Bcbatrd antI Vroctaingl in 13arlianunt.

1. LORD LONDONDERRY'S APPOINTMENT.

In the House of Peers, on Monday, after several petitions had been presented, and some routine business gone through,

The Mai quis of LONDONDERRY ro,e, and proceeded to speak as fol- lows, in a tone of voice at times scarcely audible, and with an agitated manner.

" My 'Lords, in rising humbly to address your Lordships upon circumstances of a personal nature, I am aware that I ought first to claim your attention as a matter of indulgence, and that I in perhaps out of order M the regular course of the business of this House, in addressing you on a subject that is not properly before you ; but referring to the votes of the House of Commons, which are now on the table of your Lordships' Ihmee, it is impossible that you should be ignorant of what has taken piece in the other Howe of Pediment, relating to the subject of the appointment of an Ambassador to the Cue; t of Russia. Standing in the situation in which I do, I hope that your Lordships will allow me to say a few words in stating the course which his elajesty'e Government has pursued with regard to my appointment, and the course which I have felt it my indispensable duty, since the discussion in the House of Commons, to take upon the subject. When Sir Robert Peel framed the arrengements to carve into effect the administration of the Government, he was pleased to say that he had recommended to his Majesty to no:uinate me to the important duty of Ambassador to the Court of St. Petersburg. I confess that. I had never expected this at his hands—I Dever had enjoyed any private intimacy with him. At the same time, that recommendation was accompanied by a letter from my noble friend (the Duke of Wellington), in which he declared that he not only acquiesced in the recommendation, but stated that he believed the King's ser- vice would be benefited by my acceptance of the office. I confess that I was gratified to find that my humble services were still deemed available for the 'public benefit ; and when I considered that in the course of my humble career I had been associated with my noble ft iced as his companion in arms; in the fields of Vittoria, Toulouse, and other places, and that I had been acquainted with the Ministers of the States of Europe, at Dresden, Vienna, and Berlin, though I might not have the sagacity nor the prudence of some of the noble lords who are now against me, I did believe that I might conduct the business of the country with benefit to the interests of the two:countries, and in such a way as to cement the union between them. Under these circumstances, I could not but embrace the offer thus made me, and accept the appointment. I do not evish to go into any discussion on the subject. I am not aware that there are personal charges against me. The matter has come upon me without notice. I telt, so soon as I had read the report of that discussion in the House of Com- mons, that there was but one line for me, as a subject and a public servant, to mime ; and that, as I bad bad but one rule of conduct in the course of my life—which even those who are now my political enemies will admit, and but one object—which was to serve the King, and to serve him honestly, and to the best of my ability,—[ felt that if I were to depart from the country, after what had passed in the House of Commons, I should feel, as his Majesty's representative, that I was placed in a new and false position, if I shod(' arrive at that court with the animadversion of one branch of the Legis- lature so strongly cast upon me as an individual, and that my etTorts for the public business would be materially impeded. I will not succumb to a faction, and I am entirely devoid of feeling for the scoffs or the scorn of public attacks, and I defy the malice of party ; but I stand here determined on no consideration whatever to accept that appointment which his Majesty has been pleased to eller me. I have, therefore, humbly offered my resignation : I have done it on the grounds I state. I have had no communication, directly nor indirectly, with the Government ; I have not asked nor sought advice. I took this decision on the ground that the King's service, after what had passed, could not be effectu- ally promoted by me. At other times I may have no difficulty in meeting these unfair, these unjust animadversions—raked up after sixteen years have ciapsed —raked tip at a moment when it was impossible fur the individual who was the obe jest of them to meet them. I say nothing of the House of Commons; but let the Members of that House think what any one of them would feel—let him think, I say, what he would feel if he was placed in my situation. Would to God that I was the only victim of such proceedings ! To the Member of that House who originated the discussion I will not immediately allude, but to those who fol- lowed up the matter. Let some of them think what a statesman may be reduced to, when one who has honestly and zealously done his dirty in the public service —let them, I say, think, what the situation of that statesman will be when they give a precedent for such a course of proceeding against a humble individual like myself." (" -Year, hear ! ")

The Duke of IVELLINGTOS avowed himself responsible for Lord Lon- donderry's appointment. Notwithstanding what had fallen from Lord Londonderry, he was certainly responsible for this particular nomina-

tion. He considered Lord Londonderry peculiarly fit for the office, on account of the high reputation he enjoyed in Russia as a military man, mid the great satisfaction he had given to the Ministry who employed him as Ambassador at Nrienna. He would add a few words on the party-spirit displayed in resisting this appointment.

" There is no prerogative of the Crown more undoubted than that of the ap-

pointment of Ambassadors. The Ministers of the Crown are responsible for the appointments, and for the instructions under which noble lords and others SO nominated perform their duties ; and they are, moreover, responsible for the Performance of those duties. leis impossible that the house of Commons could have carried a vote questioning such an appointment—that they could have agreed to interfere so far with the prerogative of his Majesty as to say that such or such a person should not be named, inasmuch as, by doing so the House of Commons would not only be taking on itself the particular duty and the direc- tion of it, but would likewise be relieving the Ministers from the responsibility attending the appointment to the office. For my part, I cannot believe that such a vote would have been passed. If there was the smallest doubt about it, or the least reason to believe that such a vote would have been passed, then, my lords, we ought to feel a double obligation to my noble friend for relieving us from such a consequence."

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE would not allow any person to leave

the (louse with the impression that the disapprobation of Lord Lon- dcrry's appointment arose from personal motives. The opposition to it arose from a feeling that Lord Londonderry would act upon those principles of foreign policy which he had uniformly maintained—that he would be consistent in his politics ; and therefore the opposition was far from being personally disrespectful to him. " It was my Lords, any thing but disrespect towards him, to suppose that with regard to the system of our foreign alliances—with regard to the state of Europe as connected with Poland—with regard to the state of Europe, as con- nected with the illegitimate pretensions of certain pretenders to the thrones of Spurns and Portugal—as connected with the close state of our relations and al . Lance with France, which it is essential for this country to continue, for the sake of the peace of Europe, and to which alliance he has always declared him- salf alien and adverse—on all these points, my Lords, I say, it was from motives of respect towards the noble Earl—it was from a belief m the sincerity of ins olnuiums—it was from a belief iii the consistency of his conduct, that people would naturally be led to expect in him any thing but a zealuns, a willing, surd a consenting instrument, to carry into full effect that policy which I have not yet heard is to be changed, and in the continuance of which I believe rest every chance for the peace of Europe and of the world. It is natural, therefore, my Lords, that on this subject great anxiety should have been felt by the public, and should have been partaken by the House of Commons."

He reminded the House, that in foreign countries more attention was paid to the persons appointed by a Government, than to the avowals of Ministers in Parliament respecting their policy. On the Continent, people had not the means of following the debates. He did not wonder that the House of Commons had thought it right to notice this subject ; knowing, as the Representatives of the People must knot', that Lord Londonderry's appointment bad excited jealousy, apprehension, and alarm in the country.

" I am sure that that House of Parliament will do well to consider how at any time it infringes on the King's prerogative ; it will pause and deliberate— and in this instance it has shown every inclination to pulse and deliberate— before approaching a subject surrounded with considerations of so delicate a nature. But if I think that the House of Commons ought not unnecessarily to express an opieion on the exercise of the King's prerogative in appoint- ments of this description, I must say, at the same time, it is most important to that House, that, intrusted as the Members are with the finances of the coon- try—bound as they peculiarly are to look to the peace of Europe—they should anxiously, zealously, and carefully watch every movement of the Government, which could possibly compromise that peace, or deviate from that system on which alone that peace is founded and its durability can be maintained."

The Duke of BccKtNonAst thought that the constitutional doctrine laid down by Lord Lansdowne was better fitted for a Committee of Public Safety than for the British Parliament. He ditTered with him Coto calo.

