NEWS OF THE WEEK.

SYMPTOMS of reformation are at length visible in the proceedings of the Reformed Parliament. There is an evident improvement in the tone of the Ministry, corresponding with a similar improve- ment in that of the House of Commons. The speeches delivered have been less flashy and more to the purpose in hand. Instead of angry declamation, spun out into wearisome harangues of two or three hours length, the speeches have been for the most part brief, and free from irritating matter. Even those subjects which might have been expected to have elicited strong personalities, have been discussed with a laudable degree of good sense and good temper.

Our Representatives seem awakened to the necessity of doing something to improve the working of the machinery of the House ; and with this view, a Committee has been appointed to as- certain a better mode of taking the divisions, than the clumsy and imperfect one now in use. The true principle of the responsibility of Members to their constituents was the ground on which Mr. WARD, the Member for St. Albans, who introduced the subject, rested his support of it. No one was found to reiterate the asser- tion of Lord STORMONT, in the debate on Mr. HARVEY'S motion last year,—that a Member of Parliament was bound to represent his own opinions, not those of his constituents. Mr. WARD, warned by last year's experience, avoided the snares of those who called upon him to disclose his plan. We are therefore unable to give an opinion upon it; but his object is to provide a complete and au- thentic record, open to the inspection of their-constituents and the public, of the attendance, absence, and votes, of all the Members of the House of Commons.

An important measure of the week is the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the conduct of an Irish Judge, Baron Sir WILLIAM SMITH; who has acquired an unenviable notoriety, by delivering political harangues, in a remarkably florid and de- clamatory style, from the bench of justice. These compositions have been profusely lauded by the Orange and Tory newspapers, by whom Sir WILLIAM is likened unto CICERO and BURKE : but it seems that the House of Commons will not listen to the voice of the charmer, and mean sternly to call him to account for convert- ing what ought to be a solemn tribunal into an arena for the dis- cussion of the most exciting topics of party politics. There is no country in the world where it is more necessary for judges to act with caution than in Ireland. It is of the utmost importance for them to steer clear of all collision or connexion with Whigs, Orangemen, and Repealers. Nothing more, therefore, is wanting to prove the unfitness of Sir WILLIAM SMITH for the office lie fills, than the violent political speeches which he utters from the Bench, in place of the clear and calm exposition of those branches of the law which the nature of the crimes in the calendar may suggest as necessary for the guidance of the Grand Jury. But it is not merely as a political partisan that Sir WILLIAM SMITH is complained of: it is stated that he "keeps late hours,"— that he seldom makes his appearance in court, even when on the circuit, till the middle of the day ; and that on one occasion he tried fourteen prisoners between the hours of six in the evening and six next morning—thus sitting up all night. Such practices as 'these amount to an absolute denial of justice. Men should '.he fresh, and calm, and sober, when giving evidence or verdicts, or delivering charges on points on the proof or disproof of which bang perhaps the lives of their fellow-creatures. In defence of Baron SMITH, it was urged that be was no worse than other Irish Judges; that they were all late in their atten- dance at court; and that many of them had been guilty of the same imprudence of' talking politics from the Bench. Mr. O'CONNELL. who brought forward the motion against Sir WILLIAM, told an anecdote, which gives a shocking idea of the manner in which affairs are sometimes managed in the courts of justice in Ireland.

"What would be thought," said he, " in this country, if a barrister should get up in court and say to a Jury—' This is a case in which great difficulty exists relative to the construction of the law, and therefore you will require assistance from the Judge ; but you and I both know that it is impossible to get any as. sistance from the Judge who now presides, and that if he interferes at all, he will only disturb the course of justice?' If a barrister in this country had made such an address as that in the presence of a Judge, there could be no doubt he would have been committed—and deservedly—fur contempt of court. But lie (Mr. O'Connell) had uttered those words in Ireland : and what was the answer which he received ? The Judge said that he was is comical

(Much laughter.) His reply to the Judge was simply this—' I uttered those words with a feeling of melancholy rather than of merrnuent; and if I had not stated what was so notoriously true that no man can deny it, it would be your duty to send me to gaol.'"

