NEWS OF THE WEEK.
THE fate of the Irish Corporation Bill can no longer be con- sidered doubtful. The Peers allowed it to be read a second time on Monday ; but Lord LYNDHURST, who acts as the mouthpiece of the party, announced the determination of the Opposition, to carry an instruction to the Committee similar to that which Lord FRANCIS EGERTON proposed, but which was scouted in the House of Commons. The Peers had better reject the bill at once, by refusing to go into Committee on it at all. Such a course would be less irritating to the country, and less insulting to the House of Commons. But the mad guides whom their blind Lordships follow with incredible infatuation, appear desirous of adding insult to injury—of perpetrating an unpopular act in the most unpopular manner possible. There are many other modes of throwing out the measure than by taking up a resolution which the other branch of the Legislature had deliberately repudiated. The Peers have preferred that which they know must bring them into the most direlcontlict with the People's House. This must be done designedly.: nd we pray those simple-minded persons who re- proached th pectator and other advocates of Peerage Reform last autumn wit precipitate agitation of that question,—on the ground that the maj rity of the Peers would adopt a more discreet policy in the then ensuing session,—we pray them to ponder well on the dis- position to yield to the popular wish evinced by the Tory aristocracy in their treatment of the Irish Muncipal Bill, the English Corpo- ration Amendment Bill, and the measure for purging the borough of Stafford. Fine specimens these of the prudent and conciliatory bearing of the Peers I Admirably indeed do they justify the con- fident expectation of the friends of irresponsible legislation, that in this session their Lordships were to come out in a new cha- racter—habited in garments of meekness, with words of con- cession on their lips ! The discussion on Monday elicited a manly and persuasive opening speech from the Promier, an elaborate and artful attack on the bill from Lord LYNDHURST, and an unusually pointed and vigorous reply from tb.1 Marquis of LANSDOWNE. Lord MEL- BOURNE " fluttered" the Opposition a little, by warning them against following the lead of Lord STANLEY,—the original adviser, as he insinuated, of the course they were about to take, but whose temerity and indiscretion were conspicuous in his poli- tical career. It was inconsistent, he said, with the habitual cau- tion of the Duke of WELLINGTON and Sir ROBERT PEEL to adopt the dangerous expedient which their youthful ally had suggested. We have no doubt that there were many grave gen- tlemen on the Opposition benches, with heavy purses and broad lands, who bad secret misgivings that the calm and sagacious Minister was right—who felt in their inner souls the danger of trusting to a wily old adventurer, and a disappointed and choleric ,young man, the evil genius of the party who gained power and popu- I4rity by expelling him from their ranks. We fully expect, that these evil forebodings will be realized, and that many of those who swelled the formidable array against Ministers on Monday night, will live to rue the counsel which brought the privileged orders into adverse contact with the masses.
A motion by Mr. HARVEY, for a Committee to revise the Pen- sion-list, was the subject of a long debate in the House of Com- mons on Tuesday. The speech of the clever and mischievous Member for Southwark was full of telling points—dashed, it is true, with a spice of vulgarity, offensive to the fastidious, but not the less likely to have a powerful effect on the country. To quote an expression of one of his auditors, Mr. HARVEY seemed to be: treading on the toes of the aristocracy at every step he trait : certainly a more galling attack was never made on the titled profligates (for Mr. HARVEY carefully excepted the de- serving from his censure), who to the disgrace of past Ministers
[LATEST EDITION.] and Monarchs, and their own, throng every page of the book of pensions. In exposing the turpitude and meanness of those who, in the possession of ample fortunes, allowed themselves or their relatives to live at the public cost amidst public execrations,
Mr. HARVEY Was eminently successful : but lie failed to grapple with the difficult part of the subject—he could not " rail the seal off the bond " which entitles the present King to say to Hit House of Commons. " Don't meddle with my Pension-list, for
you have got the Reform Act." Indemnity for the pensioners was the price paid by the Country, through its Representatives, for the support accorded by the King to the Reform Bill. The bar-
gain was discreditable, but it saved England from a convulsion. It would have been well if Lord JOHN RUSSELL had boldly rested
his opposition to the motion on this ground ; but he merely
glanced at his only tenable and sound argument,—leaving it to Mr. WARD to state and enforce it clearly,—whilst lie indulged in small personalities against Mr. HARVEY, displeasing his friends, and laying himself open to a slashing reply from one who had the will and the power to lay on the lash smartly. The motion was again rejected, by 268 to 146; the Ministers having the aid of about 140 Tories,—who were certainly bound to come forward on this occasion, since by far the greater portion of the Pension list atrocities are to be charged to their account.
The Tories have made a vigorous effort this week to neutralize the effect of the report of the Carlow Committee, which completely exone- rated Mr. O'CoreNELL from every disreputable imputation connected
with the RAPHAEL affair. On Thursday, Mr. HARDY moved the House to adopt a string of resolutions charging Mr. O'CONNELL
with violating the privileges of Parliament and the written law of the land. This motion was met by another set of resolutions, copied verbatim from the report of the Carlow Committee, and moved by
Lord JOHN RUSSELL as an amendment. After a spirited debate.
which was adjourned on Thursday morning to last evening, and did not then terminate till three hours after midnight,Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S amendment was carried, by a majority of 243 to 169. A resolution moved by Lord STANLEY, which condemned the money transactions between RAPHAEL and the Carlow Club, as affording a dangerous precedent and involving a serious abuse, was subsequently negatived, by 238 to 166.
