POSTSCRIPT.

SATURDAY NIGHT.

The Corn Bill passed the House of Commons at four o'clock this morn- ing. The final division was—

For the third reading 327 For Lord Granby's amendment 229 Majority 98 Being the largest positive, and still more the largest relative majority, that any of the divisions on Peel's "great measures" has presented.

We did not hear, and we have not read the closing debate. The impos- aibility of reading it to any useful purpose for this week's publication will be evident when we mention, that the Parliamentary report for both Houses occupiestwenty-four of the long dense columns of the Times; "the enormous length" of which compels the Leading Journal to omit the summary.

The speakers were—against the bill, Mr. C,otclunouir, Mr. P. BENErr, Mr. HUDSON, the Marquis of WORCESTER, Mr. Laweorr, Mr. DISRAELI, Lord GEORGE BENTINCK: in its favour, Mr. CHARLES WOOD, Mr. Mori- TAGIf GORE, Mr. VERNON SMITH, Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Sir ROBERT PEEL, Mr. VILLIERS. The following scraps are gleaned almost at random.

Mr. Cotoimousr seems to have applied himself much to the subject of prices; asserting that the effect of free importation will be to materially reduce the price in this country; and this he did not think would be an advantage to any class. Turning to politics he remarked that confidence in public men had been lost; and that as to Sir Robert Peel, there were dangerous blemishes in his character: Sir Robert had no faith in his own principles, no confidence in his own judgment.

Mr. Hopson described the agricultural interest as being in a flourishing con- dition; and regretted that that state of prosperity should be interfered with by the present bold but questionable measure.

The Marquis of WORCESTER read a letter from one of his constituents, stating that at the last market-day at Cirencester curses were uttered against Sir Robert Peel and his double dealing.

Mr. MONTAGU GORE read extracts from a pamphlet by a farmer who had visited Russia and Prussia, showing that agriculture in those countries was in so rude a state as not to justify any apprehension about competing with them should the trade in corn be free.

Mr. VERNON SMITH had long been in favour of a repeal of the Corn-laws and he thought it bold and manly in those who had supported these laws to change their opinions, and to avow that change, when they became convinced of error.

Mr. DISRAELI delivered his great speech. The Times reports it on the scale of five columns; and describes it as something like a table of contents for the debate," executed with "literary zeal and tact." An important section is de- voted to the usual personalities against Sir Robert Peel: the principal novelty of which—not new, but newer than the rest—was a mock acquittal from the charge of " deserting his opinions." He had "no opinions of his own to desert": through- out his whole career he had proceeded upon the ideas and intelligence of others. "His life, in fact, has been one great appropriation-clause—he has been the bur- glar of others' intellects. From the days of the Conqueror down to the termina- tion of the last reign, no statesman that I recollect has committed petty larceny won so great a scale as he has done of the opinions of others."

Lord JOHN Russztt followed. He thought the House must have felt how much more Mr. Disraeli's talents lay in dressing up a powerful invective against the First Minister of the Crown, than in proving that the bill before the House was a bad measure. Lord John, in addressing himself to the merits of the bill, seemed.anxious to show that his transition from the fixed-duty principle to en- tire free trade was natural and unavoidable. At the outset he was a follower of Mr. Hnskisson. In 1839, he promulgated his ideas in favour of a moderate fixed duty, having found that the sliding scale was enhancing injuriously the price of food. He retained that opinion till the middle of last year, when circumstances convinced him that total repeal had become the only suitable measure. Like Mr. Disraeli, Lord John attacked Ministers, but still more the Conservative party; the grounds being the false pretences on which they turned out the Whigs. The party had no principle of its own—no bond of union.

Sir ROBERT PEEL brushed Mr. Disraeli's personalities aside with a con- temptuous glance at his former subserviency. Vindicating the measure itself, he took his arguments from the statements of the Protectionist Members. He reiterated his willingness to endure all the painful consequences of his changed views. He defended the general policy of his Government on the highest consti- tutional principles. "1(1 I look to the prerogatives of the Crown—if I look to the position of the Church—if I look to the influence of the Aristocracy, I cannot charge myself with having taken any course inconsistent with conservative prin- ciples, or calculated to interfere with the high principles of an/ brand' of

the Legislature, or any institutions established in the country. • • • "The noble Lord [John Russell] who has .just spoken has expressed a hope that the discussions which have threatened the maintenance of amicable relations between this country and the United States would be brought to a happy conclu- sion. I think I can appeal to the course which we have pursued as evidence that we have not abandoned the honour of this country; and I can appeal to past ex- perience as showing an earnest desire, by any effort consistent with honour, to maintain friendly relations with every country upon the face of the globe. These principles will ever continue to influence me so long as I have a share in the management of the affairs of this country."

Lord GEORGE BENTMCK and Mr. Vitaanns delivered speeches amidst much impatience for the division. The report on the Tariff Bill is to be considered on Monday; and Lord GEORGE BENTINCK promises a division upon it.

Mr. HoGo introduced two bills to authorize the East India Company to grant annuities to Lords Hardinge and Gough. Mr. Htrian intimated an intention of disputing, at the fitting time, the propriety of conferring pensions to extend beyond the lifetime of the person who earns the reward.

The Lords, last night, went into Committee on the Religions Opinions BM, after a speech in opposition from the Bishop of EXETER, and speeches in approval from the Bishops of St. DAVID'S and OXFORD, Lords BROUGHAM, CAMPBELL, and STANLEY. Three of the clauses were re- served for further consideration; the others were agreed to.