we must show ourselves ready to

grant it to a suffering colony. We must justice ourselves above the paltry pre- judices of national hostility. If we seek ustice for Irishmen, who are our sub-

jects, we must not deny it to Canadians, who are our subjects also. The cause of Canada and Ireland are the same—it is the cause of self-government and re- ligious liberty—it is the cause of the suffering many who resist the overbearing insolence of a miserable monopolizing minority.' I call then upon all those who have fought the good fight for our suffering fellow citizens across the Irish Channel, to extend the range of their benevolence, and prove that if our domi- nion reaches beyond the broad Atlantic, so also does our justice, and that our desire for good government is coextensive with our empire."

At considerable length Mr. Roebuck detailed the series of arbitrary and impolitic acts which had marked the course of the British Govern- ment in Canada since its conquest. The Representatives of this great colony had repeatedly petitioned for redress ; and what did the Government propose to do in reply to these petitions?

" The people told you long since, and your own Commissioners tell you, desk the points in dispute are great questions of policy, involving principles upon with rests the whole science of government. You are told that the people complain of the irresponsibility of its public servants. You hear that supplies have bee refused by a vote almost unanimous of the House of Assembly. You see demands are made to remedy a defective constitution. And the noble lard brings before your notice a pitiful evasion of the whole matter in dispute—a sort of cut-purse remedy, ' Rob me the Exchequer, Hal,' being his motto and rule upon the occasion. (Loud laughter and cheers.) He proposes merely to pay certain arrears of salary, to destroy thus the moral force of the Assembly, and to leave the whole evil without the least remedy or check. The coming year must bring back every difficulty ; again arrears will exist; again stves; will be refused; again the Legislative Council will be complained of; and again this expedient, this shuffling and disgraceful evasion of the difficulty will be contrasted with the bold, honest, and comprehensive plan of the Assembly. You may call yourselves statesmen, and fancy yourselves $0. perior to the people whom you are about to insult ; but the illy is not far off when your puny efforts, your pretences at legislation, will 'receive the scorn they so richly merit, and contempt will be duly reflected from the measures to their authors. ( Continued cheering.) Look, too, Sri at the machinery which has been employed to produce this mighiiy pro. jest of legislative wisdom. Not content with the statements of the l'enwes Representatives, you sent out an expensive commission to make aryl now propose to do what you could as easily have done two years since. Have all your inquiries bad this effect alone? Have your three special Coin. missioners done nothing more than this? Has all their wisdom, awl that of the Ministry to boot, been able to suggest no wiser plan than this pitiful 'willing.

ging chicane? In good truth, Sir, spite of my indignation, I cannot help pitying the degraded position both of the Government and their Coininis,isa io this wretched proceeding."

After some severe remarks on the ignorance, incapacity, curl BIN. trary propensities of the Commissioners, Mr. Roebuck proceeded to expose several of their misstatements ; especially that respecting the two races in Canada, the only real distinction being that of ipiraitte.

The great majority of the people were -for responsible govt. e the " miserable minority " for the sway of an exclusive faction ; a large number of the inhabitants of British descent being in the former class, The utter inadequacy of the plan of Government, setting aside its at. bitrary and treacherous character, was manifest-

s, What is the evil—what the proposed remedy, according to your own state. meat? You declare that great misery exists among the public servants; we do not deny it. Well, misery is created—what do you propose to do? I), you propose to prevent the recurrence of the mischief? ISI`ot at all ; you pay the arrears. Who will pay the servants next year? Do you believe that the House of Assembly will do so ? Are you not well assured that next year will bring but the same difficulty ? The grievances complained of exist ; the House of Assembly exists; their feelings and their power are the same as fotoierly. What then will happen next year ? You know as well as I do, that the sup. plies will again be stopped ; that the saute doleful outcries will again be raised by the public servants; and then, I suppose, we shall have another special COIlle mission—another delay of three years—another evasion of the diftien!is—aa. other breach of faith ; and that so long as Canada is ours, disconn lit, distrust, will continue, exasperation will increase. Their powers of resistance will in. crease also: one effort will be made, and you and your shuffling pulley. your degraded government, your unworthy, peculating, and mischievous officials, will be dismissed with ignominy and hatted."

" Now," said Mr. Roebuck, in conclusion, " I will tell you what my knowledge of the country enables me to state as the certain result of the policy of the Government— The first immediate consequence will be, intense anger in the mirth of the great majority of the population, who will see in this proceeding insult and injury. This anger will produce a detet 'Milano% as soon as possible to get rill ut a dominion which entails on them results so mischievous and degradieg. Every year will hereafter strengthen this feeling, and lasting enmity Will discord 11111 thus he created between the mother country and the colony—discord that will cease only when the colony shall become, like the United States, a guest, lute. Wel, and independent community. The immediate effects of this anger will not be seen in open and violent revolt, but in a silent but effective warfare against your trade. Non-intercourse will become the religion of the people. They will refuse your manufactures, and they will smuggle from the Stotts The long line of frontier will render all your attempts to prevent this smuggling unavailing. The people will refuse your West India produce, and they will view with hatred your shoals of unprotected emigrants. They will withdraw themselves from your communion ; they will teach their children to you; and they will look with longing eyes to the happy States adjoining their ti lee tier. Impatiently will they wait for the moment in which they shall obtain their freedom, and become part of that happy and, for our interests. all My too powetful republic. A war will be waged through an unrestricted ;nests upon your Government and your people. In America you will be held up at the oppressors of mankind, and millions will daily pray fer your signal and immediate defeat. To restrain this press will be impossible: printing-poser will be established along the line, and inflammatory papers will be leveled into your colony, spite of an army of customhouse officers and lawyers. 'fbe fatal moment will at length arrive. The standout or independence will he raised ; thousands of Americans will recross the frontier, and the lii-iory of Texas will tell the tale of Canadian revolt. The instant you have pas-el the resolutions of the noble lord, a wide and impassable gulf will be opened !Ramo you and your colony, the time for reconciliation will be gone for ever; aid the bitter lesson taught us by the mighty empire we have already lost will be repeated. We may then indeed repent our folly, but repentance will he vain— our loss will be irreparable ; shame, defeat, and ignominy, will be our prim; and we shall leave for ever the shotes of America, amidst the hooting% and reviling, and exultation of the many millions of her people whom we have suc- cessively injured and insulted." (Loud and long continued chters.) Sir GEORGE GREY made a long, fluent, but feeble speech, in defence of the resolutions and the policy of the Government. His urgurnat was a diluted version of Lord John Russell's.

