Manta nal Vratetrings in Vadiament.

IRELAND.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Lord Joint RUSSELL moved for a Committee of the whole House to consider the state of Ireland. He spoke for three hours' and his speech fills more than eleven columns of the Morning Chronicle. To give an outline of it therefore, in our limits, is out of the question ; a circumstance the less to be regretted, since the speech, although in respect of composition one of Lord John's best efforts, contained in fact scarcely any new matter ; so that the heads, which alone we are able to indicate, will in great part suggest to the reader the matter handled. He began by describing Ireland as filled with troops—Ireland, which two years ago was surrendered into the hands of the present Ministers tranquil and undisturbed, is occupied, and not governed by this country. A man who may be said to live in the affections of the great mass of the Irish people, bas been found guilty of a conspiracy, and will probably be condemned to imprisonment : that offers no guarantee for the future Lord John surveyed the relations of the two countries since the Legislative Union ; beginning with an address presented by both Houses of Parliament, in 1799, to George the Third, which promised "a complete and entire union between Great Britain and Ireland, founded on equal and liberal principles, on the similarity of laws, constitution, and government, and on a sense of mutual interests and affections," " pro- moting the security, wealth, and commerce of the respective kingdoms," and " allaying the distractions which have unhappily prevailed in Ireland." Have those advantages been realized ? Nominally, indeed, both countries have the same laws ; both, for instance, have trial by jury : but is it ad- ministered alike in both ? In Ireland, the practice prevailed in criminal prosecutions for the Crown of setting aside all Catholics and all Liberal Protestants from the Jury ; creating a strong impression that a fair trial was not granted, destroying confidence in the administration of the law, and thus producing that spirit of revenge which belongs to the circum- stances and not to the nature of the Irish people. From the Union up to 1835, there had not been an impartial administration of justice. Another in- justice is the state of the franchise in Ireland : constructions put by Judges on the Irish Reform Act have virtually enhanced the freehold qualification above the 10/. originally intended : and Lord Stanley introduced a bill which would

Mill further hare restricted tbe franchise. That bill had now been positively condemned by the declaratioo in the Queen's Speech, that "it will not be safe to adopt a new system of registration, without at the same time adopting a more extended franchise." Seeing what these Ministers formerly had done, he had no belief that they now intended to give a fair franchise to the people of Ireland. In 1817, Sir Robert Peel declared that, if Parliament conferred eli-

gibility on the Roman Catholics, the Crown ought not to exclude them from a just proportion of power : yet to what Judgeship, to what high office, has a Roman Catholic been appointed ? It is objected, indeed, that the whole Roman Catholic body are opposed to the politics of the Ministry : but why 2— for Roman Catholics do not naturally incline to Democratic doctrines, like Protestant Dissenters. There is an answer to the question. Mr. O'Connell and others have been convicted of endeavouring to excite hostility between the Queen's Irish and English subjects : there is a person in England who once endeavoured to excite such feelings, by calling the people of Ireland " aliens ": was be prosecuted by the Attorney-General? No, for the words were privi- leged as spoken in Parliament : but has he been debarred from the confidence of the Crown? On the contrary, he holds the very highest place in the Queen's councils— not because of any superiority in his judgments—no duties are more highly paid or performed more carelessly than those in his office—but precisely on account of those political invectives ; which echoed elsewhere, as by Mr. Bradshaw, form part of the stock in trade of the party now in power. Having stated these grievances, Lord John contrasted the conduct of the late and present Governments. In 1836, the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General for Ireland allowed Catholics and Protestants indiscriminately to remain upon juries. The result was a greatly- increased confidence in the administration of justice. Statistics showed the diminution of crime during Lord Normanby's administration ; and the increased security of property was shown by the fact that four or five more years' pur- chase was given for land in 1839 than had been given for the seven or eight previous years. Indignant at the treatment they received, the leaders of the people sought to repeal the Act of Union. That cry should have been met by inquiry into the real evils, with a view to remedy. Government, however, would make no concession ; but began their course of opposition by dismissing some Magistrates, allowed the great meetings to go on from March till Oc- tober, and then put them down by a proclamation. He did not believe that they issued the proclamation so late that bloodshed might take place; but their conduct was marked by laziness and carelessness, and such a calamity was only prevented by the exertions of Mr. O'Connell and his friends. To Mr. O'Cont- nell Lord John offered a high tribute of praise. There was no mown to believe that if a proclamation had been issued sooner, to forbid the meetings, it would have been disobeyed : but, after those "illegal meetings" passed unreproved for nine months, the leaders were indicted, under a modern " judge-made " law of conspiracy. The law might be applied to any person belonging to an association—to Mr. Jones Loyd, for instance, or the Marquis of Westminster, for the acts of the Anti-Corn-law League. Lord John animadverted on the exclusion of Catholics from the Jury, and the conduct of the trial, including Mr. Smith's challenge. " I doubt," he said, "whether Mr. O'Connell, con- victed by a Jury made purposely and expressly of Protestants—convicted after auch a trial, sent to a prison, suffering for the people of Ireland, for whom he obtained such great objects—perhaps losing his health, and suffering at his ad- vanced age from the effects of imprisonment—will lose his hold of the people of Ireland : 1 doubt if his hold of the people of Ireland will not be strength- ened rather than weakened : I doubt if the suffering victim whom you impri- son has not still more of sympathy with him than the triumphant leader whom you prosecute."

He came to the remedies he should propose for the grievances which he had enumerate& Let the people have an impartial and pure administration of justice, untainted by a partial or sectarian spirit. The first of the resolutions which he should propose, if the House went into Committee, would have refer- ence to that subject. Let such a franchise be framed for Ireland as might be agreeable for the people—equivalent to the Parliamentary and corporate fran- chise of England. Roman Catholics ought to be declared eligible to office, in the terms of Sir Robert Peel's speech of 1817. He would put the Established Church of England and Ireland, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Pres- byterian Church of 'Ulster, on a footing of perfect equality : but there are diffi- culties in the way of doing that immediately. At present, therefore, he would only increase the grant to Maynooth College, increasing the means for libe- rally educating the Roman Catholic clergy: he would afford facilities for the acceptance from individuals of glebes and glebe-houses, would recognize the titles of the Catholic clergy, and would abolish any exclusive civil privileges possessed by the Established clergy. The most difficult of all questions con- nected with Ireland was the tenure of land ; and he knew no direct remedy for the great, extensive, and long-enduring evils under that head : but the way to mitigate the worst horrors—the wholesale massacres of the clearance system, and the wholesale retaliatory murders of landlords and agents—would be, to render the administration of justice more pure, and independent of landlords' influences; in order to which, he would increase the number of the Stipendiary Magistrates.

Lord John wound up with quotations from a speech by Fox and a story by Walter Scott, to embellish a lengthened peroration, on the theme of a more confidingand affectionate policy towards Ireland.

Mr. WYSE seconded the motion ; retracing a good deal of Lord John Russell's ground.

He warned Government, that Mr. O'Connell, if imprisoned, might "be put in commission," and the trial just closed might be followed up by a succession of others. Among the remedies which he desired, were increased representa- tion for Ireland in Parliament, increased facilities for getting land In small allotments, and better education, to improve the character of the people. He spoke slightingly of provision for the Roman Catholic clergy and recognition of their titles. He indignantly alluded to assertions which had been made re- specting the Roman Catholic oath. His ancestors had been deprived of their property on account of their adherence to their religion, and therefore he could not be supposed indifferent to the subject. Roman Catholics might formerly have entered Parliament, if they bad chosen laxly to take an oath ; but they took the latter part. He now called upon Sir Robert Peel to say in what sense he meant that oath to be understood when he introduced it into the Emancipation Bill ? Did he mean by it that when such a subject as the Church was brought forward, the Roman Catholics were to vote with him, or with those who differed from him ; or that they were to have a total absence of opinion on the subject, and ivalk out of the House whenever it was under dis cussion ? He would not do„any thing with respect to the Protestant Church which he would not feel justified in doing with respect to the Roman Catholic Church in similar circumstances. If he could not do that, he was only half a Member, and the Emancipation Bill was a dead letter, for the constituencies would be compelled to return Protestants. Before it comes to a matter of peace or. war with Ireland, let Government imitate the example of 1829, and do right a second time to Ireland.