He had always considered freedom of speech to be the undeniable right of both Houses of Parliament. Ile had seen the Speaker, attended by the House of Commons, presenting himself at their Lordship's bar, and claiming freedom of speech as their undoubted privilege ; but now, for the first time, he found that that privilege was to be made use of to prevent his Majesty from exercising his just prerogative. Was that a doctrine to be held by a Constitutional Peer iu that House? s The publication of what was said in that House was a breach of their Lordship's privileges; and yet they now found that a report of what was spoken there was made the ground of declaring the unfitness of Lord London,- derry to hold a particular office. It was said that Lord Londonderry's political opinions differed from the political opinions of others ; but was that a fair reason for excluding him from public office, or holding him up as a man unfit to serve his Sovereign ? If his policy were wrong, or if his conduct were not worthy of approbation, who were responsible for his proceedings? Why, the Government that appointed hint ; and if any thing were wrong, let that Government be questioned on the subject. It appeared, however, that the enlisters were not to be held responsible—they were not to be questioned on this point of policy ; but the noble Earl was to be made the scapegoat—he was to be sacrificed to the caprice of individuals. With respect to the King's pre- rogative, he would say that this was the first time lie had ever heard of an appointment of the Crown being questioned until the office was actually taken. f The Marquis of Lansdowne—" I did not introduce the subject."] It would have been time enough to have objected, when, by some act of Lord London- derry tl:c peace of Europe seemed likely to be disturbed. Those who were in such a hurry to censure, ought to have waited till they had some fair ground of complaint. Lord Lundornjeny had, in these trying circumstances, dune that which became him. lie had done every thing which an honourable mind ought to do. This was an innovation on the constitution ; and he would ask where were they to stop? This proceeding, lie contended, was a direct inter- ference with the prerogative of the Crown. If this were the first, where would the last be? Encouraged by this success, would not the preeeut attempt be followed tip by others ? isle warned noble Lords not to acquiesce in it. Noble Lords opposite might IE.! yet in the situation of Ministers themselves, and they might before long repent of this attack on the prerogative on the Crown. They might hereafter be sorry for acquiescing in that of which they now approved. These were times in which they had little to do beyond standing firmly by the constitution of the country. tie called on their Lordships, there- fore, to make their stand somewhere ; and they could not make a better stand than on a question which affected the prerogative of the Crown.

Here the discussion was closed in the House of Lords.

In the House of Commons, on the same evening, on the question that the House should resolve itself into a Committee of Supply,

Lord Jaws: f ITSSELL asked Sir Robert Peel, whether, after what had passed in the louse on the previous Friday evening, it was still the intention of the Alarquis of Londonderry to proceed to St. Peters- burg ?

Sir Rournr Prrt. replied, that about an hour since, he had received a letter from Lord Londonderry, relinquishing the appointment, en the ground that his public usefulness would be much impaired by what had taken place in the House of Commons. This proceeding was riot suggested to Lord Londonderry, directly or indirectly, by the Government : it was adopted entirely on his own judgment.

Lord „Tome RUSSELL said, he thought the Marquis had acted rightly. " Since he could no longer proceed as Ateletaeillor to St. Petersburg with any hope of public usefulness, I admire the mauly way he has come to that deterrninatiou ; but at the same tine, I do feel bound to remark, that this coun- try is placed in a situation of new and great embarrassment by the appointment of an Ambassador by the Ministers of the Crown, which appointment can afterwards he set aside by the judgment of the House of Coinmons. I think, in the case of which we are now speaking, that the appointment was altogether so ill-advised as to call for the observations made by the honourable Member for Tipperary, and by other gentlemen. I must say, that in the experiment we are now making, which experiment the right honourable Baronet calls a fair trial,' we run a considerable hazard that all the most useful prerogatives of the Crewn will lose the dignity and respect with which they have been usually regarded. I own, I come more and more to the opinion that we ought to re- vert, whenever we can, to that old practice of the Constitution under which the powers of the Crown were administered and exercised by persons in whom the House and the Country had confidence—the House not hieing required to express its separate opinion upon appointments so much within the province of the Crown as the choice of Ambassadors to foreign courts. I feel that in this case it was most unfortunate that Ministers selected a person against whom such strong objections could he urged. I feel that it must greatly diminish the respect and consideration with which this Government is viewed by foreign courts, when it is found that the notification of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs that an Ambassador has been appointed, may after- wards be cancelled, not by a direct vote, but by an impimed censure of the House of Commons. I could not help giving. expression to these feelings, agreeing as I did in the greater part of what was said the other night, eap,cially as to the sentiments of the noble Marquis on the subject of Poland. On that ground alone the appointment was highly objectionable ; but at the same time, I wish to say, that the blame did not rest with the Marquis of Londonderry, but with the Ministers who advised the Crown to make the appointment- ( Loud cheers from the Opposition beaches)—of which the first consequence was to dissatify the House and displease the country. I cannot but conceive that such conduct tends in some measure to bring into disgrace even the Throne itself."

Sir ROBERT PEEL observed, that Lord John Russell had assumed that the resignation of Lord Londonderry was oceasioned by the proceed- ings in the House of Commons. lie meant nothing so unfair or un- candid as to deny this : but lie must remind the House that it was only a discussion, not a vote in the form of an address to the Crown.

" No doubt that appointment met with the disapprobation of those who expressed themselves in the course of the debate on the former night ; but at the same time I cannot help remiuding the noble Lot II, that even if a majority of the House boil pronounced itself adverse to it, it would be sonic consolation to recol- lect that, 1 will not say the same majoiity, but still a majoi ity, pronounced

itself adverse to the reappointment of Viscount Canterbury to the Chair.

( Cheerd, and some confusion.) With respect to the observation Of the noble Lord upon the inconvenience to the public service of Government not being pos-

sessed of the confidence of a inajolity of the House of Commons, J can only say, that whenever the noble Lord, or any other man, thinks himself able to form a Government possessing more of public confidence I submit that the

prot,er course will be for him to give notice of that direct motion. It may be some such motion, probably, as the honourable Member for Mid- dlesex has intimated will be brought forward ; and then we shall :al

enabled to see by the result whether the House of Commons is prepared

to agree to a vote which would be tantamount to a direct address for removal. ( Loud cheers front all parts qf the House.) A man, in the situation I hold,

has a perfect right to consider, whatever may be the consequence of a resigna- tion of the trust, that it is not upon slight grounds, nor for a slight disappomt- men or mortification, that be ought to feel himself warranted in retiring, from

the King's service. The true way for the House of Coalitions to displace an

Administration, is not by a motion which those who vote for it state, they hope it will not have the effect of removing the Government, but by a motion that will

distinctly imply that some other Government possesses more of the confidence of the (louse, with greater ability to preserve it by the discharge of its public duties. No man is more anxious than myself that that question shall be brought to fair and speedy trial."

Mr. Hums: thought that Sir Robert Peel had some reason to complain that no direct vote of censure bad been passed upon him. Ile hoped that his wish for a fair and speedy trial would soon be gratified. Every man would form his own conclusion.

Lord STANLEY called Mr. Mime to order. There was no question before time House, and the prolonging of these conversations was in- convenient.

Mr. vale.—" I appeal to the Chair."

Time SPEAKER—" The question is, that the order of time day be read for the House resolving itself into a Committee of Supply."

Mr. HUMS—" There is a question before the House; and if not, it would be competent for me to conclude with a motion, that would satisfy the noble Lord, and enable him to reply to me without irregula- rity. There is no occasion for the noble Lord's extreme sensitiveness and violent alarm lest we should be guilty of a breach of order." Mr. Hume then proceeded to remark on Sir Robert Peel's taunt respect ing the rejection of Viscount Canterbury.

" The right honourable Baronet has used one expression, which seems to throw a reflection on time House fur rejecting Viscount Canter bury, and electing

another Speaker in his stead, as if that were a natter of complaint against the House, as we all know it is a matter of regret with the Ministers. I take it as a reflection upon myself and upon those who acted with me, and I consider

that time right honourable Baronet has no light to make it. The right honour- able Baronet will judge for himself, according to the dictates of his own feelings, as to what constitutes a declaration of the confidence or the no confidence of time