Mr. [loam attempted to speak after Sir George Grey ; but the House called for an adjournment of the debate to Wednesday.

On Wednesday, the House being again ira Committee, 1411.. Iltnis delivered a very long speech against the Government resolutions. Ile described the proceeding as the most unwarrantable -he had ever wit- nessed, with the exception of the Irish Coercion Bill. The question before them was that of war or pence with Canada ; whether the colony was to be retained by force or by good government ; whether it was to be a source of strength or of weakness to this country. In older to prove that the complaints of the Canadians were not groundless Or trivial, Mr. Hume detailed the many acts of migovernment which had been committed arid sanctioned by successive Colonial Ministers. Not one of the grievances mentioned iu a petition signed by 87,000 habitants of the province, in 1828, had yet been removed. On the con- trarv, fresh causes of complaint bad arisen. Measures of practical reform passed by the Assembly had been thrown out by the dozen in i the Legislative Council. Money bad been taken n a most arbitrary and unconstitutional manner from the treasury, to make payments which the Assembly refused to sanction; and very properly refused. For instance, the Clerk to the Executive Council was a member of the Legislative Council ; and the Assembly did right in refusing to pay his salary as Clerk while be remained a member of the Council. The Judges held several lucrative offices under the Crown besides their judgeships ; and the Assembly refused to pay their salaries us Judges until they relinquished other situations incompatible with the proper discharge of their judicial functions. But, with the sanction of Mr. Spring Rice, the Governor took money out of the military chest and paid these persons their salaries. This was only a specimen of the treatment the Canadians had undergone. Lord Gosford's mission had failed. Of course it would fail, for he had not the power to redress a single grievance. The Canadian Assembly demanded the redress of grievances as the condition of grunting supplies ; and now the House of Commons was asked by Ministers to take the money without grant- ing the conditions. Shame would be in all their faces, and on all their beads if they did so. What would be said in this country, if a Minister took money out of the treasury which Parliament refused to vote ? Why, Mr. Rice would have been impeached, and made to answer for his conduct.

Mr. ROEBUCK here interrupted Mr. Hume, and, with a view to gain time and a better audience, moved that. the House be counted. This was done, and about fifty Members were present.

Mr. Henn: then resumed his speech; observing, that when the liber- ties of 600,000 of their fellow subjects were under consideration, more than fifty Members ought to have been in the House. Mr. Hume entered into a defence of his own conduct with respect to Upper Ca- nada ; declaring that a certain Report, by a Committee of the House of Assembly in that province, which reflected on his correspondence with Mr. Mackenzie, was full of falsehood. To prove that he had not been repudiated as a firebrand, as the Report in question stated, Mr. Hume read resolutions of the Town-Council of Toronto, and from various other places in Upper Canada, highly approving of his conduct. He also read extracts from several private letters to the same effect. One of these letters expressed pleasure at the appointment of Mr. Spring Rice as successor to Lord Stanley ; but Mr. Hume ex- claimed—" Oh, Sir, how lamentably have I been deceived in Mr. Rice ! never did man in this world deceive me and my expectations more lamentably than Mr. Rice has done. I say that be ought to be impearlicd ; and nothing but my want of power prevents me from moving the question." In conclusion, Mr. Hume contended that the Canadians bad grievances which were not redressed ; that they had rights as well as Englishmen ; that they were justified in maintaining those rights ; and that the resolutions of the House were intended to deprive them of privileges to which they were by law entitled t there- fore, he would resist those resolutions to the uttermost.

Mr. WILLIAM Gt.ansroe F. considered it of the utmost importance that the Government should be strongly supported on this question ; and though he felt great pain rit being compelled to adopt a course coercive in its nature, and which undoubtedly set aside the principles and privileges of the constitution, be should feel it his duty to support the resolutions.

Mr. LABOECHERE would frankly declare, that with respect to the Legislative Council, he agreed entirely with Mr. Fox, that it was most unfortunate that it was not made elective— He firmly believed that many evils had arisen in consequence of that course not having been followed. There were two Councils in Lower Canada, con- stituted on widely-different principles. The popular party intrenched them- selves in the one ; and what Ile for shortness only would call the British party, or the minority, intrenched themselves in the other. What had been the con- sequences? These two councils had always been in a state of violent opposition. He thought it was not possible to find a better recipe to perpetuate those dissen- sion. than to perpetuate the constitution of Lower Canada. What would have been the result if an elective council had been established in 1791 ? After some struggling., quarrellingte and conflicts, the people would have mutually made concessions; and we should have seen the French and the English living on terms of friendship and cordial intercourse without respect to religion or descent. Let them look at Louisiana. They would see there a state of things very analogous to that of Lower Canada. There was a very large population of French descent, and a small Anglo population. How were they treated ? Whether of English or French descent, they were under the protection of equal law. No one was asked whence he came or what was his descent ; and though there was a great deal of local separation between the two races, yet politically they lived very well together, and there was no state in the union where things went on more harmoniously than in Louisiana. He was, therefore, upon abstract grounds not opposed to an elective Legislative Council in Lower Canada. How any honourable gentleman could contend that it was contrary to the British constitution, and to our colonial system that there should be no elective council in Canada—how any gentleman who had ever read the history of our colonies could maintain this proposition, in the teeth of the fact that in America more than one-half of our colonies actually were governed by elective legislative councils, he could not conceive. Our colonial system had always gone upon this principle—to give to any colony a proper constitution, without troubling ourselves about any close analogy with the constitution which might be perfectly good for ourselves at home, but not at all applicable to a colonial society, where there were no materials for an aristocracy, out of which might be made au aristocratic branch of the Legislature. The question, however, before the House, had not reference solely to the constitution of the Legislative Council. There were other demands of the Canadians, with which it would be impossible to comply. These related to the responsibility of the Executive Council, the Tenures Act, and other matters, with respect to which the demands of the Assembly were quite unreasonable. He was a sincere advocate for the removal of every abuse; but the faults were not all on one side. 011 the whole, he must support the resolutions, in preference to the amendment of Mr. Leader ; not simply with the view of getting money from the Canadian treasury, but on the understanding that the House was pledged by them to look into every acknowledged grievance, and particularly into the composition of the Legislative Council.