Sir JAMES Getsaucat led the Ministerial opposition to the motion.

He began with some general remarks on what had fallen incidentally from Lord John Russell; asking whether he was called upon to defend a Coercion- bill, or an honest attempt to govern 'Ireland by established law and trial by jury? He denied that the country was'left to the present Administration in a state of tranquillity ; and showed by reports from the Pilot newspaper, that very large Repeal meetings, attended by 10,000, 60,000, 100,000 or even 200,000 people, had been held so early as 1840. He explained the facts con- nected with the formation of a jury. The law for striking a jury Ministers found in operation. Had they chosen to bring the question to trial by a common jury, the traversers would not have been entitled to challenge a single name, whilst the prosecution might have ordered jurors to " stand by " with- out stint or limit ; but they avoided that course, and applied for a special jury. The statute for striking off special jurors was introduced by Sir Michael O'Loghlen ; and the statute is not permissive, that the partieemay strike, but it is imperative—they must strike. In the recent trials for disturbances at Cardiff, seventy-five jurors were impannelled : the right of the prisoners to challenge was limited by law to twenty ; but by the exercise of that right, and by the orders of the Crown to " stand by," the whole panel was reduced to nine. In fact, the discretion was necessary in many cases to prevent a total defeat of justice. It was a gross exaggeration to say that sixty names were omitted from the Dublin Sheriff's list : the real number was only about thirty, partly Protestants partly Catholics, out of 716 names. He was very sorry that it had occurred, however ; for he felt, with Lord John Russell, that some prejudice to the administration of justice had been created. It was at first said that ten Roman Catholics were struck off the reduced list, as Catholics; but the affidavit recently produced on the part of the traversers dis- closed the fact that eight out of the ten were members of the Repeal Association. " There is no impeachment in striking off persons who are partisans. I will put a most simple case. If in a fox-hunting country I were to bring an action of trespass against the master of the hounds, and there was a large body of the members of the hunt as special jurors, my solicitor would not act with common sense if he did not strike all those gentlemen from the jury. (" Hear, hear !" and a laugh.) Or if I brought an action against a man for tithes, he would be wanting in ordinary prudence if he did not strike all the lay-impropriators from the jury. It is not a question, there- fore, which touches the honour of parties, but it is a simple question, what are their strong preconceived opinions." Two jurors remained to be accounted for : their names were Michael Dunn and William Hendrick. In St. Patrick's Ward there were four persons named Dunn, three of whom had signed the requisition for the Repeal meeting at Tara; and it was believed that Michael Dunn was one of those three. He had made an affidavit denying that he was a member of the Repeal Association, but he did not deny that he had signed the requisition. At the time of striking the Jury, and for sonic time after, William Hendrick was believed to be a Protestant : he was struck off the Jury-panel for reasons which had no connexion whatever with religion, and which Sir James Graham was not at liberty to disclose. He could con- scientiously state that nothing was so opposite to the wish of the Government as the exclusion of Roman Catholics from the Jury upon account of their reli- gion. No such instructions were given : on the contrary, instructions were given to avoid such errors.

Throughout the last session of Parliament, Government felt the greatest disinclination to interfere with the right of petitioning; but the Repeal meet- ings were regarded with anxiety. Possibly, even some of them were illegal; and the taunt that Government did not prosecute was an admission that they were so. To have prosecuted for some speech or some article in a newspaper, would have produced no moral effect. " The noble Lord has had experience with me upon this very point. Lord Grey's Government did try to prosecute the editor of a newspaper—one of those very persons now prosecuted—for pub- lishing a letter of Mr. O'Connell's. They obtained a conviction. Mr. O'Con- nell, though his name was to the letter, did not own himself the author; and Mr. Barrett, the editor of the paper, was condemned, and was sent to prison. There may be various opinions as to whether he was properly treated. Mr. O'Connell himself censured the course adopted, and characterized it as mean and shabby in the extreme; and, as far as he was himself concerned, I think, perhaps, he was right." (Loud cheers and laughter.) The object was to punish the head offenders, They were tried, not at provincial assizes, but in the capital of Ireland ; and the verdict of the Jury negatived the proposition that the meetings themselves were illegal, though the parties were guilty of attending them for illegal purposes. ' If there was any novelty in the law of conspiracy, there was a new state of things to contend with. " One of the most sagacious of living men drew my attention not long ago to a saying of one of the most profound thinkers that ever lived among women. The Duke of Wellington called my attention to the following in Madame de Steel's His- tory of the French Revolution—' In these days,' says Madame de Steel, on conspire our to place.' In these times, Leaguers meet in theatres—( Voci- ferous cheering from the Opposition benches)—demagogues spout in the market- places—and conspirators build Conciliation Halls to disseminate sedition among the multitude." (Cheers.) Sir James described the gradual assump- tion of a more martial character in the Repeal meetings; and quoted the order for the "muster and march" of the "Repeal cavalry" at Clontarf. When re- ceived in London, that order was immediately taken into consideration. A second order was issued, slightly modified; but it did not really alter the case. The Lord Lieutenant and Lord Chancellor of Ireland were immediately de- spatched to Dublin. They arrived on Friday : they met in Council and deli- berated on the facts; and they determined to proclaim the meeting. But they had to weigh well every word of their proclamation, to put it into form, to pass- it through the Hanaper Office, and to get the great seal of Ireland affixed. The whole of this was done between Friday at noon and Saturday at noon. The proclamation was posted upwards a thirty miles round Dublin in the course of Saturday evening. It was not a meeting, be it remembered, for any district except that of the immediate vicinity and neighbourhood of Dublin. The pro- clamation could be known, therefore, by four o'clock on the Saturday after- noon, for thirty miles around Dublin ; and, admitting the full value of Mr. O'Connell's exertions, the meeting in fact did not take place and no one was injured. Stoutly standing up for his friend Lord Lyndhurst, Sir James re- minded the House that Lord Lyndhurst bad at the time denied the words about " aliens" imputed to him, in the sense ascribed to them. What were the benefits derived from the prosecution ? These : for the last three months there had been comparative tranquillity in Ireland, and the ordinary powers of the law had proved sufficient to triumph over a most dangerous conspiracy. He admitted that Ireland was occupied by a Mifitary force ; an intention having been manifested to wrest Ireland from the Crown by a military force. The precautions taken would prove equal to every emergency. He glanced at the measures undertaken by Government. They had issued a Commission to inquire into the tenure of land, and into the burden of taxa- tion upon landlords and tenants. It was a question whether it would not be advisable to modify the law of ejectment in Ireland by summary process at Quarter-sessions, to secure the tenant's interest in his improvements, and to restrict the injurious practice of sub-letting. The only measure proposed by Lord John Russell on this head was an increased number of Stipendiary. Magistrates. The late Whig Government maintaitied fifty-nine Stipendiary Magistrates in Ireland ; but in the last three months they added seven more, one on the very day they left office! Their successors did not confirm those last seven appointments ; but four of the gentlemen had since been appointed. to vacancies as they occurred. Government intend to propose a considerable addition to the grant for national education in Ireland ; being satisfied of the necessity of more constant inspection of the National Schools, and of training- schools for masters and mistresses. It is proposed. that Mr. George Lamb's Act of 1832, placing Roman Catholics on the same footing as Protestant Dis- senters with regard to gifts for charitable and religious uses, enabling them to hold real property, shall be extended to Ireland. The new Registration Bill for Ireland will comprise an extension of the county franchise ; and in towns the payment of borough-rate, jury-cess, and poor-rate, as a preliminary to the exercise of the franchise, will be substituted for the payment at present re- quired of the eighteen or twenty local taxes. Sir James declared that he would maintain the Established Church untouched. He concluded by calling upon the House to vote for the question as one of confidence or no confidence

in Ministers.

Here the debate was adjourned.