The house laughed at this story, but it is no laughing matter; and is one additional proof among a thousand, that the system of practical irresponsibility of the Judges ought to be put an end to. It is on this ground that the decision of the House on Thursday may be deemed most valuable. It will administer a wholesome caution not merely to the Judges in Ireland, but to their brethren in Scotland and England also. It appeared in the course of the debate, that Ministers had de-

termined to resist the motion of Mr. O'CONNELL as it stood on the Notice-book, for an inquiry into the conduct of Baron SMITH with a view to his removal ; but Mr. O'CONNELL wisely withdrew the " removal," and asked for a committee of inquiry only. This the Ministers, with the' exception of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, determined

to grant. But Sir JAMES declared that lie valued his character too

much to turn round upon the question in that manner. The im- pression made upon his mind by the eloquence of Sergeant SPANKIE—who delivered what Mr. HUME justly characterized as

an unconstitutional and high Tory speech in defence of the Judge —was too deep to be removed ; and therefore poor Sir JAMES, in a

very grand and magniloquent strain, avowed his determination, in spite of the pain it gave him, to divide with Sir ROBERT INC; LIS against the Ministerial Leader. We trust, however, that Earf GREY will forgive him; and that the country will soon recover from the shock caused by his mutinous conduct. There was some good speaking in this debate. Mr. O'CONNELL had evidently his heart in his subject. His personal feeling co- incided with his public duty ; and he worked up his matter of ac- cusation with skill and vigour. Mr. LITTLETom was cool and de- cided; and gave another proof of his determination to see fair play between the factions which occupy the extreme points of the poli- tical map of Ireland. Lord Jour,' RUSSELL spoke with all the, heartiness of a Whig of the days of Fox and ERSKINE, when de- nouncing the proceedings of our courts of justice in the State trials of 1794, which Sir JAMES SCARLETT, as if to prove how

thoroughly he had abandoned his Whig faith, had the hardihood to quote injustification of the political partisanship of Judges. Sir

ROBERT PEEL and Mr. SHAW had a bad cause to defend ; and their attempts to make it pass for a good one did more credit t i their zealous friendship for Sir WILLIAM SMITH, than to their skill as advocates.

The bills for extending and improving the several constituencies of Hertford, Warwick, Stafford, Liverpool, and Carrickfergus, and for punishing the corrupt voters by disfranchisement,—all of

which came to nothing last session,—have been reintroduced ; and we hope will meet with a better fate. Lord SANDON threatens opposition to the Liverpool bill. Mr. HALCOMB seems to be the solitary panegyrist of corruption in the other condemned boroughs. From a statement by Lord ALTHORP, in the course of a discus- sion which occupied a considerable part of Tuesday evening, it ap-

pears that.the pension of the King of Belgium has been regularly paid up to the present time; that it has b2en applied to the liqui- dation of debts, contracted, no one knows how, before lie left this country, and to the keeping up of Claremont and Marlborough House. In April next, however, the last instalment on the debts will have been paid off; and about 30,0001. a year will be repaid into the Exchequer. It naturally excites a good deal of surprise, that a Prince with no family to provide for, and who, in fact, was be- lieved to be penurious in his expenditure, should not have found

an annual income of 50,0001. sufficient to live upon ; and that, al- though an independent Sovereign and son-in-law to the richest Monarch in Europe, he should still be a pensioner on British bounty. It will be a warning to our Representatives against making such improvident bargains in future. Last night, Lord ALTHORP gave an outline of the next Budget. His Lordship expects to have a surplus of revenue over expen- diture, at the close of the financial year, of not lgsOlaa4.£1,500,000 He palculates that, during the ensuing year, tlieltioN duce of the Tea-duties will be raised from 3Rni).9

• • ""le•

/41 '•:-!7A'' kr 4.).

- ` • - •

to 3,900,000/., by increased consumption ; this will give a further sum of 600,000 The Estimates for the year are reduced by . 500,000 There will therefore be a surplus of . • . . £2,600,000 Of this sum, at least 800,000/. will be required to pay the interest of the grant of twenty millions to the slaveewners ; which must be deducted 800,000

The balance then applicable to a reduction of Taxes is .£1,800,000 Lord ALTHORP has determined to abolish the House-tax ; not, as he declared, because the abolition of this tax would give the most general relief to the country, but because of its extreme un- popularity. Warned, however, by the badgering which he sus- tained last session, the Chancellor of the Exchequer intends to postpone the absolute abolition of the tax, until he can ascertain the result of certain motions for the repeal of other taxes, which may be expected to be brought forward. The House-tax, if taken off, will swallow up the whole sum which Lord ALTHORP is willing to apply this year to the reduction of taxes,—namely 1,200,0001.; and he hopes and begs that the House will be satisfied with this. From the discussion which folloa ed, however, it is evident, that neither Mr. 'Lulea nor Lord CHANDOS arc satisfied ; and that by both the trading and landed interests strenuous efforts will be made to get additional relief from taxation, and a further reduc- tion in the Estimates for the year.