Lord STANLEY said, that before entering upon the main question be- fore the House, he must advert to the attempt made by Mr. Roebuck to count out the House at the fatal hour of half-past seven, in order to give the impression that, when the affairs of Canada were aiscussed, very few Members thought itlworth while to be present. But he would

remind the House, that on Monday last there bad been a full and at- tentive audience, and in the' early part of that evening there had been a numerous attendance. But patience had its

He was one of the Members who had been present nearly all the evening. He came down to the House at a quarter before five : on his road he met shoals of Members coming away ; and on asking what was the business before the

House, the universal answer was, " Hume is up." ( Great laughter, and cries of " Hear I") This was at a quarter to five. The House -vas counted at a

quarter to seven, and the honourable Member for Middlesex was not only then speaking, but he had not finished his speech at a quarter to eight. Was the honourable Member speaking to the subject or not? Let those who sat and listened to him for three mortal hours state what was the case, or let other ho- nourable Members read the reports—of which, however, they might be de-

lrived, unless the Chancellor of the Exchequer was pleased to make some re- axation as to his superficial rule as regarded newspapers. Honourable Mem- bers, however, might become acquainted with this fact by means less irksome to themselves than by reading the honourable :Member's speech, for he did not

wish to inflict such a punishment on them. The greater part of the honour-

able Member's spree') referred to a question not before the House, or which was connected with the subject matter of debate. The subject matter on which

the honourable gentleman addressed the House at such length was a quarrel on the subject of a corresuondenee that had taken place between Mr. M•Kenzie of Upper Canada and Mr. Joseph Hume of Middlesex letters were read of the

date of Match the 10th and other periods, from Bryanstun Square. and others

in reply from Toronto. Altogether, for two hours and a half of the time of a mo.t important and interesting discussion on the affairs of Canaria, the honour-

able Member chose to indulge in matters having no relation to the question, but rather relating to himself personahy. When, therefore, the honourable Member complaiued of the thinness of attendance and the want of attention during his speech, he should consider that it was not th it the house of Com- mons regarded Canada, less, but that they deprecated Hume more. ( Cheers and laughter.) After this personal attack on Mr. Hume, Lord Stanley said he would go to the question more immediately before the House. Ile entirely

agreed with Mr. Roebuck, who fought the question boldly, ably, and eloquently, thut this was not a time for half-measures ; that the subject admitted not of tampering ; that it was a question of empire ; and that the measures of Government were altogether inadequate. lie denied

that the people of Cunada were independent—free they were, but not independent ; a colony conld not be independent of the mother MID-

try. He contended that the House of Assembly in Lower Canada, although a dependency of England, claimed rights and privileges which the English House of Commons never put forward, especially with relation to the annual vote of salaries for judges and other officers, and

the settlement of the Civil List. The entire control of the revenues of Canada, with the exception of the territorial and casual revenues

belonging to the Crown, had been made over by Lord Goderich to the Canadian Assembly on the full understanding that a permanent Civil

List would have luau voted. This was dune at once in Upper Ca..

nada ; but in the Linter province the Assembly refused to fulfil its part of the contract. and to this day no Civil List had Fe:. n offered, except on terms which would be equivalent to an acknowledgment of the in-

dependence of the colony. In this state of affairs, what did the pre- sent :Ministers do ? They took a middle course, which was impolitic because inadtviate; they showed their teeth, but dared not bite ; they tampered with the subject ; by their " 1vaitings a little longer," and by their insignificant proceedings, they put a premium on the enlarged demands of' the Assembly. Nay more, one of their number—Mr. Labouchere, a man universally respected and believed—had declared in favour of an elective Legislative Council ; and the inference from this declaration must be, that after a little " coy, reluctant, amorous delay," Ministers would yield to the vigorous advances of the Member for Bath, and grant all that was asked. Lord Stanley had still that bigoted horror of French Republicanism, which had been so much ridiculed ; and he would not give over to the mercies of the French population the British settlers in Canada. He wished Ministers would recollect the measures which, when he was Colonial Secretary, Earl Grey's Cabinet had fully sanctioned for settling this Canadian ques- tion, and which, if he had remained in office, would have been carried. They were not for a mere suspension of the 1st and 241 of William the Fourth, but by a repeal of that Act would have enabled the Govern- ment to pay its officers without an appeal to the Assembly. But Minis- ters only went half way. They only paid the paltry arrears of salary; knowing, as they must, and as Mr. Roebuck had told them, that the supplies would again be refused, and that they would again be forced to apply to Parliament for aid. Now he wanted some explanation as to the ulterior measures of Ministers—

Ought they not to know what those contemplated measures were before they in the House of Commons affirmed the resolutions? They had the resolutions of the House of Assembly. They told them that their efforts would be un- ceasing for an elective Council ; that the only way in which the Government of this country could ever hope to enjoy the confidence of the people must be by tieing them an elective Council—a Council submitted to and in accordance W a their feelings and the feelings of the country. Why were they to be .t-ked to vote fur these vague resolutions, attempting to do something of which

„ey knew not what mould be the effect, or what was the object ? lie would say, let them not do %%hat they had been doing from the commencement of this commission to the end of it ; let them not raise expectations which they never Intended to fulfil ; let them nut go on uttering vague words and gluing nothing; for the effect of such a course would be this, and only this—it would weaken the force of a declaration of principle, and give to no human being the power of stating w hat indeed was the principle they took their stand upon If they desired to surrender Lower Canada, let them do it at once ; but if they sur- rendered Lower C.mada, they must recollect they surrendered with it ,Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, and they cast off 150,000 in Lower Canada alone of their Britisa fellow subjects, who clung to them fur protection against a tyrannical majority—who confided in the faith of the British Parliament, that it would not allow its engagements to thew to be violated—who entreated it to allow them to continue in the undisturbed enjoyment of the law and liberties conferred on their ancestors—who themselves did not claim the power of tyrannizing over their neighbours, but who did claim the privilege of exer• clung under the British crown the privileges of British subjects, and who, if they flung them off, if they abandoned them to their own resources, were doomed to sink in the wide•spreading democracy of the time. ( Opposition cheering.) Let them not sacrifice their engagements to the prejudice rather than to the sound opinions of a party—he meant the French Canadian popula- tion—who had granted to them a constitution as free as any uatioa could give to them—whose freedom was limited only by that absolute control which was necessary to secure the connexion between them and the mother country, but who called those whose interests were identical with the interests of the mother country by the name of strangers, after sixty years' habitation with them. The French Canadians were more lightly taxed than any people on earth. If British protection were taken away, the feudal laws and eustonis to which they were so much attached would be merged in the constitution of one great, absolute, native-American republic. For their own sake they should preserve the British connexion. /Bs only difficulty in regard to his vote was, not in supporting his Majesty's Government, but in entreating them to support themselves; and if honourable gentlemen on his side of the Mouse saw any difficulty in the way of their compliance with the resolutions proposed, the inadequacy and weakness of which he felt strongly himself, he would beg them to remember, that it was atiquestion throw now whether they would thw the whole of the weight of their influence into the British scale—whether they would assist or compel the Go- vernment to maintain entire the British possessions—and whether they would give that assistance to his Majesty's Ministers for which they must have felt themselves so deeply indebted last night.