House; but it certainly seems that he is not at all inclined to take a hint, and that no slight indication of no-confidence will convince him. Nothing less will satisfy him than a vote that he and his colleagues are unworthy to be trusted with the management of public attars—nothing less will satisfy him, and nothing will satisfy him lees. I trust that such a resolution will he sufficient, and that it will very soon be adopted. But what I rose principally to observe

upon was, the peculiar situation in which the country is .placed by having an Administration acting as this seems to act. Whatever opinion I might enter- taiu of Lord Londonderry (and I must own that his conduct in this instance

has raised him in my estimation) he at least has had the discretion which time right Imorourable Baronet and his colleagues had nut. He has shown the good sense, which the right honourable Baronet does not possess, not to run counter

to the *Mon of this House. On time contrary, the right honourable Baronet, when directly appealed to, said that lie should proceed to complete the appoint- ment. Has he done so? This is one of his eggs;' so that the Member for :Middlesex is not the only oviparous animal in die House. ( Cheers and laughter.) The egg time honourable Baronet has laid and sat upon in vain, is not a hen's egg, but that of a bird of larger growth and with a longer neck ; as

the result, had he hatched it, would have shown. On a former night, and in

a manner which he thought very facetious, lie alluded to my egg : now, here is his unfortunate egg, which lie never could hope to hatch, because every body knew beforehand that it was addled. ( Cheers.) My egg was at all events a

wholesome egg, and wotdd bare produced a healthy chicken, had it remained in my nest, but it was unproductive because it was removed. Time right honourable Baronet, with his cuckoo-note of ' a fair trial,' is the very reverse

of time cuckoo in his habits; for instead of laying his eggs in other birds's nests, for them to hatch, he pops into other birds' nests himself, and hatching their eggs, takes credit for a most goodly brood of reform chickens. However, he did lay one unlucky virgin egg ; and neither he nor the Duke of Wellington to hoot could bring it to perfection. It seems that he sets at defiance the majority of the House; because his Majesty is anxious to favour the right honourable Baronet and his friends, and to keep them in office, be is resolved, as he fairly avows, to retain the seals to the last, and to exhibit the novelty of a Cabinet retaining their places but deprived of the confidence of the Commons. This I call a strange state of timings, which must paralyze every thing connected with time internal Government of the country. I should like, as zr matter of curiosity, to see and to compare the two despatches to time Court of Russia, the one announcing the appointment of Lord Londonderry, and the other stating that the House of Commons had prevented it. I should like to see the terms in which the fact was communicated that Ministers had been obliged to cancel the appointment. . . . I am extremely happy at the result; and I congratu- late the noble Marquis on his good feeling and sound discretion. Ministers el.- sure no credit for the result : they would fain have hatched the egg if they could, but they only addled it."

Lord DUDLEY STUART congratulated the House that Lord London- eerry had found it necessary to relinquish his appointment; for several reasons, but more especially Itemise he had ventured publicly to malign it gallant people, struggling for their civil liberties and national inde- pendence.

Sir ROBERT Ismosts was of opinion that the precedent of Friday night, followed up by the Marquis's resignation, was pregnant with danger to the Constitution.

" If the expression of the opinion of the House in a formal Address to time Throne had produced this result, I should be the last person to deny that the

constitutional exercise of the prerogative of the Crown might have been employed

to cancel the appointment. I should have thought such a course unfortunate; But it is still more unfortunate that a mere conversation, expressing the dis- approbation of the House of an individual in whom the Crown (whether wisely or not, is another question) had reposed confidence, should have produced the same effect. The King is thus deprived of the services of an individual selectrd as Ambassador to St. Petersburg, for no reason that appears on the votes and journals of the House. If a mere discussion like that of Friday last call fetter the discretion of the Crown, it is a state of things deeply to he regretted. Under these circumstances, I must express may ;egret, with all admiration of the high-spirited self-denial of the noble 31.1-quis, that the House has set so pernicious a precedent."

Sir HENRY ITARDINGE declared, that he thought the Marquis could not have acted in any other way than that which lie had adopted. Ile denied that Lord Londonderry held the opinions respecting Poland which had been imputed to him ; and assured the House, that in this respect he would have followed out the policy of Lord Castleree01, his lamented brother.

Sir JOIIN Hoettouse said that if a bad precedent had been esta- blished, it was riot the fault of the Opposition.

" It arose from an act which the honourable Member for Oxford may be sure will be the fruitful source of more evil—I mean the Ministers of the Crown endeavouring, to govern the country by a minority here. (Lottri chum vs front the Opposition benches.) If the Mitustets of the Crown were in possession of the common confidence of the House—I mean to say if they were able to wield

a majority, not a large one, but available for the purpose of carrying on the Go- vernment of tint country—no such catastrophe as the honourable Baronet has lamented, could have occurred. Because the right honourable Baronet at the head of the Cabinet had sanctioned the appointment, let men talk as they v.amuld,

when it came to the important point of the vote of the House, it wealth he found that time majority supported him and his measures. lit consequence however, of the position—I must take the liberty of calling it the false position —in which the right honourable Baronet has placed himself; in consequence of his trying this almost unheard-of experiment of governing the nation while an in acknowledged minority—("No no!" and laughter on the Itlinisterb.l side)—it is very well for some of the supporters of the Government to laugh, but I do not see the right honourable Baronet and his colleagues force even a faint smile, and I do not wonder that they are disinclined when I alliale to time

majority against them ; they know I am nut exaggerating, and we II rye had two or three proofs of it since the meeting of Parliament : therefore I ta'amm the libel ty

of saying, that if there be any thing inconvenient or dangeromm in time precedent, the blame does not light upon our heads, but upon the heads of thomem who sit on the other side of the House, and on them alone it should be visited. It would have been a just ground of condemnation of our foreign policy, had the noble Marquis been sent to St. Petersburg as the organ of Governalcut. The right honourable Secretary for Ireland has told us that he is aware front private solace

that the opinions of the noble Marquis are oat what have been attributed to him. I do not wish to go again into topics discussed the other bight, but I

must say it is unfortunate, if lie were really so friendly to the P. !es, that lie should have characterized them by a name not only condemnatory of their caese, but of their persons, when lie called them rebellious. Thin, too, he it remem-

bered, was not in the excitement of debate, as the right lamomahle gentleman.

would have us believe, but in a prepared opening speech. Thelefore I ant jus- tified in saying that this looks as if it were his Lordship's deliberate opinion. . . . . I must say that Government could not abandon its decision ; and had I been in office, notwithstanding the opinion of time House, I would rather have resigned than consented to advise the cancelling of the appointineet.w (Cheers.) Sir ROBERT PEEL complained that he was placed in a situation of great hardship by debates conducted in this mariner. " I was asked a question, and I gave my answer, not expecting any discus- sion; and now, by the forms of the House, I am precluded from making any reply to what has been advanced. ( Cheers, and cries of " (.."o on !") Then, in the first place, I beg to thank the right honourable Baronet for the support he has so charitably given to an unfortunate, sseak, and defenceless Government. Supposing I had said on Friday, in answer to the question he put, that I was prepared to advise the Marquis of Londonderry to retire, I shouirl net ouly

have deprived him of the grace of the relinquishment, and robbed bins uf

the credit of deferring to the sense of the House, but I should basely have abandoned him after he had been appointed, and after he had under-

taken time duty under circumstances of great difficulty in which the Go- vernment was involved. The honourable Member for :Middlesex says that we are acting in opposition to the sense of the majority of the House. Now, I ask whether I put forward any declaration of the Government in a hasty or insulting manner ? The question was put to me, and I could not avoid

answering it. If it were meant as a condemnation of the foreign policy of the Ministry, I contend that it is too important a question to be disposed of in SO indirect a manner—not on motion, not in any way that will appear upon the Votes, but on a question for going into a Committee of Supply. Therefore I did not consider it as a condemnation of our foreign policy. 1 did consider it as the expression of an opinion in the course of debate, and what it might have led to I know not had not the Marquis of Londonderry resigned." Ile wished Mr. Hume would bring forward some decisive motion, instead of continually threatening them. He would facilitate such a step, and endeavour to find a convenient day for the motion. Mr. HTME—" Perhaps the right honourable Baronet will be good enough to permit us to take our own time. We do not want him to trouble himself to open the door of the trap in order that we may enter it. This is the second time he has begged us to follow his advice ; and, for the second time, I assure him that we shall not." (Cheers and laughter.) Sir ROBERT PEEL reminded the House, that this was the second time Mr. Hume had said he should be prepared with a decisive motion on an early day.

Lord JonN RUSSELL begged to add a remark or two- " Ile asks the House to come to some direct vote of want of confidence; but let us recollect the ground on which he has stood ever since Ile was called to the Government. Has he not always said, Though you may not give us implicit confidence, yet allow us a fair trial ?' Let him, then, bring forward his mea- sures. If we had produced a direct vote of want of confidence, would he not have said, You are now precluding us from being heard—NO!l you condemn us before we are heard ? Will vou reject our reform before you know what it is? Is this giving is a fair trial?' I was willing to wait for a time, in order that he and his friends might introduce those very measures on which they pretend to found their title to confidence."

Sir ROBERT PEEL said that the course be was pursuing was the right one. Lord John Russell then was prepared to hear Lis measures. " One of .here I am to iutroduee to-morrow, girlies relief to the Dissc•nters in matters of marriage; next week we have another on the commutation of Tithes ; nevi nee are also about to attempt the settletneut of the most difficult question of all, Tithes in behold. These are our measures, and It us be judged by then:. I ask the noble Lord this question—if, after a common debate, not on any regular uiuti ,n, It even on such an equivocal question as the choice of a Speaker, I bad thrown up the Government, would not the noble Lord have said, "Ibis is a abandonment of your duty : you have fled from your places, though we never meant to remove von. We never bronght forward a vote of censine, but von shrunk from the bash which you had asked, and dared not produce your nols:nes ?"11iis 1 :Ink certain would Lane been the language of the noble Lord."