Every Member who addressed the House, Whig, Radical, and Tory, (with the exception of Mr. Hardy,) fully and explicitly ac- quitted Mr. O'CONNELL of the slightest taint of personal corrup-
tion. Mr. HARDY, with ineffable meanness, insinuated, what he dared not directly state, that Mr. O'CONNELL had offered RA- PHAEL a Baronetcy with the intention of keeping 10001. or 12001. in his own pocket as an equivalent. But, with this exception, the House was unanimous in exculpating Mr. O'CONNELL from the original charge—fur be it remembered, that was the original
charge, persevered in for several months—of pecuniary corrup- tion. The foul conspiracy of the "dirty and base creatures," as
they were justly styled by Lord JOHN RUSSELL, has therefore been utterly defeated ; and the triumph of O'CONNELL is complete. It will be asked, why so large a minority voted in favour of Mr. HARDY'S resolutions, seeing that the charge against O'CONNELL
had been abandoned. The aim of the Tories was to lessen the effect of their defeat on the main question, and therefore they re- solved to get up a case on a collateral issue. They changed their ground, and professed to be shocked at the violation of Parlia-
mentary privileges by the Carlow Club, and by O'CONNELL as the Club's agent. The arrangement made between the Club and the candidates was stigmatized as a corrupt traffic in seats. Now in what way are the poorer and dependent constituencies to protect themselves, if not by such proceedings as this? A constitu- ency desirous of electing candidates of congenial principles, at the (least possible expense, adopts the common, we may say the universal practice, of searching for those who will con- tribute more or less to the payment of the necessary cost. If such practices are to be disallowed, there is an end of combined efforts by the less wealthy electors against the overbearing possessors of money and influence ; and there will be no such thing as free election—no representation of the electors' political opinions. The only alternative is the Ballot. Wanting that, and with all the other imperfections of the franchise, such practices are not only necessary, but praiseworthy. The course of the Opposition was inspired, not by a regard for purity of election—nobody can sup- pose it—but by party-spirit, and by a desire to wound, through O'CossELL'sl side, the cause and the Ministry he supports. Well, it was a Ministerial division: what have the Tories made of it ? The Liberal majority has been growing since the open- ing of the PEEL-chosen Parliament : the last trial of strength, on the Irish Municipal Bill, gave 64—on the present occasion, with the name of O'CosesELL added, to embitter and concentrate Tory malignity, the Liberal majority is swelled to 72. We have no room for criticism on the speeches; but we are happy to be able to praise Lord JOHN RUSSELL'S as manly and spirited ; and Mr. Sergeant WILDS is allowed to have delivered one of the ablest argumentative speeches on the effect of evidence. ever beard in Parliament.
Sir ANDREW AGNEW succeeded, on Thursday, in introducing another of his annual bills for puritanizing the country. No ex- planation was given of the provisions of this particular measure; but we can easily guess their scope and character. The permis- sion to bring in a bill is no guarantee that it will pass; and it is almost certain that much waste of time, with perhaps a little amusement, will be the result of Sir ANDREW'S new attempt to interfere with the health and enjoyment of all but the great and the rich. We refer to the report of the debate in a subsequent page for laughable speeches on the subject by Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr. ROEBUCK.
The aggressive policy of Russia, and the injury which may arise from it to British commerce in the East, were brought under the consideration of the House on Wednesday, by Mr. P. M. STEWART; who moved to address the King to send a diplomatic agent to Cracow, and to provide for the extension and security of our trade in Turkey and the Euxine. After a rather tedious discussion, in which the old topics connected with the Russo-Turkish ques- tion were gone over for the third time this session, the motion was withdrawn—of course ; for the persons who introduce motions of this description seem satisfied with speech-making, and never press them to a division. Lord PALMERSTON informed the House, that he had already determined to despatch a Consul to Cracow ; and he trusted that Parliament would give him credit for watchful anxiety as regarded the commerce of British subjects with Turkey. The House was not so unpolite as to impute carelessness to the Foreign Secretary ; and very generally approved of his reiterated declaration that the preservation of peace was above all things to be desired. Indeeed, with the exception of Mr. STEWART and Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON, whose tone was rather warlike, every Member who spoke—including Sir ROBERT PEEL, Mr. WARBUR- TON, Mr. ROEBUCK, Mr. BARLOW HOY, and Mr. CUTLAR FER- GUSSON—deprecated the idea of saying or doing any thing which could have a tendency " to provoke a breach of the peace." It appeared to be the almost universal opinion, that mere scolding— the display of teeth when no bite was intended—should above all things be avoided. We rejoice that this is the prevalent opinion among men 9f all parties in the Legislature ; and trust that the day is far distant when the prosperity and improvement of the country will again be sacrificed at the shrine of the " Balance of Power."