Lord HOwICK said, that be had never heard a speech from Lord Stanley with so much pain as the preceding. He deeply regretted that language so completely the reverse of conciliatory, and conceived in so arbitrary a spirit, should have been used by one who had deservedly so much weight and authority in the House of Commons. His only con- solation was, that it would serve as an antidote to the florid speech of Mr. Roebuck, and prove to the people that Ministers were not the tyrants Mr. Roebuck represented them to be, but that, on the contrary, their policy was mild and conciliatory compared with that of gentlemen opposite. He went on to defend the policy of Lord Glenelg ; and charged Lotd Stanley with departing from established usage in refer. ring to a Cabinet proceeding in a House of Commons' debate. He reminded Lord Stanley, that his decisive policy was only partially sanctioned by the Cabinet of Earl Grey; and that he only had leave to bring in his bill on condition of moving for a Committee to which the whole state of Canada might be referred. He was in possession of facts to prove, that there was not that entire conformity of opinion in Lord Grey's Cabinet with respect to Lord Stanley's Canadian policy, which Lord Stanley bad been leading the House to suppose. It was a complaint of Lord Stanley that the resolutions were not sufficiently ex- planatory of the ulterior views of Government ; but would Lord Stanley explain his own policy? Lord Stanley intimated that he would stand by the Legislative Council as it now existed, and propose the repeal of the act of 1831 which gave the Canadian House of Assembly the control over the revenues of the country, instead of merely proposing to suspend the operation of that act : but would he do this after read- ing the report of Sir George Gipps, one of the Commissioners, who declared, that without other healing and conciliatory measures, to repeal the act of 1831 would be neither efficacious nor safe, inasmuch as the Assembly would still retain the control of a revenue double that at the disposal of the Governor, as well as the power to refuse the renewal of several necessary acts, about to expire. Now he would ask, bow would the repeal of the act of 1831 prevent the disoiders and difficulties which Lord Stanley feared ? While denouncing the mea- sures of Government as inefficient, he proposed one hlinself, which would wig e. at irritation, and not put down the disaffected. It was clear that the Legislative Council was not suited to the Canadians ; Mr. Pitt had declared the institution to be merely an experiment ; there was nothing like it inahe other American or Wast India colonies; it neither represented the Crown nor the People, and was completely above control. This was its original faith, and a very great fault it appeared to him ; and it was the intention of Government to introduce a bill to niter and improve the constitution of the Legislative Council. He repudiated utter ly the policy which dictated a declaration to the Canadian people that an institution proved to be faulty should not be altered— In all free cnwitt iea, the institutions ought to be such as were calculated to produce the most good to the great body of the intelligent 111ZISSeR. If they attempted to support and maintain any other—no matter what might be the aid they should obt,liti or the power they could coinmand—although they might for a shorter or a longer period prolong the contest, still they might depend upon it that, sooner or later, they would be daeated. Ile for one never would say to the MTh: of Canada, that where a necessary improvement was required to that necessary improvement he would never consent. He trusted that the Parliament aaii the country never would adopt that mode of dealing with Canada.

IIe cysts warned that the conciliatory policy would fail : still lie was disposed to try it further, and it would be time enough to resort to Lord Stanley's when they could do nothing better.

Mr. Lreohn wished Lord Stanley had remembered Lord North's advice, to discuss the affairs of the North American provinces "dis- passionately and without recourse to violent language." In that case, he would have refrained from the inflammatory and insulting language he had used towards the Canadians. However, he thanked Lord Stanley for that speech : it would have the same effect in Canada as the speech of Lord Lyndhurst had in Ireland. One insulted the Ca. nadians, the other insulted the Irish people. Lord Stanley had been called the evil genius of Ireland—he would now be culled the evil genius of Canada, Mr. Leader congratulated Ministers on having such an ally.

The Committee divided ; the question being, whether the words in the fourth resolution, which declared the inexpediency of making the Legislative Council elective, should stand part of the question Ayes, MB; Noes, 56; majority, 262.

After a brief discussion, unintelligibly reported, the Committee again divided on a motion that the "Chairman should report progress ;" which was'negatived, by 287 to 39.

Mr. Roteirce then contended, that the evidence given before the Canada Committee of 18;14, referred to by Lord Stanley, but not in the hands of Members, should be laid on the table before the resolu- tions were proceeded with.

Mr. Spn::“.; Vic:: thought there would be some difficulty in pro- curing the uric: ilia] t vAence. Probably several Members had copies ; and he v.e.-re ,iy to lay his Qatar copy on the table of the House ; but he eid ti:ii.k th,:t I e could be Lilly called 011011 ill the 1111:011 while to stspeed th rcsolat:ons. Mr. HARVEY said, that after the speech of Lord Stanley, who lad so much stress on the proceedings of 1834, the evidence ought to produced.

Mr. HUME said, there was plenty of impoitant business to go ea with ; and they could wait for the Canadian evidence.

Mr. HARDY thought there was nothing in the evidence necessary to the present discussion.

Mr. WARD said, that he was paying a poor compliment to Lord Stanley, who seemed to think the evidence very important.

Lord STANLEY denied that he had laid any stress on the evidence.