It was resumed on Wednesday ; but for a time proceeded without ranch interest. Lord LEVESON supported conciliatory policy towards Ireland. Mr. BAILLIE COCHRANE supported Government ; suggesting remedies, and a firm but forbearing policy. Lord CLEMENTS assailed centralization, the Arms Bill, the system of conacre and middlemen. Mr. YOUNG defended Ministers. Remarking how incompetent the Repeal leaders might be to restrain the agitation they had provoked, he likened the present state of Ireland to the early stages of the French Revolution, when the humbler rural priesthood were the most active class, and when Robespierre spoke in terms parallel to those found in the speeches of Mr. O'Connell- " The people have by their conduct confounded all their enemies : 80,000 men have been under arms nearly a week, and not one shop has been pillaged, not one drop of blood shed. Their insurrection was spontaneous, the result of an universal moral conviction. The insurrection was a great moral and popular effort, worthy of the enlightened people among whom it arose."

Sir GEORGE GREY followed up Lord John Russell's attack on Minis- ters.

He touched upon the military occupation of Ireland, the composition of the Jury-list, the virtual indictment of the whole Catholic population, and so forth. He took a great deal of pains to confute Sir James Graham's explanation of the diligence taken in stopping the Clontarf meeting, by a comparison of dates ; humorously describing Government as occupied all the Tuesday and Wednes- day in comparing the verbal and literal alterations made in the second form of the " Repeal cavalry " order. As to the measures proposed by Ministers, Le should be glad enough to see them introduced ; but were they in the least degree adequate to the crisis in which the country was placed ? What hope did Sir James Graham afford that the great grievance, the exclusive Church, would be redressed—when all aid was refused to the Roman Catholics for eccle- siastical purposes, and he refused to entertain the question of distri- buting the Church property ? There was but one way to check the Repeal agitation—accustoming the Irish people to look to the Imperial Parlia- ment for the accomplishment of such reasonable objects as they now expected to obtain from a local Parliament. Had England done every thing which could be done to avoid a contest between the two countries ? And would not the House be taking one step towards doing so by agreeing to the motion of his noble friend ? What was really wanting for Ireland was, not only measures 'calculated to meet the wishes of the people of that country, but they wanted to see a Government in whom they could place confidence—a Government con- ducted in unison with the feelings and sympathies of the people. What then were the measures which Ministers promised ? They were measures which, though small in themselves, were, as he had already stated, good measures in his opinion: but then the Irish people took into view the policy with which those measures were connected : they regarded the past policy of the men who promised these measures, and they felt in regard to all those specious promises from the party opposite, that time was when "your words were sharper than swords, though now they are smoother than oil." (Cheers.) Lord ELIOT replied to Sir George Grey ; whom he reproached with dealing in fine phrases and vague generalities. Ile believed he might say, that the present state of Ireland was not worse now than it was in the time when Sir George Grey supported a Coercion-bill. Proof could be adduced that the Law-officers of the Crown were desirous of re- taming upon the Jury Roman Catholics, provided they could do so with safety to the interests of justice. The traversers were spoken of as if they were all Catholics ; whereas three of the eight were Protestants ; and he called to mind that when Mr. O'Connell acted as counsel for a distinguished military officer at Cork, he struck every Protestant off the jury-list. He justified the delay in the Repeal meetings by the argument that it would have been very imprudent for Government to proceed against them until their illegal object was distinctly made out. He explained the circumstances attending the Clontarf meet- ing. The Lord-Lieutenant was compelled to go to England for a time by se- vere illness ; and the Lord Chancellor, exhausted by the effective discharge of duty in his court, was also obliged to seek relaxation in England. In their absence, Lord Eliot consulted with the Law-officers of the Crown in Dublin ; and had been prepared to take, upon his own responsibility, the conduct pur- sued as to the meeting. A proclamation was prepared ; but suspended on the appearance of the altered "Repeal cavalry" order, which was sent to London, and arrived in London on the 4th October. The Lord-Lieutenant could not bring a proclamation with him cut and dry, because he could not foresee that the circum- stances might not have altered. As to the risk of bloodshed, measures were taken to send the proclamation to every police-station within thirty miles of Dublin : such meetings never take place till aftef mass; and at daybreak on the day of meeting, the ground was occupied by an overwhelming military force, which no masses of the people would ever have thought of resisting. Defending the dis- tribution of Government patronage, Lord Eliot remarked, that the great ma- jority of those engaged in the liberal professions of Ireland are Protestants. Of 60 or 65 Queen's counsel, but 12 are Catholics ; of the 8 Queen's counsel en- gaged bythe traversers in the late trial, only 3 were Roman Catholics; and 4 P of the Protestants were Conservatives.

The debate was again adjourned, about twelve o'clock.

On Thursday, Mr. Ross resumed the debate, on the Opposition side. Soon after he began, Mr. O'Connell entered the House, and was greeted with uproarious cheers from a number of the Opposition Members ; several of whom went up to him and shook hands. This incident Mr. Ross improved, by asking how much safer Government would be if they put that man in gaol—what security would they have if Louis Philippe Is ere to declare war against England ? This renewed the Opposition cheers, answered by cries of "Oh, oh ! "

The debate proceeded for some time without great interest ; Mr. BORT RWICK and Mr. REp-ron speaking on the Ministerial side ; Sir Wins-cos BARRON on the other.

O'Fnuatal. imparted a new and bitterer spirit to it ; fbercely driving home the charges against Ministers. Be complained that they were not explicit as to the policy which they in- tended to pursue in Ireland. Sir James Graham admitted that it must be governed constitutionally, yet said that under the circumstances it must be governed by force. [Sir James Graham dissented.] At all events, he said that :he Established Church must be maintained in its present state ; which amounted to the same thing. The Union can only be maintained by placing the two countries on a level—raising Ireland to England's level, or lowering England to Ireland. At present, a healthy is joined to a diseased body. "In bringing Ireland to a healthy condition, Irishmen were not the only parties in- terested. Every Member in the House, every man in England, had an in- terest in this work. ("Hear, hear!" from the Ministerial benches.) Then why do you not apply yourselves to the work ? (Loud Opposition cheers.) Why do you leave Ireland a spectacle of degradation before the world—her vanity wounded—her desire to aid you diminished—her position an anomaly among the kingdoms of Europe?" (Repeated cheering.) Sir James Graham had propounded remedial measures. "First, he proposed to permit the Catho- lics to endow their own churches. Marvellous boon ! Did the Government, however, forget that the Catholics bad endowed their own churches once already ? Did they not know that there was not one parish in Ireland, great or small, in which land had not once been appropriated to the endow- ment of the national churches, but which lands had now become the very freeholds, the very voting - tenures, of a Protestant clergy ? Were the Government simple enough to believe, that with such remembrances, with such securities, the Irish people would a second time make these endowments, only, perhaps, that they might a second time be alienated ? " The details of the promised Registration Bill had yet to be explained. Some light was thrown on its probable nature by the declaration of Mr. Ponsonby Barker, the Government candidate, in retiring from the poll in Tipperary : he said to the Conservatives, that they would soon have an opportunity of contesting the county " under more advantageous circumstances "! Some of the Catholics excluded from the Jury were, it appears, Repealers ; but were there no opinions on the part of the jurors retained? (Loud cries of " Hear, hear ! ") Were the Government jurors members of no association ? (Great Opposition cheering.) Had they never visited a certain club in Dorset Street? Was not their public and private hostility to the principal traversers well known and well understood? (Loud and general cheers.) It might, perhaps, be difficult in Ireland to obtain from any panel a perfectly impartial jury ; but if this argument were to be urged, was it not, let him ask, a reason for having no trial at all? (Laughter, and cries of " Oh, oh !" from the Ministerial benches.) Why, what was the object of a trial ? Was it not to set an example, to hold up a warning to the people, to prevent them from following in the track of men who had outstepped the laws? If this was the object of a trial, of what avail was such a farce as they bad witnessed recently ? The Government had obtained a verdict ; but what had they obtained besides ? (Opposition cheers.) What was the effect upon public opinion ? The truth was, that at the root of the trials, and of all the attendant proceedings, lay the one great cause—hostility to the Catholics. Never did the Government, or its members, let pass an opportunity of vilifying their Catholic fellow-subjects. He well remembered how the Home Secretary had aspersed them last year, and though his aspersions had been retracted, he well remembered bow his language had been taken up by the scavenger of the Government in the other House—their man-of-all-work—[meaning, it appears, Lord Brougham]—their once bitter opponent, their now friend and intimate— who carried about his Billingsgate to the best market, to see who would hire him at the highest price—the generosity of whose defence might well be ques- tioned when it was remembered that never yet had he done a single action, good, bad, or indifferent, except for his own personal interest. He looked to the future prospect with nothing but alarm. It was said that Government in- tended to withdraw troops: he warned them against taking any such steps; and he told them, once again and once for all, "If you will govern by the sword, you must govern by a sword that is long and strong."