Lord Joux Busst:f.t. rejoined: " I did nut mean to s:it• Bra such were my sentiments; because I adhere en tirihe to the maxim which the rigini honeurable Baronet has himself adrptol more than once, that we are to faun into judgment' by fke inen typo bring for-

ward the measures. I I _ say, that nve iiAtotitiecti such a direct inothoi of want of confidence, the right lionourable Itnronet would have gained many sup- rioters, by saying, that it was not giving tine new Ministers a rtir trial." Ct"11.art made a few observations, told he discus-

sites was closed. •

DIS• ENTERS' MAIIMAGES.

Sir ROBERT PEEL, (III Tuesday, moved for leave to bririe in a bill for the relief of persons dissenting from the Church of England in regard to the celebration of Marnege. He began by extollinie the advantage which would result from tine settlement of a qinestion whieh interested so lunge a portion of the community. Ile then stilted the existing law on the subject, and the objections which the Dissenters entertained to it.

It was no denbt known to all who heard hien, that in the year 1751 an act had passed, commonly known by the name of LA Act, laich m .de a great alteretioa in tine law of this country in respect to marl iage. It was providol that no ceremony of marriage should he performed by any clergymant exeeptin.g by a clergyman of the Church of Eogitud, and according to the rites and ordinanwes of the Established Church. The only exception made was in favour of M.: marriages of Jews and of Quakers, who weie allowed to contract mai thin! according to their own forms and ceremonies. The Dissenting body objected to the provisions of that act. They alleged that there was no relatina in life which tended more to the happiness of individuals and the gown geol sGeik::V than that of marriage ; and they olijected to a law which rondered that relation invalid unless it were contnicted according to 'in.., and is con- formity to ceeemonies, in which they cold mgt conscientiously comor ; and they therefore required of the Legislature the enactment of such a law as would enalnie t leen w contract marriage without being compelled to go through those forms and ceremonies from which they conscientiously dissented. That was the obicetion brought by the Dissenters to the law as it now stood. New, he would say that if the scruples of the Disemers were really sincere, that no one could deny, not only the justice, but the poh.•:,•, of affording them the relief which they required.

As there wins nothing, in the present Irw or ceremony objected to by Churchmen, there was no occasion to make any alteration on their ac- count : the mei:entre he proposed was for the relief of Dissenters only. This could tint be effected by an alteration of the marriage ceremony (which would, moreover, be offensive to Churchmen), because the Dissenters objected to being married in church. It had been attempted to obviate this difficulty', by allowing Dissenters to be married, under certain regulations, in their own places of worship. This was the ob- ject of Loci Julia Russell's bill of last year ; but the preemitions pro- poeed to prevent clandestine marriages, and other parts of the measure, lied, it was well lialown, rendered ;t very unpalatable to those for whose rel . f it was inn tended,—a sufficient reason of itself for not pressing it. Th Ili niSterti Of the Established Church also objected to the mea- :awe (if Lord Joint Hassell; and Sir Robert Peel stated a number of '.,:em eireunistaaces which in his opinion would have rendered that bill an unsal'e and uneetisfactory act of legielation. He then :stinted the principles of his own measure.

Ile proposed that there should be two ceremonies of marriage—the one a civil, the other a religinas ceremony. Ills plan, at the some time that it en.,..mged the celehration it tine. religious ceremony, did not make it imperative upon those contracting marriage, nor as essential to the validity of the marriage. Ile pro - posed, ou the other hand, that the civil ceremony should be essential to the validity of tine ntarl sage. Ile would fain hope, though the religious ceremous' was not essential, that that circumstance would not tend to divest marriage of its relii;innas attributes. lie believed that it would not. He believed that tense who went through the civil ceremony would, in most eases, superadd the reli- gious eel-en:may ;:e doubted whether it would not have more teal religion in it, if the super:el:Heim of it were left to the good feeling and discretion of the prtiesn:.eonselves, than if it were enforced by tine law. if the ceremony were not confried tin the Established Church, he could not see upon what grounds tine State shimld require that tine religious ceremony should be solemnized at all. The obi: et was to encourage tine solemnization of the religious ceremony ; and It wa, likely it would be solemnized in all cases where it was not contrary to the coin...mimes of the parties contracting the marriage ; but in that case it was not prescribed, and it was therefore that he said, encourage tine religious cere- mony, but do not exact it.

No religious ceremony could be imposed on the Dissenters, because the same would not suit all eeete. The Unitarians, for example, would object to a form which other Dissenters might approve of. The prin- ciples of his bill were the same as those of the measure introduced by ?Ur. William Smith in 1827 for the relief of the Unitarians, and they were also in conformity with the common law of the landrevious to the passing of Lord Hardwieke's Act MI 1754 ; and Sir Robert quoted the opinions of Lord Holt and Sir William Scott in confirmation of this statement.

Therefore, by making the civil ceremony essential to the validity of the mar riage, and leaving it optional to parties to snperadd the religious ceremony if they chose, which was the plan he now proposed, they would be acting not only in conformity with the canopies of the bill of 1827, but in conformity to the law as it stood previous to the passing of the Marriage Act in 1754. But not only that the case, but in his opinion the principle which he had adopted wasvias'n conformity with reason and good • • - 1

sense,—name y, to leave to every religious de-

nomination the right to hive the marriage ceremony solemnized according to their own tenets. That principle was even admitted by the existing law, be- cause the act of 1754 did not require persons of religious persuasions differing from the Established Church in every ease to celthrate their marriages accord. ing to the forms and tenets of? the Church of England ; for it is said that the Quakers and Jews were excepted from the operation of the act. Ile knew it would be said to be doubtful whether, under the provisions of that act, the children of Quakers and Jews were legitimate; but he believed that the whole stream of decisions on the subject were in favour of the supposition that such marriages were valid for all the purposes of legitimatizing the offspring and transmitting property.

It was not intended to deprive Dissenters of the privilege of being married according to the Church of England ceremonial, if they de- sired it. Ile wished in fact to invite the Dissenter to take part in the rite of the Church. Sir Robert Peel then explained the forms which the Dissenters would undergo, if married according to the regulations of his bill. They are briefly as follow.

The parties wishing to be married must go before a magistrate of the hundred in which one of then* has resided for more than seven (lays past, and declare their iatention of entering into the married state. An oath, similar to that taken on applying for a nem iage liceuce now, will be required on the first visit to the magi 'tette. The oath will set forth the name and place of residence of the party—will declare that he is not a member of the Church of En„gland, and that Inc Alerts to be married according to the rites of that Church ; that he Iris dwelt in such or such a place for seven days past ; that the parties arc of z,ge, or th it they have the consent of their parents or guardians; and that there is no lawful ilope‘lilnent to the marriage. Within any period after such applica- tion to the migisn r'siV, not less than fourteen days, nor more than three mouths, tL.t pm•ties m tv agriu present themselves before the magistrates, and go through a simple form of nit i! contract, signing a declaration that they consider them- ,,elves to be loan and wife. The magistrate before whom the marriage takes place, will be required to transmit the declaration of marriage to the parson of the in also, who will be riNiiined to register it in the same manner as he registers naRci ,ges solemnized by himself. The fres in the who!e will amount ti '7s. ; of which -2s. are to be paid to the magistrate, and Ss. to the parson. Mr. IVILKS expressed hie general approbation of the measure, and gratitude to Sir Robert Peel for the liberal and kind menace in which be had introduced it to the House. He had, however, this objection to it—that the Dissenters would feel the difference made between them and the Churchmen as an attempt to degrade them. There would also be an objection to go before a clerical magistrate to be married. He was himself for reverting to the old law, whereby the marriage, ceremony was a civil contract for all classes and denominations. Lord JOIIN RUSSELL healed the spirit displayed by Sir Robert Peel in bringing forward the bill, whatever might be its reception by the Dissenters.

Dr. Lusintso-rox was of opinion, in ancient times the marriage cere- mony was a religious, not, as Sir Robert Peel had stated, a civil con-

tract only. The great difficulty would be in the registration of the marriages.

Mr. 1.1.arees said, that the fees of seven shillings were higher than the humbler classes were now in the habit of paying ; and this would be an objection to the measure. Mr. CUTIAR FERGUSSON contended strongly that marriage should be simply a civil contract for all denominations; and there was no doubt as to this being the anedent law of England.