Mr. Roeuucic thought that Lord Stanley must have forgotten par of his own speech. When some of the resolutions were grounded on the alleged ill-conduct of the House of Assembly, it was but fair to have the evidence of such misconduct.

A conversation ensued between Mr. SPRING RICE and Mr. Rot. BUCK respecting the production of the evidence. Mr. ROEBUCK pro. posed that the decision on the other resolutions should be postponed until the evidence was produced ; and that, in the mean while, he would consent to take the decision of the House on the fourth resolution, understanding that the matter was perfectly open and in abeyance.

Mr. RICE acquiesced in this proposal.

Mr. AGLIONBY protested against this course : he could not at all nn. derstand it. He supposed that when the fourth resolution was affirmed, it would be taken for granted that the others were adopted also. He could not understand on what principle a compromise was made.

Mr. ROEBUCK said, he bad consented to leave the remaining resole- tions in abeyance until the evidence was produced.

Lord SANDON protested against a compromise.

Lord Homo( said, no compromise or delay could takeaway any thing from the moral effect of the division on the fourth resolution.

Mr. G. F. YOUNG said, that the moral effect of the decision would be defeated if delay was granted.

A`fter some further conversation, Mr. HUME moved that the Chair- man should report progress. For the motion, 14; against it, 176.

When the gallery was reopened, Mr. ROEBUCK was found speaking. He said that his understanding was, that the whole question was to be in abeyance : that was the import of his offer, Ministers might take it in what light they pleased.

Mr. SPRING RICE said, that Mr. Roebuck had altered his pro. position. He never would allow that the whole question was in abeyance.

Mr. HUME again moved the adjournment, but withdrew his motion; and Mr. HARVEY moved that the Committee should report progress. For this motion, 18; against it, 164.

Mr. HINDLEY moved that the Chairman do leave the chair.

Captain BERKELLY wished that Ministers would act more decidedly; and protested against these attempts to interfere with the progress of public business.

Mr. HUME admitted that his object was delay.

Colonel THOMPiON said that if he could afford it, he would pay a guinea for every minute's delay.

Mr. HINDLEY withdrew his motion; and the main question being put, the fourth resolution was carried, by 144 to 16.

The House then resumed, and the Committee was ordered to sit again on Wednesday next.

The adjournment took place at a quarter to three o'clock.

THE BALLOT.

Mr. GROTE moved the House of Commons, on Tuesday, for leave to bring in a bill " for taking votes by Ballot at elections of Members of Parliament." Ile said that he should not trouble the House with the details of his bill, but would content himself with simply stating, that there were no insurmountable or great difficulties in providing effectual machinery for carrying the principle of the Ballot into effect. 1-le was perfectly prepared to enter into details at the proper time, but thought it better to omit them for the present. His main object was to get at the real sense of the community—to guard against false and spurious returns—to protect the voter against seduction and coercion. (Mr. Grote then proceeded, first to state the nature and extent of the evil to be remedied, and then to examine and refute the objections to the Ballot, in the course of a speech of which by far the best report is to be found in the Constitutional, but on a scale altogether exceeding our limits, and it will not bear abridgment. We hope it will be pub- lished separately and entire. In the mean time, we shall only indicate a few leading points.] He denied that the Ballot could create any new hypocrisy or deceit ; and that which it might introduce was far more pat. donable than that which it supplanted. When the process of intimidation could no longer be consummated, it would no longer be begun—the trade would be at an end ; a landlord would no more think of coercing his tenant than of coercing a neighbouring gentleman, when the Ballot had made the vote of each equally independent. Besides, the Ballot insured ignorance of the state of the poll, and consequently a candidate could not tell how many votes he must buy to carry his election. The elector's vote was changed from a certainty to a contingency, and a contingency was a sorry piece of merchandise when it came to be va- lued in money. If in small constituencies the Ballot did not extirpate bribery, as the electors might be bought in the gross, what was the plain remedy ? Why, to enlarge the constituency ; for among large constituencies, he would venture to say that the effectual employment of bribery would be an impossibility. It was said that the elector was a trustee for the non.electors, and therefore ought not to vote in secret. This argument implied the right of the non-electors to influence or coerce the voters- " Du you really believe that the persons who stand without your electoral circle are competent to control or amend the votes of those within it? Then, in common justice, admit them within it at once; for ou that supposition they are the superior party of the two. By whatever line of argument you prove to me that the control of the non-electors over the votes of electors is good, by the same line of argument I engage to prove to you that universal suffrage is still better. You show no cause against the Ballot, but yeti show touch is favour of uidversal suffrage." It was worth while to look for a moment at the condition to which the assertors of the right of the non-electors to influence him reduced the voter. See what a business voting is reduced to ! " Coercion over the voter by the poor non-voters—coercion over him. by the rich—coercion by every one who has the power to coerce him—all is right, all is justified, on the principles which are resorted to in opposing the ballot. Coercion and counter-coercion are asssumed to be the essential and tutelary forces which keep the electors in their proper orbit. And all this while the professed purpose of the law is that electors shall deliver their suffrage freely and indifferently I—while the law punishes both the giver and the receiver of a bribe, under pretence that the freedom of election is a sacred and a solemn thing ! Why, Sir, on the reasonings of those who oppose the Ballot, every thing like freedom or indifference of election is denounced and set aside: it is not even tolerated as a contingent good—it is banished as a positive mischief." He denied that the just or fair influence of property would in any way be lessened by the Ballot : be believed that the Liberal cause would gain by it, thinking as be did that it was the cause of truth. But, he said, in couclusion- " Whether the opinion of the people is for me or against me, I demand at least that it shall be fairly and freely taken—rejoicing when it proves to be in my favour—prepared to submit and to wait if it be otherwise. And I feel that io advocating the Ballot, I am upholding nothing less than the sacred right of free judgment and free utterance in political matters ; I am treading in the steps of those illustrious men who have rescued the individual conscience from its trammels, and vindicated its liberty and inviolability in matters of religion ; I am striving to baffle the guilty efforts of that spirit of persecution which still harasses the political world, and still defiles the sincerity and solemnity of the elective franchise. If, Sir, you can break the sword of the persecutor, and assure freedom of election, without the aid of the Ballot, proceed to the task without delay, for never was there a case of more pressing necessity. But when it is notorious that this cannot be done, and when the alternative of the Ballot is ready within your reach, I beseech you to consider whether you can, with a safe conscience, license and perpetuate the countless mischiefs of an unprotected suffrage." (Much cheering.)