Mr. &Jaw (the Recorder of Dublin) minutely explained the acci- dental omission of names from the Jury-list-

Twenty parish-lists, containing about 5,000 names, are first examined by the Recorder, and elaborately corrected and interlined, which the law directs. Each of those lists is reduced to nine separate lists, according to the classes of the citizens, making 180 separate lists; one class being the 5,0001. traders eli- gible for the Special Jury, marked in the parish-lists with a cross. The lists of the same class are then put together, to make the final list; but in that process one of the 180 lists slipped among a number of blank forms exactly like the paper on which it was written, and was removed with them. That list con- tained 15 names ; 4 more of the marked names were carelessly omitted in the transfer; and in the cases of 5 others, the marks had been mistaken, and the names erroneously carried to the panel of Common Juries. He believed that of the 15 in one list, the majority were Roman Catholics, and that of the other 9 a majority were Protestants : but these small numbers could hardly have had much effect on a panel of between 700 and 800 special jurors : and he would add, that the Registrar who had made the mistake was himself a Roman Ca- tholic, was new to the business, and was as free from suspicion as Mr. Shaw believed himself to be deemed in Dublin. (Cheers.) Addressing himself to the general question, Mr. Shaw contended for main- taining the Protestant establishment, "on the broad ground of religious truth"; but deprecated acrimony, which he said is not so much felt in Ireland as those in England suppose.

Lord HOWICK supported the motion at great length.

He dwelt upon the danger of compelling allegiance in Ireland by means of force—dangerous even in peace, more so in war, and rendering the chances of war greater. He described the Opposition as charged with the responsibility of propounding a policy, while Ministers descended to the humbler task of criti- cism ; and he recommended further measures than those small ones offered by Ministers,—public works and colonization, to improve the physical condition of the people ; other measures to heal their sense of injury, and especially in religious matters. The Protestant Establishment is at the root of all the dis- cord. Instead of defending it on "the broad ground of religious truth "—the ground on which he rested his own convictions, but which he could not force on another—they must legislate for Catholics on perfectly equal civil grounds, as they would have Catholics legislate for Protestants. No distinction can be recognized on the assumed truth of their own faith. Either they must snake the Catholic the Established Church in Ireland, as the Protestant in England and the Presbyterian in Scotland, or they must abolish all State endowments in Ireland ; or they must equally divide the State endowments between the different persuasions. Either course presented great difficulties ; but the difficulties must be manfully faced, if they would regain the affections of the Irish people. Until that source of animosity was closed, no physical improvements could allay agitation—education would only make the people more sensible of injury—even rebellion, to be quenched in bloodshed, would fail to terminate the struggle. He had no party motive in voting for the motion ; for be looked upon this question as one which, like the Catholic question, never could be carried by a mere party triumph. He believed that its settle- ment could only be accomplished as that of the Catholic question was ac- complished—by the union of the two great parties who divided that House and the country, to sacrifice their preconceived opinions and their mutual hos- tilities, and to concur in doing that which was necessary for the welfare of Ire- land and the safety of the empire. (Lord Ifowich was loudly cheered as he sat down.) There was a pause, no one rising on the other side; and after some talk about an adjournment, the House was cleared for a division. None took place ; but Lord JOHN RUSSELL was found taunting Ministers with their taciturnity. Sir ROBERT PEEL was surprised at the nonchalance of Lord John Russell, who, being himself in favour of maintaining the Irish Establishment, at least until some very remote period, thought that Lord Howick's speech urging abolition needed a reply front the Ministerial side. Lord Jonx RUSSELL protested against that description of Lord Howick's speech. Eventually, the debate was adjourned, at midnight.

The House of Lords also took up the subject of Ireland, at the same time as the Commons. On Tuesday, the Marquis of NORMANBY moved, "That this House having, in answer to her Majesty's most gracious Speech, assured her Majesty that they entered into her Majesty's feelings in forbear- ing from observations or comments on Ireland, in respect to which proceedings are pending before the proper legal tribunals,' feel it, in consequence, to be their duty to take the earliest opportunity, when no prejudice can arise there- from in the minds of the Jury, to record their intention to examine into the causes of the discontents now unhappily so prevalent in that country. That with a view to the removal of existing evils, and the restoration of confidence, this House look to the full development of the only principles of a perfect union, by securing to her Majesty's subjects of all classes and persuasions, in all parts of the United Kingdom, the practical enjoyment of equal rights." He supported this motion in a long speech, impugning the conduct of Minis- ters, in a spirit not differing from Lord John Russell's; but setting forth the case in much more general terms. He reproached Ministers with the discon- tent in Ireland ; which was not confined to the Repeal party, as appeared by the Charlemont House meeting. He condemned the course taken in the suppression of the monster-meetings ; which he contrasted with his own combating the Rcpealers with fair argument, when an address was presented to him from the county of Cork, in 1836; and be contrasted the Irish policy of Ministers with their own policy in Ca- nada. Lord Lyndhurst's phrase about "aliens," the dismissal of the Repeal Magistrates, the recent appointments in Ireland, Mr. Smith and his imputa- tion on the Roman Catholics respecting their lax observance of an oath, and the formation of the Jury, formed prominent topics in his speech. He at- tacked the temper of Lord Chief Justice Pennefather's address to the Jury; and called to mind that, in a libel case, that Judge had uttered such language as the following—" This is a most diabolical libel ; this is a most base and in- famous libel; and I hope that's not mincing the matter." He contrasted with the severity shown to the Repealers, the indulgence shown to the Orange meeting at Hillsborough, in 1834. At that meeting, the Reverend Holt Waring led the first party; "which constituted a close, dark, dense mass of 20,000 people." [Lord Wharncliffe—" Very like a parish-priest."] Lord Normanby never heard so strange a defence. That same Mr. Holt Waring had recently been appointed Dean of Dromore. It was announced that Sir Robert Peel's was to be a wise and conciliatory policy in Ireland, and he was to "legislate for Ireland in a wise and generous spirit " : only one bill had been passed—the Arms Bill!

Touching upon remedies, Lord Normanby said that the state of the Protes- tant Church should be left open to a free and full inquiry ; and he argued for religious equality; but lie regarded the present as an unfortunate time for talk- ing of payment to the Catholic clergy. He wished that the Landlord and Tenant Commission had been allotted a wider field of inquiry. He cited the example of Austria, which had latterly conquered disaffection inLombardy by a liberal policy ; regretted that, while he saw three Scotchmen "and a half" among the Ministers before him, there was no one connected with Ireland, ex- cept the Duke of Wellington; and wound up with some observations on the inexpediency of no longer governing Ireland by the sword.

Lord WHARNCLIFFE found nothing in the resolution to oppose ; but he was prepared to meet the charges conveyed in the mover's speech : and he defended the course taken by Government in suppressing the Repeal agitation, and explained the facts connected with the formation of the Jury, much as Sir James Graham did in the House of Commons. In speaking of the remedial measures, he mentioned, more distinctly than Sir James Graham did, that in the alteration of the law respecting charitable trusts, stipends and glebes, and the appropriation of money for the building of Catholic chapels, were contemplated. The appoint- ment conferred upon Mr. Holt Waring was merely honorary, without stipend or cure of souls.

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE followed up the attack of Lord Nor- manby. He admitted incidentally, that the Dublin Jury, whatever their creeds and politics, had found an honest verdict. He especially recommended a careful consultation of the Report of the Committee on the Irish Grand Jury Laws; which showed how 160,0001. a year might at once be saved to the public out of the local rates and taxes.

The Earl of RODEN rose to defend himself from some incidental attack which he had sustained from the Marquis of Normanby ; on whom he retorted, by imputing the present troubles in Ireland to the effect of the wholesale discharges from gaols, with other such esta- blished modes of attack on the quondam Lord-Lieutenant. He justified the exclusion of Roman Catholics from the Jury, by asserting that the Catholic priesthood were universally in favour of Repeal, as a means of destroying the Protestant religion— In the Grand Jury which found the bill, there were three Roman Catholics; and one of these Roman Catholics came forward into the box after the bill had been brought up and found, and, after having taken his oath that he would keep his own counsel and the counsel of his fellow-jurors—in that box he de- clared to the Judge that he had dissented from the finding. This he thought in itself afforded a sufficient justification of the coarse which the Attorney-

General had pursued.