Mr. POLTI.ETT THOMS1N thought that some religious ceremony should accompany the pen formance of the contract.

Mr. D. W. lie avev objected to the interference of the Magis- trates, which the bill would sanction.

Mr. STUART WORTLEY Highly lauded the liberality die played by Ministers; and boasted that he had told Ida constituents that they would be astonished at the measures Sir Robert Peel would propose. (Loud laughter.) Mr. LENNA RD, Mr. EWART, Lord SANDON, Mr. Pi: An:n, Mr. SilEit, Sir J. CAMPBELL, and Sir F. Poem:Ise made a few brief ob- servations, generally in approbation of the bill.

Mr. WARBURTON said, tiot if any party bad a right to complain of the measure, it was the member of the Church of England, who might say that he was not placed on precisely the same footing as the Dissenter. With reference to registration, the same compleint might equally be made by both : the Dissenter could not be said to have any grievance imposed on him in this respect.

Mr. JAMES KENNEDY said, that the bill would be more unpalatable to the Dissenters than Lord John Russell's.

The objections which the Dissenters entertained to that bill affected only its details—such as the necessity of a publication of the bans and a connexion with the Establishment by the mode of registration proposed. The present measure was objectionable in principle—it went to draw a line of demarcation between the Dissenters and the members of the Church—to establish two kinds of marriages, one of a civil and one of a religious character;—anti to degrade the Dissenting clergy by placing them in a position of inferiority, of which they would justly complain.

Sir RnBEItT PEEL replied ; but it will be unnecessary to quote from his speech, as it contained little but a reiteration of the arguments with whir ll he had introduced the measure.

Lcay.. was then given to bring in the bill.

3. hem Tholes.

Last night, on the motion of Sir Hasa' HARDINGE, the House of Commons went into a Committee of the whole House (Mr. 13ernal in

1

the chair), to take into consideration that r King's part of the ' .'• Speech which related to the settlement of Tithes in Ireland.

Sir HENRY HARDINGE then proceeded to describe the state of the tithe question • dwelling for some time on tine poverty and sufferings of tine Clergy, amid the impossibility of collecting the tithes from the oc- cupiers of land in Ireland. Ile also went into a history of the measures adopted during the last few years to bring about a settlement of this question, and their uniform failure. The plan he now proposed was to commit the present tithe composition into an annual rent-charge on the owners of the first estate of inheritance, at the rate of 73!. for every 1001. of composition ; such rent-charge to be redeemed, arid the redemption-money to be invested in land or otherwise, for the benefit of the titheowner. In case the clergyman found any difficulty in collect- ing his rent-charge from the landowner, he would have to apply to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who would take the matter in hand and prevent all direct collision between the clergyman and the tithepayer. With regard to lay improprintors, they would dispose of their redemption- money according to their ow n convenience, except in certain cases, such as the iosanity of the titheowner, when the Court of Chancery would act for him. It was intended to guarantee to the present clerical titheowners the full amount of 75/. for every 1001. ; but their succes- sors would have to submit to any loss of interest which might arise In the process of investing the redemption-mono •. This is the substance of the first part of the plan ; and Sir Henry contended that this would remove all difficulties, especially when it was recollected 'that a vast proportion of the land in Ireland was owned by the Protestants, who would now become the direct paymasters of the Clergy. He found that in 903 benefices in Ireland the Protestants owned 10,500,000 acres, the Catholics only 545,000, oe in the propor-

tion of 15 to 1. Ile then proceeded to the second division of the plan ; which was to remit to the Clergy the whole amount already ad- vanced to them out of the million loan, and to apply what remained of that loan—namely, about 300,0001.—to the discharge of the arrears of

1831. ral this way, there would be an end to the collection of tithes, and arrears of tithes, from the occupier of land. He affirmed that to expect repayment of the money advanced to the Clergy, wars u mere de- .labion. It was utterly impossible that they could repay it ; for the whole power of Government civil and military had been found inade- quate to recover the arrears due to them from their titlitotentiony. Sir Henry concluded by moving the following resolutions, embratieg the substance of what is more fully explained in the foregoing sketch of his speech.

"Thal it is Iheopiuiun of the Committee that Tithes in Ireland ought to be abolished; and that in lien thereof there be a rent-charge, payable oat of the land. That such tent- charge should be after the rate of 75!. for every lent. tithe. That such renteharges he saleable ; and that the money raised by the redemption thereof be invested iu lands for the benefit of the present owners of the tithes.

" That it is expedient to amend the Act granting 1,000,004i. for advances on account of the arrears or tithes in 1531. 1832, and 1833.10 extend its provisions for the purpose of making advances on account of the arrears of tithe for 1531; and to give to his Majesty power to remit charges on account of advances on the security of arrears of tithes."

Lord Jolts Russeet. said lie would not oppose the resolutions pre- paratory to the introduction of the contemplated bill ; which, he re. minded Ministers was not very dissimilar to that which their party had thrown out in the House of Peers last year. Had that bill been al- lowed to pass, the Clergy wool 1 now have 771. 10s. for every 1001. of their income, and the tithe war in Ireland would have ceased months ago. He contended, that although the bill might be introduced, it

would be necessary to settle the great question of appropriation before any progress could be mark in it.

Mr. SHAW avowed himself a supporter of the plan of Sir limy Hardinge ; and laboured to show that he did not act inconsistently in voting fur it, though he had opposed the Tithe Bill of the late Alinistry.

Lord Howicx hoped that the whole of the resolutions would not be pressed. Ile objected to the increme of Church lands, and to sad.iling this country with the payment of the million lean, especially without

notice. lie was con ieced that the appropriation question must he

Roiled before any thing satisfactory could be done. Ile asked what

would he the feelings of Englishmen, if the cases were reversed, and a Parliament siitieg in 1 hiLdfn were debetiee the 'impiety of

hug an immensely wealthy Catholic Establishment in Englund ?

Sir Roirene Peer., in the course of a long speech, endeavoured to justify the peliey of giving up the million luau for the sake of peace. Be expressed 1-in.o.11 ready to withdraw the list resolution, which had reference to this point, as there was some ground for the remark that the Committee was taken by surprise in being called upon to agree to it. Ile likewise conceded that the appropriation question must be settled before any progress could be made in the Tithe Bill.

Mr. O'Coashal. said, that the measure proposed by Ministers, and the speeches of Sir Henry Hardinge and Sir Robert Peel, filled Lim

with the deepest regret, as they shut out all prospect of relief for Ireland.

ss, The situation of Ireland reminded hint of the military case discussed between the learned Dr. Slop and Corpoi:il Trim, into .vhich the learned and grave Doctor introduced a metaphysical disquisition. " Metaphysics!" said the Cor- poral, " what is that ?—a push of the bayonet is worth it all." . There was one single word, which, if pronounced by the Government, would be worth all these measures, and that word was " appropriation." That word pronounced, would have magic influence on Ireland, and would do more than any thing else to soothe and tranquillize her. They would, however, promise no surplus; they- said there would perhaps be no surplus. Why, if there were none, what harm would there be in making a promise of its appropriation? They would even take no notice of a possible surplus ; they would not indulge the country with a declaration of appropriation.

He contrasted the bill of last year with that now proposed: the latter was worse for the Clergy, who would receive less, and worse for the People, who would pay more.

What hypocrisy, to talk of peace, when they make an increase of the causes of discontent ! In the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer there was not one word of mitigation. He proposes to make the tithe composition 75 per cent., and then talks of peace! The hate Ministry had avowed a determination to make an appropriation of the surplus. They had issued a Commission to ascertain it ; and what surplus should appear, was to be appropriated to other than ecclesiastical purposes. The bill passed the House of Commons by decided and overwhelming majorities, the minorities being trifling and unimportant. Ireland was cheered with the prospect of the new system, because the Ministry were pledged to the appropriation. To be sure, the Ihiuse of Lords were pleased to throw the bill out. Was there a man on that bench (pointing to the Millis- tarial bench) who did not deeply deplore the act of the House of Lords?

The war of tithes had not ceased in Ireland— There was the blood shed at Rathcormac, over which two magistrates had presided. The mother had her sons in the morning, and amidst the scene of blood, she went to examine the bodies that lay on the ground: she found a first body, and she shrieked with joy, for it was not the dead body of her son : she found a second body, and she gave a second shriek of joy, for that was not the body. of her son: but the third !—Oh God !—her eye-balls glared on the corpse of her child, and she wept not—she could not weep—a woman's tears could not fall, nor do they yet flow !