Mr. Law HODGES seconded the motion.

Mr. POULTER opposed the Ballot, because all other possible modes of meeting the evil had not been tried. Besides, lie doubted the ex- tent of the evil : he thought many of the cases brought before the In- timidation Committee, on which Mr. Grote relied, were exaggerated.

Mr. B. HALL, Mr. JEPHSON, and Mr. ELPHINSTONE, supported the motion.

Mr. VERNON SMITH said, that the Ballot would not secure an inde- pendent use of the elective franchise. Every body knew how a man would vote before he put his hand into the ballot-box. At the regis. tration every elector's vote became known. To establish secret voting, would be to suffocate public opinion; to ascertain which, and to govern the country in accordance with it, was now the aim of the Legislature.

Mr. Beasrm. feared that the use of intimidation and undue influence had reached such a height, that the secret vote must be resorted to in order to secure the independent exercise of the franchise. From all he had lately seen and heard, he must declare himself—though rather unwillingly perhaps—a convert to the Ballot.

Mr. PETER BORTHWICK said, that the majority of his constituents were opposed to the Ballot, and had required him to resist any attempt to establish it.

Dr. LUSHINGTON expressed his disgust at the squeamishness of those men who pretended infinite horror at falsehood, and yet upheld a sys- tem which compelled the dependent voter to violate his conscience.

Lord Homo( said, that the Ballot was not, as some gentlemen seemed to take for granted, the sole remedy for bribery and intimida- tion. So far from preventing bribery, the Ballot would render it more safe and easy in all those elections which depended upon securing a small number of votes towards the close of a contest. With regard to intimidation, a plausible case had been made out by Mr. Grote ; but he had greatly overrated the advantages of the Ballot in preventing intimi- dation. It would still be in the power of the landlord to say to his tenant—" You shall not vote at all, and you shall not canvass for that gentleman." The only effectual way to prevent the malepractices for which the Ballot would be an imperfect remedy, would be to direct public opinion strongly against them. At present both parties were guilty of bribery and intimidation ; but at the two elections under the Reform Act, there had been less than formerly; and lie did not despair of seeing a complete stop put to the practice by the good sense of the electors. But though he could not concur in the remedy proposed by Mr. Grote, he would say that the evil of intimidation must not go un- checked. If the good sense and virtue of the people did not put it down,—if the opponents of the Ballot should drive on to an intolerable height the evils now complained of,—he did acknowledge that to the Ballot we might be forced at last. (Ironical cheers from the Opposi- tion.) He was prepared for that cheer, but he would repeat his cau- tion to the enemies of the Ballot; for, said Lord Howick, "if gentle- men opposite continue to act on the principle of intimidation, to the Ballot we must and shall come."

Mr. CHARLES BULLER handled some points very neatly. He said that intimidation bad much increased under the Reform Act. He maintained that men of property and intelligence and moderation would have a better chance of being elected under a system of secret than under a system of open voting, inasmuch as in secret voting the judgment 44 the electors would have more sway, and greater influence would be given both to electors and candidates of moderate opinions.

Mr. SPRING RICE said, that when he last stated his opinion on the Ballot to his own constituents, he did not find more than from ten to twenty in favour of it. But there had since been presented from that constituency, a petition in favour of the Ballot, signed by three hun- dred as independent, intelligent, and respectable men, as ever ad-

dressed the House. Such had been the progress of this measure. These men had been made advocates of the Ballot by disgust at the

increased bribery and intimidation. No man in the House had a

stronger interest than he had in putting down intimidation ; and it was certainly from no sinister motive that he opposed the Ballot. He agreed with the object of its supporters, but differed with them as to their means. Suppose that the Ballot were established in Ireland, how would it work there ? The landlord would only select for hi!, tenants men whose opinions were so violent that he could depend 111/01I their votes, though given in secret. Again, the Ballot would not pievent a

landlord from obliging his tenant or his dependent not to vote at all. He really believed, that if they took up the subject of penal legislation more rigorously than they had done hitherto, much might be done towards putting an end to intimidation and bribery.

Mr. GROTE briefly replied. He congratulated the House on the altered tone of Ministers. With them it had become a question of time, not of principle, whether the Ballot should be introduced. Hav- ing carefully attended to the arguments of his opponents, he felt justi- fied in saying that no material point of his case for the Ballot had been touched.

Mr. SPRING RICE and Lord Howicx both denied that their opi- nions had in any respect been altered since the last discussion on the Ballot.

The House then divided—

For the Ballot 153 Against it 22 Majority

112

Mr. HARDY then moved for, and obtained, leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws relative to bribery in the election of Members of Parliament.

Mr. HUME hoped that Mr. Hardy would introduce a clause into his bill relative to the payment of „head-money." (Loud cheers and laughter.) Mr. HARDY said, there was a provision to that effect in the bill. He proposed to examine the principal as well as the agent before a Committee. That would be an effectual remedy ; whereas the Ballot could afford no remedy in a case such as that of Carlow, when a can- didate gave 2,0001. to be divided among a constituency.

Mr. O'CONNELL 'said, that Mr. Hardy appeared anxious to make amends by his speech for the vote he had just given in favour of the Ballot. For his part, he would rather have Mr. Hardy's vote than his speech any day. He hoped that the operation of his act would be retrospective, and prevent any person who had heretofore been guilty of bribery from having a seat in the House.

Mr. ROEBUCK made a rentark ; upon which Mr. HARDY challenged any Member to prove bribery against him. Mr. ROEBUCK said be in- tended no personal reflection ; he was astonished that Mr. Hardy should suppose for a moment that the cap fitted him. (Laughter.)

RATE-PAYING CLAUSES OF THE REFORM ACT.

Mr. T. Dexcosnie moved, on Thursday, for leave to bring in a bill " to repeal that portion of the Reform Act which requires the payment of Rates and Taxes in cities and boroughs as the condition of Regis- tration." He would not then trouble the House with any remarks, but postpone the discussion to the second reading.

Mr. SPRING RICE said, this was a very serious question, and he thought discussion should precede rather than follow the introduction of such a bill. He must oppose the motion, on the ground that no arguments in its favour had been adduced.