The Earl of DEVON stated some particulars to show how zealous the Landlord and Tenant Commissioners are in obtaining information from all quarters, and in pushing their inquiry into every part of the subject. The examination of the Report on the Grand Jury Law would be part of their task. They did not proceed on the idea that the landlords were "wrong," or that the tenants were " wrong "; but sought to discover the root of the evil.

The motion, or rather the mover's statement, was opposed by the Marquis of WESTMEATH and Lord HOWDEN, and supported by Lord BEAUMONT ; who decidedly approved, however, of the Ministerial mea- sures announced for Ireland.

The debate was adjourned, at a quarter before twelve o'clock, until Thursday.

On Thursday, Earl FORTESCUE took up the discourse; explaining the appointment of the seven Stipendiary Magistrates in Ireland, in the three last months of his stay in office— They were not in addition to the number of preexisting Magistrates, for three were appointments to vacancies. Of the other four, one was sent to Armagh on the application of Lord Gosford and the County Magistrates ; and two were sent to Tralee and Donegal, on account of continued disturbances. The seventh was appointed on some account equally urgent : but, for want of documents and of communication with Lord Morpetb, who is in attendance on his sick father, Lord Fortesene could not exactly state why that appoint- ment was made. The appointments had no connexion with the retirement of the late Ministers. [The remainder of Lord Fortescue's speech consisted of reproach to Government for the state of Ireland, and a slighting approval of the proposed Ministerial measures.] The Earl of HADDINcroN stuck to the story of the Magistrates : on the 7th June 1841 there were 59 Magistrates ; in August there were 66; and Cocker would prove that there must have been an addi- tion : there are now 60. Lord Haddington then launched into a ge- neral defence of his colleagues' policy and conduct. Alluding to Lord John Russell's attack upon Lord Lyndhurst, he warmly vindicated the truly generous temperament of his misrepresented friend.

Lord MONTEACLE delivered a speech of considerable length, in its topics resembling many that have preceded it ; but effectively working out the difficulty which impairs all that Ministers could attempt in Ireland, from the taunting and exasperating language which their party had employed in speaking of the " Irish majority," the Irish Catholics, and the Irish favourite O'Connell ; by which was produced a mutual distrust that cannot be conquered. He approved of the course taken by Government last year, and of the delay to prosecute until the case was ripe ; which he thought it was when they did prosecute : but he censured the retro- spective and cumulative nature of the charge, and the composition of the Jury ; citing a case in which a Catholic priest, active in the Repeal and Tithe agitation of Earl Grey's time, was prosecuted by a Catholic counsel for the Crown, and convicted by a jury half Catholic.

The Earl of Itirox maintained that Ministers had done nothing but what was right in itself : he defended his relative Lord De Grey, a sup- porter of Catholic Emancipation; and vindicated the appointments of the Government.

A strange scene ensued. When Lord Ripon ceased, the Lord Chan- cellcr retired ; Lord Shaftesbury taking his place on the Woolsack. A pause, in which no one rose. Lord Brougham, who had been sitting on the Woolsack, walked over to the Opposition benches, and appeared to try to incite some of the Peers to reply to Lord Ripon. No success. Another pause, with cries of " Question ! " and " Divide!"

The Earl of SHAFTESBURY rose to put the question ; and then Lord NORMANBY rose to reply. While he was in full career, and just as he bad remarked on Lord Lyndhurst's silence, the Lord Chancellor re- entered the House. He seemed to exclaim, as he entered, "I cannot get a word in now !" Lord NORMANBY, apparently answering the exclamation, said that he had risen to reply because be understood that the Lord Chancellor had retired for the night ; and he contended, [speaking with vehemence, and striking his hand on the table,] that after he had replied no one else could speak. [There had already been a good deal of audible exclamation and comment, and now there were loud cries in approval and dissent, with " Order, order r] Lord KENYON denied that there was any such rule fixed ; and Lord BROUG■ nem averred that there was no rule on the subject but the courtesy of the House. [The tone of the dispute waxed hotter, several Lords speaking at once.] The LORD CHANCELLOR interposed an explanation. He had been sitting in his Court from ten o'clock that morning, in the House from five till nine. Under those circumstances, he had retired for five minutes. He had had no desire to take part in the debate, [because, as he afterwards explained, no Law Lords had impugned the conduct of Government ; ] but he only meant to say a few words in defence of his own conduct, in consequence of what had been said about it. How- ever, he had been so warmly defended already, that he thought it needless to say more. The confusion was again renewed ; Lord NORMANBY not understanding Lord Lyndburst's waiver of a speech, and still contesting his right : but eventually the Lord Chancellor made his opponent comprehend; and the Marquis proceeded to a close. Oace more the discord was revived. Lord BROUGHAM [who still sat on the Woolsack, by Lord Lyndhurst] rose amid loud cries of " Question I " and desired to remind the House of the extraordinary position in which they were placed ; for the event proved that they might have finished the debate on Tuesday night. An animated com- bat of words ensued; the House laughing and cheering more and more as the sport continued.

Lord BROUGHAM (continuing)—" My noble and learned friend who moved the adjournment, according to the ordinary course of Parliamentary proceed- ings ought to have commenced the debate tonight : but he has not spoken at all. This has been to me a real disappointment, and I regret much that we were not favoured with any observations from my noble and learned friend. I hope this will be a lesson to us another time to avoid adjournments." Lord CAMPBELL—•-" My noble and learned friend is quite irregular. All hie proceedings are one tissue of irregularities. I expected he would have spoken on this subject ; for there is not one single subject brought before your Lordehipe on which he does not speak six or seven times—excepting only this. My Lords, a grave attack has been made on the legality of the principles which were applied to the conduct of the late trial; yet my noble and learned friend on the Woolsack [Lord Lyndhurst] has not opened his mouth. He has spoken neither by himself—nor by his counsel. (Loud laughter.) He has allowed judg- ment to go, as the lawyers call it, by nil dicit. My other noble and learned friend says he is sorry that I did not speak. I believe that he is not very sorry when I am silent : but I will not remain silent to gratify him, whenever he addresses to your Lordships sentiments which, I am sorry to say, he too often now does—sentiments containing principles departing entirely from those principles for which I once admired him, and in which I concurred." Lord BROUGHAM—" I have been charged by my noble and learned friend with irregularity. Any thing more gross and unfounded in point of fact than that charge, I have never happened in my life to hear, even from my noble and learned friend. I had a right to speak before or after the reply. This is an undoubted privilege of Parliament, which as a Peer of Parliament I have, and which no taunts of any ignorant new Member of Parliament, who does not know even the A B C of the House—so ignorant, so gross, that I should not have thought it possible for any person to display so much ignorance on any subject—I will not, I say, for all the taunts of such ignorance and inexperience as that, be prevented from exercising my undoubted privilege as a Peer. Happy and rejoiced am I to find now for the first time presented in public—in this House, where I can meet the vile and false charge face to face—the imputation that I have changed my principles—that I had changed any political opinions when I quitted those as a party, with whom, SS a party-maa, for so many years, to my no great advantage, per- haps—to their no great advantage, perhaps they would say also—I acted. I was, at least, their faithful and active and zealous and constant and unflinching and untiring adherent : but I was obliged to change my relations with them when they deserted those opinions which we then held in common. I defy any man—and I will speedily give my noble and learned friend an opportunity —to substantiate the charge which he has brought forward. Now, that they have selected him as the most powerful,the most experienced, the best-informed, the most judicious, and the most discreet of their advocates against me whom they could callout of their ranks--and as I think 1 can devise the means for doing it— I will give him, their counsel as he now is, an opportunity of showing in what one particular I have changed one opinion, or departed from any political prin- ciple I have ever maintained at any period of my political life. The charge is a large one ; the defiance is a strong and a searching one ; bat I throw down my defiance with the must resolute and undaunted confidence that I must pre.

yarn"

Lord CAMPBELL—" My noble and learned friend (for such 1 ehall still cal him) says that he is to give me the opportunity of entering upon these topics at some future time. When the opportunity arrives, I will not shrink from the challenge. It may happen, as he is now a devoted friend of those whom he formerly politically opposed, be will be able to show that they have changed their opinions, and have adopted the opinions to which he has ever so strictly adhered?'