He ridiculed the idea of the Protestants being the great landowners of Ireland ; although they bad the fee simple, their land was let out

in perpetual leases to Catholic tenants, who would be the 1 payers of the tithe ; which would be exacted from one under-tenant to ano- ther till the demand reached the peasiont.

A long debate then ensued. Mr. CHARLES WOOD, Mr. ErrrLE- TON, and Mr. \Vann, avowed their willingness to let the first resolu- tions pass us a groundwork tOr the bill,--under protest, that they were not committed to any one part of it. Mr. WARD took occasion to express his satisfaction that Lord Howick had adopted his view of thinking on the appropriation question ; and regretted that, through a premature expression of his own opinions last year, he had asked for Lord Howick's cooperation before his Lordship was in a condition to afford it.

Mr. Home, Mr. Ilanvre, Mr. CI TLAR FERGUSSON, Mr. SPRING

tut:, and Mr. PouLETT ToomsoN, expressed themselves very forcibly against allowing the first resolution to pass. It was BB attempt to pledge the House by aside-wind to most important principles,—in fact, to decide the question of appropriation ; though that question was not fairly before the House; inasmuch as it was avowedly part of the Government plan to secure to the Clergy the whole amount of the land to be purchased with the tithe redemption-money.

Mr. Hutt: moved that the whole question be postponed, and that the Chairman do report progress. In the course of his observations, he remarked upon the conduct of Sit. Robert Peel in bringing forward tile present measure after opposing the bill of last session ; and said, that had he been in his place, he should have held such conduct to be dishonourable.

This moved Sir ROBERT PEEL to demand an explanation ; but he could get nothing from Mr. 111,311; but a repetition of the substance of what he had before stated.

Mr. GOULBURN and Colonel CONOLLY supported the Government plan. Mr. H. GRATTAN opposed it.

Lord STANLEY expressed his disapprobation of an incidental discus- sion of so important a question as that involved in the resolutions, though he himself agreed in all that they contained ; but if Sir Robert Peel persisted in declaring the passing of the resolutions to be neces- sary to enable him to bring in the proposed bill, lie would vote with him.

After a rather sharp discussion between Mr. SPRING RICE, Sir RoasaT REEL, and Mr. Pot:user THOMSON,—in which the previous conduct of each of those gentlemen was referred to by one or the other, in order to demonstrate the inconsistency of their present with their former course in relation to the tithe question,—Mr. HOME withdrew his motion ; and Mr. SPRING Rica moved, as an amendment to the resolutions, " That it is expedient to alter and amend the laws relating to Tithes in Ireland." This resolution, he maintained, would enable the Ministers to bring in their bill. Sir Romer PEEL refused to give way; and the Committee divided: for the resolution, 213; against it, 19S; majority, 15. The House resumed, and the report is to be received on Monday.

4. Pools-Laws row IRELAND.

A discussion of some length arose in the House of Commons on Thursday-, on a resolution moved by Mr. Oanntea, " that it is expedi- ent to make provision for the aged, helpless, and halm poor of Ireland." Mr. O'Brien dwelt upon the extreme wretchedness of the Irish peasantry, and maintained that the establisinvelo of a system of Poor.laws was the only mode of administering effectual relief. Ile proposed to levy an assessment of a shillieg in the pound, two-thirds payable by the landlord and one-third by the tenant, in order to compel absentees to pay their fair proportion.

Sir R. Museeava, Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR, Mr. P. SCROPE, Mr. W. ROCHE, Mr. Beenonos, and Mr. SHELL, strongly supported the motion.

It was opposed by Mr. O'Coaseet.; who complained of the vague-

ness of the resolution ; and argued that it would be better at least to wait for the report of the Commission now collecting evidence on the sub- ject, before pledging the House to so sweeping a declanition. It would also be more prudent to see bow the experiment of the new English Poor-law Bill answered, before establishing a new system for Ireland.

Mr. GOULBURN, Mr. Homo, and Sir ROBERT PEEL, objected to pledging the House to Mr. O'Brien's resolution, until further informa- tion was procured ; and Mr. HuME expressed himself decidedly hostile to poor-laws in general. Sir ROBERT PEEL intimated his readiness to give the subject a favourable consideration when the report of the Com- missioners should be made; and he did not intend to wait for such parts of their report as would only relate to minor details.

Under these circumstances, Mr. O'BRIEN withdrew his resolution.

5. IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT.

On the motion of Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, the bill to abolish impri- sonment for debt, in England, was read a second time on Wednesday, and referred to a Select Committee.

Considerable opposition was given to the bill by Mr. RICHARDS, Mr. ALEXANDER BARING, and Mr. CARRUTIIERS. Mr. RICHARDS, as usual, excited the laughter of the House by his observations. He maintained that the bill would deprive creditors on book debts of the most effectual means of recovering them. He had been extensively engaged in business all his life, and had never arrested five persons. It was very rarely indeed that parties to bills of exchange were ar- rested.

He knew that the opinions he had stated were not approved of by the Doc- trinaires whom he saw around him; but their reasoning was not adapted for this sphere. A great number of those honourable gentlemen who now sup- ported the fashionable doctrine brought forward by the honourable and learned gentleman, were in debt : and, in consequence of their not paying their credi- tors, who relied upon obtaining money from them, their tradesmen were unable to take up their bills. Disappointments of this nature by the tradesman, were, he was convinced, the reason, nineteen times out of twenty, that bills of ex- change were not taken up. He had no doubt in his mind, that if this bill were passed, the number of bills would be materially, diminished. (" Henr, hear," from Mr. Warburton.) The honourable gentleman seemed to rejoice

i that there was a probability of there being no bills. This might be in unison

with his Utilitarian notions, but it would be most injurious to the community. At present, nineteen out of twenty, or rather ninety-niee out of every hundred transactions, were on credit. The Doctrinaires or Utilitarians seemed to have set up a theory in opposition to the philosophy of Lord Bacon. The Doctn- nairts and philosophers seemed to look forward to the adoption of punt:Th. without having any regard to their application ; and they appeared to him to be two. syllogism men. Mr. BARING was of opinion that the bill would operate unfairly on the shopkeepers. Merchants arrested their debtors very seldom. lie had never arrested one in the course of his commercial transactions, which had been to the amount of many millions.

There was one class of persons whom he was anxious to caution against this bill—he meant country gentlemen: were they aware of the summary remedy given against bondholders ? The agricultural interest would be must deeply affected by one part of the bill. Many of the large landowners, and the greater par t of the smaller owners of land, had, during the depreciation of landed produce, raised money by mortgage or bond on their estates; and, according to the pre- sent law, payment could not be enforced without six months' .motice. Sir J. CA It observed, that proceedings might commence immediately. Mr. Berrien: said that the present state of the law affm.ded delay ; rind a mortgage could not be called in, or a bond enforced, within a less period than the tune he had stated. According to the bill of the honourable and learned gentleman, a bondholder or mortgagee might obtain judgment within ten days, and after ten days more might follow up the proceedings ; and if judgment was not satisfied, the property would be placed in the hands of the creditor. According to the bill, the property was to be transferred to trustees, who were to be appointed, and they were to sell it and distribute the money to time creditors. At present the law afforded facilities fur delay to the person who gave a mortgage; but if this bill passed, he Nvould be at once placed at the mercy of his creditor. En- tertaining the opinions he did, he must protest against the experiment being tried. Ile begged to be understood as reserving to himself the power of op- posing, if he should think fit, the bill in its future stages.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL entered into a general defence of the measure. It does not appear from the report of his speech that he denied that the operation of it in regard to bond and mortgage debtors would he such as Mr. Baring described.

Mr. CLAY, Mr. Gaon:, Mr. O'CONNELL, Mr. BERNAL, and Mr. ltannewroar, spoke in favour of the bill.

Sir JohN CAMPBELL Said he was desirous of having the measure ex- tended to Ireland ; and time SPEAKER informed him, that the necessary alteration could be made in the Committee, without any special in- struction from the House to that effect.

On the same evening, the Scotch Small Debt Bill was read a second time, on the motion of Sir WILT.IAM RA]; (the Lord Advocate), and referred to a Select Committee.

6. NAVY ESTIMATES.

The discussion on the Navy Estimates was resumed in the House of Commons on Monday. On the motion that the House should re- solve itself into a Committee of Supply,

Mr. Hum: moved that the whole of the Estimates be referred to a Select Committee ; and complained of want of information on several important particulars. The motion was opposed by Sir Houma PEEL and Sir JAMES Ca:Aiwa and briefly supported by Sir I haelta- PAR- NE LL, and Dr. Bowarea. The House divided ; and Mr. flume's motion was negatived, by I ;6 to 60.