Mr. DE:NCOMBE was prepared with arguments, but had not antici- pated opposition to his motion.

Mr. SPRING Rice was ready to hear arguments—was quite open to conviction. (Cries of " Divide, divide !") Mr. DUNCOMBE reminded the House, that when be proposed last year to introduce a clause to repeal the Rate-paying clauses of the Reform Act into the Registration Bill of the Attorney-General, that learned gentleman had told him to introduce a separate measure, which should have his consideration, but that he could not allow him to interfere with his Registration Bill. He had taken the advice of Sir John Campbell ; and now it was hard that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should resist his motion on the ground that his course was unusual. Mr. buncombe then briefly argued, that the clauses ought to be repealed, inasmuch as they had the effect of reducing the numbers of the constituencies far below what was intended by the Reform Bill.

Mr. SPRING RICE defended the clauses : he affirmed that they were constitutional in principle, and by no means partial, unfair, or vexa- tious in their operation. It was not the fault of the law, if people through carelessness neglected to pay their taxes.

Lord DUDLEY STUART, Lord W'oRSLEY, and Mr. WAKLEY, sup- ported the motion.

Mr. PEASE opposed it. He never would take away from the elec- tor the power to disfranchise himself, in order to avoid offence, until the protection of the Ballot was granted.

The House divided : for Mr. Duncombe's motion, 49; against it, 38; majority against Ministers, 11.

ABOLITION OF CHURCH-RATES.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, a Member, whose name is not given, asked whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer would lay before the House the data on which he had mane his calculations as to the value of the leases of Church property ?

Mr. SPRING RICE replied, that the statements which formed the basis of his calculations were derived from private sources, and he could not divulge the source of his information ; he could only give the results.

Some further conversation on the subject took place on Wednesday. Several Members pressed Mr. Spring Rice for the data on which his calculations were made ; but he refused to produce them. Mr. Rica postponed the adjourned debate on this question to Monday next.

In the House of Peers, on Tuesday, some conversation occurred on

the same subject. In reply to a question from Lord ELLENBOROUGH, Lord MELBOURNE said, that the calculations of Mr. Finlayson should be presented to Parliament ; but he feared they were not yet suf- ficiently complete to be produced. Lord HOLLAND said, that be- fore the bill was introduced all the necessary papers should be laid on the table.

Lord A mammas: feared that the calculations were founded on some conjuring, sonic contrivance in the distribution of Church haunts. He could not ace how the value of the lands could be increased ; he would as soul believe that four persons could set down to whist and all rise winners. Lord Etemsetmouen said, that the English lessee was badly treated in being forced to come into the plan. He should like to know from Lord Lansdowne, whether the Church lands he held were near large towns, or in an agricultural district ; because if the former, be would gain—if the latter, be would lose by the bill.

Lord LANSDOWNE declined answering the question. But Lord HOLLAND said, that he held Church lands in both situations, and his opinion was exactly the reverse of Lord Ellenborough's.

Lord BROUGHAM observed; that one part of the measure was good, and the other decidedly bad. The lessees of the Church ought to be permitted to renew their leases on payment of the customary fines. An easy answer might be given to the remark of Lord Ashburton—

There could not, he conceived, be any difficulty in combining strict justice to those individuals with the perfect success of the plan, provided that it was left optional with them to renew, if they pleased, with the customary fines. Look at the present state of Church property. It was circumscribed to leases of twenty-one years. If an individual held property under the Church in the centre of a city, or in the immediate neighbourhood of a city, where buildings might be erected, he would willingly pay the difference between a lease for twenty. one years and a lease for ninety-nine years. He would for his acre of land, worth at present 51., be willing to pay a large sum in the hope of deriving 500/. or 2,000/ from the increased term of lease. That, however, was not the case with persons holding lands differently situated from a Dean and Chapter. Be conceived, therefore, that the option ought to be allowed. The same thing might be said in cases of mines and minerals, as in the bishopric of Durham. That was very like the case of lands held in or near towns : and where in- stances of that nature occurred, it was well worth a man's while to pay a con- siderable sum for the enlarged term of years.

After a few remarks from the Bishop of EXETER, who hoped Lord Brougham would give his best attention to the subject, the conversation Was closed.

On Thursday, petitions to their Lordsliips, for and against the abo- lition of Church-rates, having been presented from various places, The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said, that it Was a great fallacy to suppose that the country generally was opposed to Church-rates. The proposed abolition of them had excited a more general sensation among the agricultural population than any which he remembered. There was a lamentable deficiency in church-accommodation in many districts of the country. Without exaggeration, he might say that there were two millions of persons destitute of the means of religious instruction : if, therefore, there were any surplus of Church property, at ought to be applied to the relief of this destitution. The aspect of the times was such that he could not but anticipate a juncture when the aggregate of the property proposed to be taken from the manage- ment of the Church, would be seized upon at one blow. Objections without end might be urged against the measure ; but he would merely state, that in protesting against it, he acted for others as well us himself. A meeting of fifteen Bishops, all who were in town, bad been held that morning ; and he had been unanimously authorized by them to resist the measure by all just and proper means. He Was the more anxious to express his sentiments on this occasion, because he was joined with the Bishop of London and the Bishop of Llandaff in the Commission which was to have the management of the lands ; and it rani. ht on that account be supposed that he and his brother Prelates were parties to the plan, though they had not been consulted with respect to it, and wished to be relieved from the odium of being its supporters.