The question was then put ; and the numbers were—Contents (in- cluding 96 proxies,) 175; not content, (including 39 proxies,) 78; Ministerial majority against the motion, 97.

AMENDMENT OF TILE POOR-LAW.

In the House of Commons, last Saturday, Sir JAMES Gasuest moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Poor-law; stating the objects of the measure.

He began by addressing Mr. Thomas Duncombe and Captain Pechell, who had opposed the abolition of the Gilbert Unions. Ile was strongly of opinion that it was for the good of the country to abolish those unions: but he was prepared to go into an inquiry with respect to their operation, in conjunction with the general law for the relief of the poor throughout England and Wales ; and pending that inquiry, he did not intend to provide for the abolition of the Unions in the present bill. The bastardy-clauses of the original Poor-law Amendment Bill of 1834 bad given very general dissatisfaction in Wales and in the North of England. Those clauses went upon the principle, that to prevent the making of orders for the maintenance of a bastard upon the puta- tive father would conduce to female chastity. The act, as passed, left the power to make such orders in the hands of Magistrates at Quarter-sessions, upon testimony being given in corroboration of the mother's; but it only enabled the claimant to attach the goods and not the person of the father. In 1839, the power of making orders thus limited was extended to Magistrates at Special Sessions. Even that bad not satisfied public opinion ; and he now pro- posed to relieve the Poor-law of the whole weight of the question of bastardy. "I propose that the mother of an illegitimate child shall be exactly in the same condition as a destitute widow; and that a parish-officer, as such, shall have no interest in the question of an order of maintenance : but, following the analogy of the law of Scotland, that as between the mother of a bastard child and the putative father there shall be a summary process before two Magistrates, I propose that the mother shall have power to make application to the Magistrates within forty days of the birth of the child, for some main- tenance as against the father ; that the maximum sum to be granted shall be 41. a week; and that the order shall be binding on the putative father until the child attains the age of thirteen y ears. I select that age because it is the age at which in the Factory Bill the line of demarcation is drawn between children and young persons, and is I think the first period of emancipation. I propose also, that the order against the putative father shall be signed as before the Act of 1834, and that it shall be binding not only against the goods but against the person also. I propose that the mother, in claiming a remedy, shall pro- duce some corroborative evidence."

Another provision would remedy the hardship inflicted in the Metropolis and large cities on destitute persons while the question of settlement is pend- ing; when people are driven, at the most inclement seasons, to sleep in arches of bridges, in porticoes, and in parks. " The House will perhaps remember, that on a former occasion I proposed that children brought up in workhouses should have district schools established for them in the Metropolis and in large towns. I now propose to add to that portion of the bill a provision for the establish- ment of district asylums by the combination of the Unions in the Metropolis; and that these district asylums shall under certain modifications be opened for the reception, for one night in each week, of every destitute person. I pro- pose that destitute persons during sickness shall be maintained there at the common cost of the district; and that every destitute person desirous of going to an asylum for one night's lodging, and for food night and morning, shall be at perfect liberty to do so, subject only to the task of four hours' labour. [Mr. HAWES—" That is the present law."J But the establishment of district asy- lums is a most important change, because at present their reception is doubtful, except they can prove their settlement. I propose, however, that no question of that sort shall be a bar to their reception on the first night, and that a party returning for a second night shall also be admitted; but in case of a return beyond the second night, that then shall arise the question of settlement."

Captain PECHELL expressed satisfaction at the determination re- specting the Gilbert Unions. Mr. Taoaras DUNCOMBE, Mr. EVELYN DENISON, Sir WALTER JLMES, and Mr. STUART WORTLEY, expressed eatisfacdon at the improvements generally.

The bill was brought in and read a first time.

PROTECTION FOR BETTERS.

In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, Mr. STUART WORTLEY moved the second reading of the Horse-racing Penalties Bill ; the ob- jects of which he explained— He described the bill as only intended to suspend till the end of the session the Acts 16th Charles IL, c. 7, and 9th Anne, C. 14, so far as regards common informers bringing actions to recover penalties for betting at horse-races ; and he illustrated the hardship of the qui tam actions brought against parties who had no idea that they were breaking the law, by reference to cases in which betting was recognized as legal, and sums claimed under bets had actually been recovered. If necessary, he would show who were the parties bringing these actions : one was an attorney's clerk, who bad been croupier at a gambling-house and had been discharged ; another was also an attorney connected with gambling. Relief had been granted in similar cases : in 1814, the Legislature stopped certain actions brought against non-resident clergy- men ; and on another occasion Parliament was called on to interpose for the relief of persons who were vexatiously prosecuted for not attending church. The whole law of gaming was in the moat confused state.

Mr. MILNER Guisosr moved an amendment— The strongest reasons ought to be given for an es post facto law to relieve those who had violated an act of Parliament. The House ouhgt altogether to dismiss the question as to the character of the parties; for to admit such con- aiderations, was to legislate not on principle but on personal motivea. Be had heard that people on the other side were very fond of trying to make the nation moral and religions by act of Parliament ; and be therefore would not, if he could help it, allow great men, and rich men, and influential men, to escape the infliction of laws which they had made for other people. (Cheers.) It was quite absurd to see the right reverend Prelates, who had been so mon- strously alarmed at the idea of any thing being done by Parliament to sanction gaming, allowing their zeal for public morals to subside and ooze away at being told by the friends of the bill that it was, forsooth, "a manly sports and wholesome pastimes bill." Great men may jest with saints : 'tis wit in them, but, in the less, foul profanation." (Laughter.) Redid not believe that there was so much ignorance as to the existing law of gaming as Mr. Wortley seemed to think ; on the contrary, scarcely a term passed in which actions were not brought under these statutes of Charles and Anne. Parliament had invited informers to take upon themselves the odium and the expense of prose- cuting, and the informers had a right to complain if the Legislature attempted to deprive them of those rights which it had bestowed upon them. And would it not tend to lower the character of the Legislature with the people? Would it not be said that all those who had friends in Parliament in high stations could suspend the operation of the law—could have bills of indemnity intro- duced to release them from the liability to penalties which they had incurred? In the year 1842, qui tam actions had been brought, under the provisions of this very clause, against a person named Bond—actions of a precisely similar character to those now under discussion ; for he was not indicted for keeping a gambling-house, but for winning bets above a certain amount. Be was ruined, and forced to leave the country. No bill of indemnity was brought in for bun. The Times expressed gratitude to Mr. Smith, an artist, and to " an act of Par. lien:lent of the good old days of Queen Anne," for the successful action against Bond. This case showed that the statute was perfectly well known. Blade- stone denounces gaming as the vice of the aristocracy, but says that it is diffi- cult to be put down by penalties and qui tam actions : unfurtunately, that is not the sentiment of the Legislature nowadays. They are desirous to make the people moral by act of Parliament. In this spirit they brought forward the Bill for the Better Observance of the Sabbath, and other measures by which they showed that they relied more upon stringent enactments than upon affording a sound education to the people and enabling them to trust to their own self-control. Relief had indeed been afforded in similar cases; but one cited by Mr. Wortley was a gross dereliction of principle in the Legislature. In 1814, Mr. Wright sought to recover penalties in two hundred actions against non-resident clergymen, under an act passed in 1803: the Bishops and great men of the Church combined with the aristocracy to relieve the parties from penalties imposed by their own act passed ten years before : but even here, so indisputable was the claim to penalties considered—created as that claim had. been by the Legislature itself—that although the actions were suspended and ultimately discontinued, the informer was not deprived of his " vested inte- rest " in the penalties. Sergeant Copley, now Lord Lyndhurst, pleaded the cause of the informer, and said that the case was not in a position for ex post facto legislation. On the other band, where was the guarantee that the HOWLS was desirous to remove obsolete and antiquated laws from the statute-book ? The reports of the Inspectors of Prisons stated that Magistrates were in the habit of resuscitating old statutes for the purpose of coercion ; and the House did not repeal those statutes, or indemnify those who had violated them. In Lancashire, men had been imprisoned for many days, or even ten weeks, until they paid the fine and costs for not attending church. In Ireland, the Re- peaters are prosecuted under an unexpected turn given to the law, after months of impunity; while in England Ministers would not dare to prosecute for " conspiracy " the Anti-Corn-law League, or the other League to which a Cabinet Minister had subscribed a hundred guineas. He called on Ministers not to evade voting on this measure ; and he regretted the absence of some gentlemen who arrogated to themselves the exclusive guardianship of the reli- gion and morality of the country. The House ought not to pass the bill with- out pledging itself to revise the whole of the laws relative to gaming. He moved, "That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the existing statutes against gaming of every kind, and into the penalties enacted by them; and whether the same, or any, and what part of those statutes, have fallen into desuetude, or ought to be repealed."