There is nothing new in Lord ALTHORP'S communication, ex- cept, perhaps, his rather doubtful anticipation of an increase in the revenue from tea. Every body was aware of the amount of surplus revenue, on the 5th January ; and every one was pre- pared for the abolition of the House-tax. With his present con- tracted views on the subject of taxation, we are not aware that any thing much better could be expected from Lord ALTHORP'S Budget of 1834. A revision of the whole scheme, on large and compre- hensive principles, would give much more effectual relief to the suffering interests of the country. It will be said, that whatever Lord ALTHORP'S views may be, the House would not sanction any plan of such extent. This may be doubted. The House has never yet been fairly tried on this point by the Minister : perhaps it would follow his lead on this as willingly as on other questions.

The charge against the Irish Members, if not the most impor- tant subject which has occupied the attention of the House of Commons during the week, has certainly excited the greatest in- terest. A Committee of Privileges was appointed on Monday to imp: at into the " matter of complaint" arising out of Mr. HILL'S speech at Hull, as quoted in the Examiner.* On Wednesday, Mr. GROTE, the Chairman, applied to have Mr. O'Co:INELL added on the ground that it was necessary that Mr. SHELL should have some confidential adviser in the Committee. Mr. O'CONNELL was accordingly admitted. Why a Committee ap- pointed to judge calmly and report impartially on the facts brought before them, should deem it necessary to have an avowed partisan among them, in the character of an advocate, it is difficult to conjecture. Last night, the Committee made their report. It entirely exculpates Mr. SHELL; the Committee declaring "their deliberate mviction that his innocence," in respect ( f he whole matter of complaint referred to in their investigation, is entire and unquestionable." It appears that Mr. HILL stated to the Com- mittee his conviction that " the charge was wholly untrue, and he came forward to express his deep and unfeigned sorrow for having ever contributed to give it circulation."

Such is the conclusion which the Committee and Mr. HILL have arrived at as regards the charge against Mr. SREIL. How they arrived at it, by no means appears from the Report. Only two witnesses were examined : one of these, as we learn from the speech of Sir HENRY HARDINGE, so far from supporting the charge against Mr. SHELL, stated that, in a private conversa- tion with himself, Mr. Sititir. had expressed his disapprobation of the Coercion Bill. The other witness (was it Mr. NI AC AULAY ?) is said to have refused to give any evidence whatever on the subject; and the Committee, as we gather from a paragraph in the Courier of last night, appears to have encouraged rather than discountenanced his taciturnity. But the Committee seem to have from the first mistaken the nature of the duty which they were appointed to perform. Having placed Mr. HILL in the position of an accuser (though in the House, on Mon- day, he formally repudiated that office), they hear one witness, who gives them information relative to one conversation ; and then, having satisfied themselves of Mr. Sum is innocence, make their report; without taking the trouble to investigate the conduct of Ministers—by far the most important branch of the inquiry committed to them, especially when Mr. HENRY GRATTAN'S statement respecting the change of opinion by some means effected in the consciences of thirty English Members is borne in mind. Is this what the House of Commons or the country had a right to expect from the Committee? As regards Mr. &TEM, the charge broke down most completely; but the fact of his innocence is presumptive evidence, that somebody—the Morning Post points to a" big boy " in the back-ground--tnisre presented the real opinions of the Irish Members, for the sake of obtaining votes for the Coercion Bill. The acquittal of Mr. SHELL, so far from being considered a termination of their labour by the • The report in the •Erasiimer of the 10th, and in the Spectator of the 2d November, appear to have been taken from the same Bull paper.

Committee, ought to have proved to them the necessity of going on with the investigation of the other branch of the charge.

As far as individuals are concerned, the only person who ap- pears to much advantage, is Lord A.Lrnoite; who candidly ad- mitted, that in his reply 'to Mr. SHEIL'S question, he had com- mitted an act of imprudence, out of pure generosity.