The House then went into Committee. Several large amounting to nearly 1,400,( f1'/., were voted, principally for the pay- ment of SeallIVH MaTiacS, and for victualling vessels in commission. There was a gaol deal of desultory conversation; iii the emir:. e of which Sir Jamie: GRAHAM gave replies to most of the rprestions of air. Hum: and other Oppesition Members, as Lord Asmi LEY seemed unprepared to answer them. The number of the Royal yachts was considered too large by Mr. Heel: and Mr. G. Yousx. ; but the pro • fessional :Members of the House, Admirals ADAM, ConeareeTore, and Tuounamee, expressed a contraly opinion in strong language. 't he system of Captain Symonds iu building vessels of war was the subject of some discussion, and the gemmed opinion was highly- favourable to it.

The Committee reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Wednesday.

7. REGISTRATION AND IMPRESSMENT OF SEAMEN.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM obtained leave, on Tuesday, to bring in two bills, time object of which is to do away with the necessity of impress- ment of seamen for manning the Navy.

The first measure which he should propose was to amend and consolidate the laws relating to the merchant seamen of the t sited Kingdom, and to form and

maintain a register of all the men engaged in that service. This seas almost the same measure as that which he hail iatrodueed last year. The principal object in view being to render the mercantile navy the means of maiming the Royal

navy when required—the first step was to protect the seamen of the mercantile navy from evils to which they were at present exposed. He intended to pro- pose that all seamen, whether employed in the coast or in foreign trade, when they embarked with the master of a merchant vessel, should do so under a written agreement. Having thus protected the men, he should proceed to pro- tect the masters from some evils under which they at present laboured; especi- ally against the harbouring of deserters from their ships iu other vessels. He should then proceed to reenact the law at present existing with respect to the number of apprentices; and he intended to provide that ships in the foreign trade should, on their return to au English port, be visited by the Custom- house Officers, and that their apprentices and seamen should be mustered and accounted fur, antler heavy penalties. This would in a great measure obviate the hardships to which merchant seamen were frequently exposed, by being, in consequence of frivolous disputes with the master, left in foreign countries with large arrears of. wages due to them. By the la,t part of his measure he hoped to secure an efficient registration of all the seamen of time mercantile navy. The leading features of the second measure were as follow.

He proposed, in the first place, to declare that the Crown had a right to the services m time of war of all seafaring men. In the next place, he proposed to limit those services. First, with respect to. their duration. He meant to propose that the service should in no ease exceed five years in duration, and that having served five years should always he a protection to a seaman against being called upon for further service. Having done that, lie was desirous, with a view to consult the feelings of those who were anxious, if possible, to avoid all compul- sory service, to exhaust every inducement to voluntary enlistment. He meant, therefore, to provide that, before his Majesty, in the event of war, should he em- powered by proelarnation to compel the service of merchant-seamen in the Royal navy, a period of grace should be allowed to elapse, during which all seamen who entered voluntarily for five years should receive a double bounty. Last war the bounty was 51. ; he proposed that it should be 101. He proposed also that such volunteers should sooner derive the benefit of a pension ; and that during war, one year of voluntary service should reckon for two years of service in peace, or of compulsory service. He proposed, likewise, that if the war ex- ceeded five years in duration, at the expiration of that period a seaman, whether serving compulsorily or as a volunteer, should be entitled, if he chose to enter for five years ITIOIC, to receive a bounty of 5/. He also proposed that a seaman who hail served twenty years, and was entitled to a pension, should be allowed, if lie roma:ilea to serve, to draw his pension as well as his wages. At present. such a seaman was not allowed to draw both, which was the cause of the fre- quent less of some of the best amen iu the navy.

Mr. G. F. Youxo and Mr. BUCKINGHAM expressed their strong approval of these measures.

Mr. ALEXANDER BARING also spoke in favour of them.

No man who was old enough to recollect the history of the last war but must be aware that it was quite impossible this country could contemplate the possi- bility of any naval war being again entered into with the saute mode of manning the Navy. Not only would the abhorrence the public had of impressment pre- vent it; but the old system could not be perservered in without the certainty of the first gun that was fired involving us in a war with that country with which, °fall others, it was most desirable we should remain at peace, he meant the United States. 'flee similarity in the language, habits, and characters of the sailors of those States and of the British lslands, would render such a result inevitable. No man who recollected the scenes ,which took place during the last war could expect that a nation pretending to independence, that a nation with any character at stake, should submit to the proceedings which, under the old system, we found indispensable towards the close of the last war. Captain BERKELEY, Captain GORDON, Alderman THOMPSON, Sir. M. RIDLEY, 1111d Mr. DAVID BARCI.AY, spoke in favour of the bills.

Admiral ADAM said, be knew by experience the truth of the adage " that one volunteer was worth two pressed men."

Sir Plume DuariAm declared that a volunteer was not to be pre- ferred to a pressed man. It was only by impressment that hardy sailors could be obtained at the close of the last war, and after being on shipboard twenty-four hours, they worked an willingly- as a volunteer. (Lanyhter.) He was, however, anxious to get rid of the impressineut (Laughter), if it could be done in the mode proposed by Sir James Graham.

Ilere the discussion closed.

S. LAW OF LIBET..

Mr. O'CONNELL obtained leave, on Wednesday, to bring in a bill for amend the law of libel. He gave a brief account of the existing law; remarking upon its anomalies, and injustice ; but postponed a descrip- tion of his own measure until the first reading of the bill. He men- tioned that the Law Officers of the Crown had promised to watch the progress of the measure, and give it their best attention.

9. INTIMIDATION OF VOTERS.

lira POI:LTEIT moved, on Wednesday, for leave to bring in a bill to protect voters fir their exercise of the elective franchise. lie proposed to make the act of using threat or intimidation by any one a misde- meanour, punishable by line and imprisonment, accur ding to the charac- ter of each particular ease. He proposed to increase tile punishment for a second offence, and to attach to a conviction wider his bill a dis- qualification ever again to vote in the election of ail a I embers to serve ire Parliament. Ile would have recourse to every expedient before re- sorting to the Ballot. Ills present object was to have the bill printed, and then ieferred to Sir George Grey's Committee, to await the deci- sion to which that Committee might come.

Mr. Fox alecia: seeonded the motion, in a short speech : and leave seas giver] to bring in the bill.

10. CHATHAM ELLCTION : CONDUCT or GOVERNMENT OFFICERS.

Mr. LAW lioness, on Thursday, called the attention of the House of Cormnons to a petition signed by :3:10 electors of Chatham, and other inhabitants of the borough, complaining of the conduct of Colonel Tr emenheere, commanding officer of the Marine 13:wracks ; who it was alleged, bad interfered in the most unconstitutional manner with the freedom of trade in the borough.

The petitioners stated, that certain tradesmen of that town had, from time immemorial, been allowed access to the barrack-yard tin the purpose of selling their commodities. No interruption had occurred in this privilege till the 19th January last, when an order was affixed to the barrack-yard, signed by Adjutant James, stating that for the future no pawnbroker or slupseilee should be admitted. to the yard, without the special permission of the Commandant. The peti- tioners proceeded to explain, that the classes of tradesmen in question were those that had hitherto enjoyed the advantage above described, and that the sole reason for this most unjust and injurious exclusion was that at the last election the whole body of them, with three exceptions, voted for Captain Byng, in op- position to the Government candidate, Sir John Beresford. This, the petition- ers added, was proved beyond a doubt, by the fact that the three persons who had voted for Sir John Beresford had each of them received that special permis- sion from the Commandant which enabled them to engross the whole business of the barrack-yard. This proceeding the petitioners protested against, as a most gross and unconstitutional exercise of power for the purposes of intimidation and the destruction of freedom of election. The petitioners went on to give an account of a conversation which took place prior to the election between one of the electors and the Commandant, Colonel Tremenlicere, onthe subject of the approaching contest; in which that officer saki, that, "if the electors did not

return Sir John Beresford, he hoped Government would take measures which should shut up half the shops in the town." The petitioners concluded by pray-

ing the House to cause inquiries to be made into the circumstances of the case, and that such relief should be granted them as the urgency of the case required.

Mr. HonoEs, after commenting strongly on time facts stated by the petitioners, moved that the petition should be referred to the Intimida- tion Committee.