Lord JOHN MANNERS supported the bill ; opposed the amendment, as involving a task that would need a Justiniatt• or Napoleon to accom- plish; and justified the fine on non-attendanee at worship, as a remnant of a wise and consistent law. Mr. MONCKTON MILNES supported both motion and amendment. Mr. HUME supported the amendment. Mr. VERNON SMITH thought that the motion was one which the House ought not to entertain. Captain BERKELEY and Mr. C. BERKELEY reprobated the exclusive nature of the proposed legislation ; and the latter said, that if the bill went into Committee, he should move to extend it to the Act of the 5th William IV., c 65. The Arrousis-x- GENERAL said that the bill might be made to "suspend" iustead of "discontinuing" the actions.

On a division, the amendment was negatived, by 112 to 25.

In the course of some further conversation, Sir JAMES GRAHAM re- marked that the penalty for non-attendance at church was to have been repealed in the Ecclesiastical Courts Bill of last year. He thought it reasonable only to "suspend" the actions, until the merits of the ques- tion had been further considered. Mr. WORTLEY would enable the parties to recommence their actions at the end of three months.

The bill was read a second time ; to be committed next Wednesday.

RECOGNITION OF NEWSPAPER REPORTS.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Mr. CHRISTIE moved that "a Select Committee be appointed to consider the expediency of recog- nizing the presence of strangers at debates, and the publication of de- bates under the pleasure of the House, and to consider and report what regulations may be necessary."

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER could not perceive Mr. Chris- tie's object— The practical advantages are already attained. The Standing Order only applied to strangers found in the body of the House or in the Members' Gallery, empowering the Sergeant-at-Arms to take them into custody. The House did not recognize the publication of their debates; nor could they do so, except through some authorized channel responsible to the House. One of the first consequences of the recognition would be, that the House would be inundated with petitions complaining of misstatements. A. useful effect of the restrictions imposed by the libel-law is, that it checks personal imputations, which it may be very necessary to make in debate, but which it would be very improper to publish.

The motion was supported by Mr. THOMAS DUNCOMBE, Mr. Wu:. mem WILLiams, Mr. HUME, and Dr. BOWRIbIG.

Being called upon by Mr. CHRISTIE, the SPEAKER explained, that the Standing Order related only to the part of the House appropriated to Members. The general exclusion of strangers did not depend upon any sessional order, but was a right inherent in the House.

Mr. CHRISTIE modified his resolution, so as to apply only to the pub- lication of debates, and not to the exclusion of strangers. On Et divi- sion, it was negatived, by 84 to 37.

THANKS TO THE GENERAL AND ARMY IN SCINDE.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Earl of Rtnoti moved the thanks of the House to Sir Charles Napier and the Army employed is the operations of Scinde.

In the early part of last year, when Sir Charles Napier held the command of the British forces in Scinde, he was called on by the Governor-General to aid

in furthering 'certain negotiations with the Ameers. He received information that while the Ameers were treating, they were busily engaged in collecting

troops ' • and to hasten the negotiations to a satisfactory issue, Sir Charles

moved forward from Sukkur upon Khyrpore. The Ameers had retired from that place into the desert; believing that there they should be safe. Tu refute them, the General advanced and captured the fort of Emaurn Ghur. Thence

he proceeded towards Hyderabad, the capital of Scinde ; but waited for some days at Killaunee. While he was there' on the 15th February, occurred the

attack on Major Outram's residence, between Hyderabad and the Indus.

With a handful of troops, Major Outram defended the residence against the attack of 8,000 undisciplined but courageous and determined Beloochees ; and evantually he escaped with the loss of only ten or twelve men. Sir Charles Napier now felt it necessary to make a more determined advance. With a force not exceeding 2,800 men, [in fact it did not much, if at all, exceed 2,000,] he encountered the enemy, 22,000 [or rather 25,000] strong, at Meeanee ; the Beloochee army being protected in front by a deep watercourse, on either flank by a jungle, and on the right by a village. After a desperate resistance, the position of the enemy was stormed, with great loss on their side, little on ours; and a quantity of military stores fell to the share of the victors. The Ameer of Kbyrpore had still a reserve of troops, which was reinforced by the fugitives from Meeanee ; making in all 20,000. Sir Charles Napier, having effected a junction which increased his force to 5,000, went forward in two days to attack this new army, near Hyderabad. The Ameer was intrenched behind two

nullabs, or dry ditches, with ramparts behind to protect his rear. With bril- liant gallantry, the British attacked, first the right, and then, almost simulta- neously, the other flank. Our loss in the two victories was about 500 men ;

and several officers of distinction in the Indian army were slain ; attesting the desperate valour with which the enemy fought. Of the conduct of the British non-commissioned officers and men it was almost needless to speak—it was

known with what spirit and unbroken discipline they fought. The Native

troops of the East India Company displayed the courage and admirable disci- pline for which they were distinguished. He moved that the thanks of the House be given to Lieutenant-General Sir Charles Napier, for the skill and gallantry with which the military operations in Scinde were carried on, and for the decisive victories with which they were crowned ; and that the thanks also

of the House be given to the several officers of the army serving under Sir Charles Napier for their gallantry, zeal, and meritorious conduct ; and that similar thanks be given to the non-commissioned officers and privates of the Army, both Native and British.

The Earl of AUCKLAND seconded the motion ; declaring that more conspicuous victories had never been achieved in India, not even excepting Plassy and Assaye.

The Duke of WELLINGTON, in the strongest terms, complimented Sir Charles Napier. He never knew an instance in which a general

officer showed in a higher degree all the qualifications which were

necessary for enabling him to conduct great operations. The march to Emaum Ghur was one of the most curious military feats which he had

ever known to be performed, or had ever perused an account of in his life. The Duke also mentioned with warm approval the act of a British officer, who, in the hot season, rode forty miles and back again,

to obtain fresh orders from Sir Charles Napier, at a difficult juncture ; a proof of the general confidence in Sir Charles Napier, and of the unbounded zeal of his officers.

The motion was agreed to unanimously.

Sir ROBERT PEEL made a similar motion in the House of Commons— With the policy of the war, he said, the motion had nothing to do. Sir Charles Napier acted from instructions of the Governor-General; and for that policy the civil power in India, and not Sir Charles Napier, was entirely responsible. He sketched the course of military operations in Scinde; re- marking that the victory, both at Meeanee and at Hyderabad, was mainly to be ascribed to the example set by the personal intrepidity of the leader. It was

most fortunate that, at such a crisis, the command of the British army should be committed to one of three brothers who have grafted on the stem of an ancient and honourable lineage that personal nobility which is derived from

unblemished private character, high honour, and repeated proofs of valour in the field. "Sir, each of these three brothers learnt the art of war under an illustrious commander' during the whole of those memorable campaigns of which one of them has been the faithful, impartial, and eloquent historian. The exploits of those three brothers during the whole of those campaigns entitle

them to the gratitude of their country. In almost every action of the Penin- sular war they gave proofs of their military skill and valour. In the actions of Comnna, of Buser:0, of Ciudad Rodrigo, and during the operations of the