Lord MELBOURNE said, that he had listened to tie Archbishop of Canterbury with great respect, but with deep sorrow and concern, not only on account of the measure, but an account of the Chinch and the Hierarchy. He w as confident that the Archbishop had been driven on by those who had more guile and deeper designs than himself. He considered the measure to be one of peace and concord. (Loud laughter from the Bishop of Brett r.) The right reverend Prelate laughed, but he would find the question to be a very semiotic one ; and it would have been more decent and fitting and decorous, to have waited till it came regularly before the House, than thus precipitately to pronounce its condemnation. The Archbishop of Canterbury said that a large portion of the population were against the abolition of Church-rates : now he would ask, whether the question had been fairly put to them, and whether it wes fair to describe the bill as one for the destruction of sacred edifices ? When the measure came to be rightly understood, it would be hailed with delight. It was said that the financial part of the plan would fail ; but if he felt more confident of the success of one part of the plan than another, it was the financial part of it. He had maturely considered this question ; and the decided opinion he had come to was that the first duty of a Chris- tian Legislature and a Christian Hierarchy, was to promote tranquillity and Christian peace throughout the country— With this feeling, however anxious I have ever felt that the objects now stated by the most reverend prelate should be amply provided for, I have made inp• my mind that the preference should he given to the objects contemplated by the measure now in question. The most reverend prelate expresses his opinion that this measure is a concession to the claims of a sect. No, my lords, it is not a concession to a sect : it is a measure framed to meet the general, the well- understood exigencies of the State, the general interests of the community, the wants, the demands, most general, most pressing, and roost immediate—to secure those objects which are most essential—to secure peace, harmony, tran- quillity, and concord—objects, my lords, all-important in my eyes, whatever may be the case with the most reverend and right reverend bench. The most reverend prelate, my lords, has also intimated some objection to the mode in which it is proposed to carry this plan into effect. My lords, if any plan of this description—whether the present measure, or a measure for the augmenta- tion of small livings, or whatever it be—is to be carried into effect at all, it must be in the manner now proposed, and in no other. My lords, I repeat it was with great sorrow, with great concern, 1 listened to the speech of the moat reverend prelate ; and it is deeply painful to me to find, that in the fur- ther prosecution of this measure we are to look for the decided opposition of the most reverend prelate and his brethren. But, my lords, however great my regret, I take leave to assure him and them—I take leave to assure the /louse and the country—that the opposition of the most reverend and right reverend prelates shall In no degree influence me to alter the course 1 have marked out for myself on this question. Convinced as I am that it is a measure most important, most beneficial, and must essential, no opposieou, whencesoever it conies, shall deter me from persevering in it to the last." ( Great cher, ing.) The Bishop of LONDON protested against the virulent attack of Lord Melbourne upon himself and his brethren— What ! was it to be endured, that because he and his right reverend brethren had come forward to state their opposition—strongly, though respectfully and mildly, to a scheme of sacrilege and spoliation—were they to be denounced in this vehement—this unparalleled manner, by the Prime Minister of the Crown' (Loud Opposition cheers.) Because they came forward, not to assert their. own rights so much as to defend the threatened spiritual interests of the hun- dreds of thousands, the millions of the poor, who were now destitute of religious assistance or pastoral care—was it to be endured that they should be thus attacked—attacked in a manner altogether unprecedented in any former Minister of the Crown? Was this the manner in which they were to ba treated, because they stood forward to resist the sacrifice which was now se tempted to be made of the Protestant Church ?

If this measure. passed, the Church would be thrown for support on the Voluntary system ; there would be no prospect of religious instruc. tom for two millions of destitute ; and he would on these grounds give it his strenuous opposition.

Earl Frrzwireteat had his doubts as to the success of the plan ; but he did not apprehend that it would disconnect the Church from the State. He feared, however, that it would separate the Church from the local influences with which it was desirable that it should be con- nected. He thought it was desirable that local communities should feel responsible for the repairs of local edifices.

MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

POOR-LAW COMMITTEE. On Monday, Mr. WALTER moved as an amendment to the Order of the Day for the House of Comtnons going into Committee on the affairs of Canada, that Major Beauclerk, Alt.. Sergeant Goulburn, Mr. G. F. Young, Mr. Freshtield, Mr. Thomas Attwood, and Mr. Hindley, be added to the Committee of Inquiry into the operation of the Poor-law. The motion was opposed by Lord JOHN RUSSELL, chiefly on technical grounds ; and, after a brief debate, it was negatived, by 152 to 124.

TRADE WITH JAVA. On Tuesday, in answer to a question by Mr. P. M. STEWART, Lord PALMERSTON stated, that the negotiations with Holland as to the charge of a heavier duty than was allowed by treaty on goods imported into Java in British vessels, had not yet been brought to a satisfactory conclusion, but were in progress. Mr. STEWART said, the answer was not satisfactory ; and he should bring the subject before the House in a substantial form on an early day.

PUBLIC PLAY-GROUNDS. On the motion of Mr. Hume, on Thurs- day, it was agreed that it should be a Standing Order of the House, that in all future Enclosure Bills, a clause should be introduced to set aside a portion of the land to be enclosed for a public walk and play-ground for the people of the neighbourhood.

MERCANTILE MARINE. Mr. BUCKINGHAM obtained leave, on Thursday, to bring in a bill for the better regulation of the Mercantile Navy. This measure is founded on the report of the Committee on Shipwrecks ; and its chief object seems to be the prevention of ship. wrecks, by providing for the employment only of safe vessels and ex. perk need commanders. It embraces, however, a vast number of details rind Mr. HOME, Mr. WARBURTON, Mr. POULETT THOMSON, Mr. C. F. YOUNG, and Mr. Romesoe, though they did slut oppose the introeuction of the measure, intimated doubts as to its feasibility, and disapproved of some of its provisions.

Texas. Mr. BARLOW HOY moved, on Thursday, for copies of the correspondence that had passed between his Majesty's Government and the Government of Mexico relative to the state of the province of Texas. Lord PALMERSTON objected to produce the papers, in the present un. settled state of the question,when Mexico was making great preparations to recover the province in the present spring. He saw no grounds for the interference of this country, as yet ; though he admitted that with reference to the slave-trade, and other important considerations, it was one in which we must be deeply interested. With regard to the slave-trade, he could say that a considerable cheek had been put upon it by an article in a treaty with Spain concluded last year. The Portuguese Government was also honestly endeavouring to stop the traffic. Mr. WARD, Mr. O'CooNeee, and Mr. FOWELL Burros, supported the motion. Mr. BARLOW HOY, riot satisfied with the reply of Lord Palmerston, divided the House ; when his motion was rejected, by 41 to 25.

THEATRICAL AMUSEMENTS. Mr. T. DUNCOMBE, on Thursday, called time atte»tion of the House to a petition from Mr. Bunn, lessee of Drury Lane Theatre, complaining of the interference of the Lord Chamberlain to prevent his giving certain performances in Lent. Mr. SPRING RICE suid, that Mr. Fox Alatule was prepared to make some remarks on this subject, but had been obliged to leave town : he hoped, therefore, that Mr. buncombe would defer the consideration of it fora few days. Mr. DUNCOMBE acceded to this request.