Sir Joie m BERESFORD said, that such proceedings as were the subject of the petition were evidently calculated to injure, not to serve his in- terests in time borough. Colonel Tremenbeere bad no connexion with his canvassing the borough, and "he'd be hanged if be could tell whe- ther the Colonel was a voter or not." The Colonel was a most honour- able man ; and if any blame were to be thrown on him, Sir John declared that he would stand his friend. The electors had nothing to do with the Commanding Officer's orders, and might as well interfere with the regulations on board his Majesty's ships in the River.

Sir GEORGE GREY said, there had been too many instances of inter- ference with the freedom of election by Government officers. The House was bound to sift the case before them thoroughly ; and he suggested that the petition should be referred to a Select Committee. Mr. POTTER, Sir E. CODRINGTON, Mr. BERNAL, Lord EBRINGTOWs

10. DUBLIN ELECTION.

Mr. O'CONNELL complained to the House of Commons, on Wed- nesday, that the agent for the second of the fuur petitions pre- -acute(' against his return for Dublin had assured him that it would net be pressed, and he had therefore sent orders to Dublin to prevent the 'despatch of his witnesses, and to postpone other preparetions connected +with his defeece: but notwithstanding this assurance, by which he had been threw') off his guard, he now found that the petition was to be proceeded with, and the ballot for the Committee would take place the meat day. Under these circumstances, be hoped that the ballot would be postponed till Thursday the :2Oth, in order that he might have tittle to prepare for his defence.

Mr. Slime said, he had a paper signed by the agent, denying most aolemnly that he had ever stated any intention of abandoning the petition. Delay would put the petitioners to great expense, as they were now all in London.

Mr. O'Cosseet. said, that four persons were present when the agent for the petition declared that it was abandoned,—namely, the agent against the petition, his clerk, Mr. II uthven, and himserf; aid they were all ready to swear to the truth of what he had stated.

After sonic further remarks from Mr. SHAW, Mr. SPRING RICE said, that he thought the House should extend protection to a Member treated as Mr. O'Connell had been. The House should show agents and solicitors, that its jurisdiction was not to be trifled with ; and that gentlemen were not to be thrown off their Jenard by such statements as those which had imposed on Mr. O'Connell.

Mr. IVINer agreed with what had fallen from Mr. Rice; but thought that the Committee should be ballotted fur, and the question referred to it.

fir T. TROUBRIDGE, and Sir J. CAMPBELL, spoke strongly on the same side.

Sir PHILIP DURHAM asserted the right of the Common iing Officer so exclude all persons, whether Jew or Gentile, from the Ilarraess.

Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL wished the discussion to be postponed far to few days, that Colonel Tremenheere might have an opportunity of de- fending himself.

It was finally agreed th it Mr. Hodges should move for a Select Committee to inquire into the truth of the allegations in the petHoti, son Tuesday next.

Mr. O'Coesear. strongly urged a postponement of the ballot. His witnesses to the conversation were all ready to be sworn. Ile would saiove. that Sir Robert Sidney be called in.

Sir ROBERT Peer. said, the sitting Member must abide by all con. asequences of neglect of form, except such as proceeded from the vo- Juntary communication of the petitioner or his agent. He thought the douse should protect a Member in Mr. O'Connell's circumstances.

Mr. Rsre:vex said, the communication in question Was made by the agent for the petition in his presentee. There was a sort of in- trigue and dishonesty in the man's statement. He had said it was not tntencled to proceed either with the first or second petition.

Sir .Tastes G;L%IIAM observed that the declaration of a Member had always been considered equivalent to a declaration upon oath. Mr. Ituthven's statement was not contradicted. He thought the postpone- ment ought to be granted, for the honour of the House, which he was :especially anxious to maintain. Sir Jortsr CAMPBELL then moved, that the ballot be postponed till Thursday next.

Mr. SHAW and Mr. Lernov said that they had never heerd tl:c slightest imputation on the character of the agent for the pstitit u.

Mr. O'Connell having withdrawn his motion, Sir John Campbell's Was agreed to.

/I. CANADA COMMISSIONER; Loan CANTERBURY'S A reeINTMENT. The Earl of A imanEr.s stated in the House of Peers, on IVednes- day, in reply to a question by Lord Meeoneve, that :Ministers had " secured the services " of Viscount Canterbury as Commissioner to go out to Canada, with full instructions from the Government to settle the disputes between the colonists and their rulers. He added, flirt much ability, discretion, judgment, character, and conduct, and a cm:ci- tatory spirit, were the necessary qualifications for the performance of the duty assigned to the Commissioner.

Lord 1V1ULGRAtT. said, the situation was a most difficult and delicate one, and he could scarcely congratulate Lord Canterbury on his appoint- merit to it,—though there could be no more proper person, on account of his ability and the amenity a his manner and disposition.

In the House of Commons, on the same evening, Sir Romer PEEL announced Lord Canterbury's appointment, in reply to a question by 24r. ROEBUCK.

I. MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

OPERATION or THE Poen- LAW ACT. A discussion of some length arose on Tuesday in the House of Lords, on the presentation by the the Duke of BUCKINGHAM of a petition from the parish of Stoke Pogis in Buckinghamshire, complaining of the proceedings of the Poor- Law Commissioners, especially in regard to as proposed junction of that parish with sixteen others. Lord BROUGHAM denied the correctness of the statements in the petition. And copies of the correspondence Into tween the Commissioners and the parish officers were ordered, that the seal state of the case might be ascertained.

CANADIAN COMPLAINTS. Lord BROUGHAM, on Thursday, pre- estented a petition from certain members of the House of Assembly and Legislative Council of Lower Canada, complaining of misgovern- ment. The petition wit: to the same effect as that presented last week by Mr. Roebuck to the House of Commons. Lord RIPON defended jars conduct in regard to Canada when at the Colonial Office. Lord ABERDEEN slowed that the petition was directed against the proceed- ngs. of the late Ministry, including Lord Brougham himself, not against the present. Lord Bar:Guam maintained that the complaints tne re against the local government, not against that of the Mother Country. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. CONVEYANCE OF EMIGRANTS. On Thursday, the House of Com- mons gave Mr. W. E. GILA os CONF. leave to bring in a bill the object of which is to provide some security for the seaworthiness of vessels em- ployed to convey emigrants from the United Kingdom to foreign parts.

EDWARD SCGDEN. Sir Robert Peel, on Thursday, in reply to a question by Mr. H. GRATTAN, stated, that Sir Edward Sugden, who had resigned the Irish Chancellorship. had himself declared his resolu- tion not to take a retiring pension.

MARRIAGES OF CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. Mr. LYNCH Ob- tained leave, on Thursday, to brim; in a tall to repeal so much of an act passed in the reign of George the Second us annuls marriages cele- brated by Catholic priests between Protestants and Catholics. Colonel Pencevet. gave notice that lie should oppose the bill in its future stages.

IRISH CHURCH. Lord JOHN RUSSELL mentioned, on Monday, that he understood a special Report of the Irish Church Commissioners, comprising eight dioceses, would be received during the week ; and he moved that it should be laid on the table of the House when received.

Sir Romer PEEL said, that Ministers had received no reports arid had not the means of information possessed by Lot d John Russell as to when they would probably be transmitted. Ile objected to the mo- tion being made without notice.

Sir II ealte HARDINGE declared that Ministers were really ignorant of what the Commissioners had dune ; they bad not interfered with the Coinntission.

Lord Jolts Russeae said he would state the course he meant to !Hiram., the next day.

On Tuesday, accordingly, Lord John gave notice, that on Monday the sell he would move that the special Reportalluded to should be laid on the table of the Howie; and that on the Monday following, the 90th instant, lie should submit his motion on the subject of the Irish Church, when he should also move that the House be called over.

NEW Were. On Tuesday, on the motion of Mr. VERNON, a new writ was ordered for North Nottinghamshire; the late Aleinber, Lord Lumley, having been summoned to the House of Peers, us Earl of Searberough.

OMNIBUSES AND H, CKNEY-COACHES. Mr. Ahlelnlatl WOOD ob- tained leave, on Tuesday, to bring in a bill for the better regulation of hackney.coaches and omnibuses.

CANINE MeeNess. Mr. W. Mmes moved for leave to bring in a bill to prevent the increase of caeine madness, and to give compensa- tion to persons injured by mad dogs. Mr. O'Cososera, said, the sub- ject was not fit to legislate upon. Who was to determine the madness of a dog, or why were dogs the only mad creatures to be looked after? Several Members agreed with Mr. O'Connell; and Mr. MILES with- drew his motion.

Ism:so-cox CATTLE MARKET. On the motion of Mr. HANDLEY, the bill for establishing a cattle-market at Islington was read a second time, on Monday,