Pyrenees, they proved that there was no British officer more prodigal of his

blood in the cause of his country than was each of those brothers." In the page which records a recent naval action emulating in the accomplishment of vic- tory by most inadequate means the glories of St. Vincent—a victory by the

moral effect of which a dynasty has been changed—we find that the name of the commander is "Napier." Even in a more circumscribed sphere of action, when, last year, it became important to vindicate the law before a misguided multitude, the man who at the head of six constables attacked hundreds of people, and made more prisoners than the numbers of his own men, also bore the name of" Napier." The motto on the family shield, "Ready, aye ready," was the characteristic of their conduct. When Sir Charles Napier was called upon to take the command of the British army in Scinde, he had attained the age of sixty-two, with a body shattered in the service of his country : but his unwearied spirit, controlled by military skill, inspired unparalleled confidence in those whom he commanded. "The actions which have been performed by members of the family of Napier may appear to the pusillanimous to be fool- hardy—to the superficial, the result of lucky accident ; but, however desperate they may appear to have been, they have been undertaken, and the difficulties surmounted, by a combination of such skill, experience, and personal valour, that however desperate such actions may appear when undertaken by ordi- nary minds, they are reconcileable with the coolest calculations of pru- dence when conducted by such men as Sir Charles Napier." To show that Sir Charles had not needlessly entered into hostile operations, Sir Robert Peel referred to the blended pretence of friendship and treacherous violence which Sir John Keane experienced in Scinde in 1839, when it was necessary to crush the Ameers by determined measures ; the difference being, that iustead of eight or ten thousand men under his command, Sir Charles Napier had but two thousand five hundred. For the moral courage with which he determined to act in opposition to the advice of Major Oatram, who counselled him not to advance, he was preeminently entitled to praise. For the heroes who had fallen no epitaph could be more honourable than the mention made of them in Sir Charles Napier's despatches. Lord JOHN RUSSELL briefly seconded the motion.

Lord Howicu interfered in the unanimity of the House with great regret— It was, however, impossible to forget that Sir Charles Napier was not General only; but that every step that was taken against the Ameers, was virtually taken and determined on by him, to whom the Governor-General had delegated authority in the matter. lie agreed with Sir Robert Peel, that had Sir Charles Napier followed the advice of Major Outs-sin, the most disastrous consequences must have ensued ; but, from a careful consideration of the papers, he could not help coming to the conclusion that it was the arbitrary way in which the Princes were treated, after Sir Charles Napier took the management of affairs in Scinde, that led to the battle of Meeanee. In a speech recently published by Mr. Eastwick, there appeared strong ground for considering that " Sir Charles Napier's ignorance of the language, and his want of sympathy with the Ameers, was the main cause of the evil result of his negotiations.' Not being more conversant with the affairs of the East, Lord Howick felt unequal to pronounce an opinion upon the question before the House; and for that reason he could not agree to the motion. He illustrated his objection by a reference to the past. Idr. Iluskisson and his colleagues opposed a vote of thanks to Sir Edward Codrington and the officers engaged at Nevado°, because that battle originated in an " accident "; and to give thanks would cherish too easy a disposition to create such accidents, which might lead to such disastrous consequences. Thanks were withheld from the Duke of Wellington for the victory of Toulouse, because the war had already terminated ; although the Generals on either side were not aware of the fact. But in the present in- stance, as admitted by Sir Charles Napier, war had not even been declared. It was the more necessary to watch that infringement of rule, since Sir Robert Peel's avowal of the " uncontrollable principle " at work, which caused civi- lized states to absorb barbarous states ; a principle which might induce France to extend her dominion on the Northern coast of Africa, and one which must be strongly protested against. Brilliant as were the victories of Hyderabad, he regarded them as stained by needless bloodshed. He knew that the sense of the House was against him, and therefore he should not propose any amend- ment; but, having discharged his conscience from any participation in the vote, should leave the matter in the hands of the House.

Mr. VERNON SMITH, Mr. HAWES, and Mr. CHARLES WOOD, con- curred in the view taken by Lord Howick. The motion was also opposed by Mr. MANGLES, who charged the conduct pursued towards the Ameers with inconsistency and harshness. It was supported by Sir HENRY HARDINGE, Sir HOWARD DOUGLAS, and Mr. BINGELAM BARING.

Commodore Sir CHARLES NAPIER, in his own blunt and amusing manner, supported the motion, with some anecdotes of General Sir Charles Napier's exploits in times past.

The number of bayonets which Sir Charles Napier mustered at Meeanee was really only 1,700, while he bad reason to know that the enemy counted not fewer than 30,000. The only wonder was, that the British force had not been driven into the Indus. The General praised the manner in which the officers rallied the men : he never said that he was the man who rallied the Sepoys when their ranks were broken. The nullah at Hyderabad was forty feet wide and seventeen feet deep : Sir Charles Napier, mounted on his horse Red Rover, was the second to ascend the bank. It was inconceivable how it could have been done. The excitement in the men carried their very horses through, and their exertions went even beyond hunting in Leicestershire. Had Sir Charles Napier waited twenty hours longer, he would have been surrounded by fifty or sixty thousand men; for one of the Ameers admitted that on the evening after the battle there were twelve thousand fresh troops in Hyderabad. The case was not at all to be compared to that of Navarino, which was rightly called "accidental"; but where was the " accident " at Meeanee or at Hyderabad? This led Commodore Napier to a sweeping attack upon political and diplomatic agents; of whom Sir John Moore said In Spain, " That they knew nothing; and that they did nothing but get the country into constant serapes."

Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD, to bring the question to an issue, moved "the previous question." Mr. BROTHERTON seconded the amendment ; and Dr. BOWRING supported it. Mr. BICKHAM EscarT, advocating the original motion, cited the opinion expressed by Lord Auckland in the House of Peers that evening. Lord PALMERSTON cordially supported the vote of thanks, as simply a tribute to distinguished military merit.

On a division, the amendment was negatived, by 164 to 9; and the original motion passed. The Speaker was authorized to communi- cate the vote to the Governor-General of India, for transmission to

Sir Charles Napier.

On Tuesday, Sir E. COLEBROOKE gave notice, that, on the 10th instant, he should move a resolution condemning the demands made by Lord Ellenborongh on the Ameers of Scinde, as opposed to the honour and dignity of this country.

MISCELL.A.NEOUs.

Tar FACTORY BILL was read a second time in the House of Commons on Monday ; to be committed on the 1st March.

CHARITABLE TRUSTS- In reply to Lord HALYBURTON, on Tuesday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM stated that a bill on the subject of Charitable Trusts would be introduced in the House of Peers by the Lord Chancellor.

In reply to Colonel CONOLLY, Lord Eraor said that Government contem- plated the introduction of a measure for the regulation of medical charities in Ireland.

NEW PARISHES IN SCOTLAND. In reply to Mr. EDWARD ELLICE, on Monday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM stated that a bill would shortly be introduced by the Lord Advocate for the better division of parishes in Scotland.

THE METROPOLIS IMPROVEMENTS BILL was read a third time on Monday. A bill on the snbject, passed two years ago, contained a clause empowering the Bank of England to lend money, to be repaid by instalments, as it might be raised from the rents of houses to be built : the present bill was intended to remove doubts. Mr. ROME and others objected to that sanction of an illegiti- mate kind of banking. Sir ROBERT PEEL explained, that advances of small sums were needed, which it was very difficult to obtain of capitalists; and the proposed plan would therefore be for the convenience of the public and con- ducive to economy. The motion was carried, by 145 to 70; and the ball passed.

THE COMMITTEE ON RAILWAYS Was appointed On Saturday, without further opposition.

OFFENCES ON THE HIGH SEAS. On Saturday, Sir JAMES GRAHAM in- troduced a bill to authorize charges relating to the commission of offences on the High Seas to be tried by Judges of Assize at Sessions of Oyer and Ter- miner. At present, all offenders of the kind are sent up for trial from the outports to the Central Criminal Court in London. The bill was passed on Thursday, CORN-LAWS. On Tuesday the 27th instant, Mr. HUTT is to move for a Committee of the whole House, to consider the resolution " That it is expedient that the trade in corn between the United Kingdom and the British possessions in South Africa, India, and Australia, be made subject to this same laws which regulate the trade in corn between the United Kingdom and Canada."

IMPORT-DUTIES. Mr. RUBE has postponed his motion for a Committee till the 20th. Mr. WALLACE has notified that, on the 19th instant, he shall move that the surplus revenue be applied to reduction of taxes, especially the tea-duty. Tolman TREATY. On the 22d instant, Dr. Bowauto is to bring the Turkish treaty of commerce under consideration.