28 JANUARY 1832, Page 2

Ehbatryi mat prorrebingl itt VarTiaturnt.

1. THE REFORM BILL. A long conversation took place in the Com- mittee, on Monday, on the second clause. Mr. GOULBURN objected to the word " thirty" standing in the clause. It could not be defended on -the same grounds as " fifty-six," for " thirty" made no part of the first Lord ALTHORP observed, that Mr. Goulburn gave but half the rea- aon assigned for the retention of " fifty-six." The other half was, that the term had been exchanged for words expressing any higher num- ber, it might have formed an additional argument against the present mill in the Lords. It was true that Schedule B, in the former Bill, contained forty-one boroughs ; the reduction in the schedule in the present Bill was a concession to opponents. It was considered to be -necessary to make every modification in the Bill, in conformity with the expressed opinions of the Upper House, that did not injure its ef- Aciency. The modification of Schedule B had been made with that -view. Farther to diminish the number of boroughs in the schedule, would, he thought, diminish the efficiency of the Bill.

Mr. Govutuns: did not think Lord Althorp's reasoning satisfactory, and therefore moved the omission of the word " thirty."

Sir GEORGE WARRENDER concurred with Mr. Goulburn, but for different reasons. Sir George thought, that the boroughs in the sche- Aide must either be nomination boroughs,—in which case, they did not deserve any members at all ; or they must be open boroughs,—in which case, they ought to retain their political privileges entire. Sir George afterwards entered into a long, and as the House seemed to think, a tedious defence of his conduct against certain at- tacks in the Morning Post. He then returned to the Bill; and con- tended that the test of population was an extremely unsafe one—that the metropolitan districts had no claim to members—and that, similarly, many towns in Schedule D might be lopped with advantage. The impatience of the House was manifested by cries of " Question ;" end Sir George, after again asserting his consistency, gave up contend- king with it.

Lord EASTNOR admitted, that though the Reform Bill of Ministers _bad not the support of all the property of the country, it yet had the :support of the great mass of the population, and of a considerable por- tion of the property. Under these circumstances, no Government could go on under a system of nomination boroughs. To their aboli- tion, therefore, he would yield ; but he contended against the principles fa Schedule B, which went to disfranchise boroughs that were not nomination ; and also against the clause for constituting boroughs of the metropolitan districts, which would make the House the representative ,of the mere passions of the people.

Sir ROBERT PEEL followed the same course of argument as Sir George Warrender and Lord Eastnor, in objecting to the disfranchise- ment of boroughs that were not nomination boroughs - on which grounds alone, he contended, the disfranchisement of Schedule A was maintainable. Adverting to the motion for delay which had been made by Mr. Croker on Friday, and to the promptitude with which the in- formation on account of which the delay was sought had been subse- quently granted, Sir Robert expressed a hope, that by agreeing to the number of 56 boroughs in the first clause, the House was not pre- cluded from discussing each of the boroughs that were to make it up. in answer to Lord Althorp's argument in favour of 56,—namely, that the country would not be contented with a smaller number,—Sir 1Zobert asked, how, in that case, would the country be content with the reduction of Schedule B from 41 to 30 ? If they were content 'with 30, why not with 50?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL observed, if the test laid down for disfran- chisement had been 2,000 of population, or 500 houses, it would have been reasonable to ask such information as was necessary to prove that there were 56 boroughs of that description ;. but, however necessary, in the present case, information might be, to judge between the claims of individual boroughs, none was called for to show what was sufficiently notorious, namely, that there were not 56, but 100 small boroughs in England, which it was mockery to consider as the representatives of England in any sense. Lord John instanced Beeralston, as a specimen of these boroughs, where, on examination, the Commissioner found it impossible to ascertain who was the returning officer. With respect to an objection often urged—that one member would give rise to much bickering and ill-will—he cited Abingdon and other towns in contra- diction, where one representative was at present returned.

Lord SANDON and Mr. ADEANE spoke against the clause. After a few words from Lord ALTHORP and Mr. CROKE% the House divided : for the clause as it stood, 210; against it, 112; majority, 98.

A long conversation took place upon Schedule C ; which it was agreed, in conformity with the opinion of the Speaker, should be taken as part of the clause.

Lord NEWARK spoke at some length on the propriety of dispensing ~with Schedule D altogether, by merging it in Schedule C. He ob- jected generally to the principle of single representation ;_ but he most objected to the schedule because it would hold out a bait for numerous towns now verging on 10,000 of population, when they arrived at that limit, to press on the Legislature for admission to this schedule. Lord Newark proposed, therefore, to give two members to the 31 towns in Schedules C and D, which, on the combined tests of houses and as- sessed taxes, stood highest in the list. Lord Newark did not press this amendment, and the clause was agreed to without any division.

In a similar manner, clause 4th, which includes Schedule D, was put -and carried.

- Clause fifth—that which respects New Shoreham, Cricklade, and -Aylesbury--was also carried.

On Clause 6th,-conjoining Weymouth. and Melcombe, Sandwich Jod Deal, and Penryn and Falmouth being put, Mr. FRESHF/ELD

said, the boys of Falmouth and Penryn were constantly fighting, and the inhabitants of the two towns would not intermarry. The clause was carried.

Mr. CROKER wished Aldburgh and Orford to be united also, but did not press his amendment.

Some conversation took place on Clause 7th. Mr. KNIGHT sug- gested, that provision should be made that the clause should not come into operation before the bill for limiting the boroughs had passed. [This suggestion, it was on Tuesday announced by Lord ALTHORP, Ministers would act upon, and introduce a clause in the Bill for that purpose.]

Clause 7th brought the time down to twelve o'clock ; and the Chair- man, agreeably to an understood agreement, reported progress.

On Tuesday, the Committee being resumed, Clauses 8, 9, 10, were agreed to, without.further comment.

Mr. GOULIIURN objected to the mode of appointing returning officers under Clause 11th ; lie thought it gave the Sheriff a power which no man ought to have.

Lord Aurifonr said, the provision was a temporary one merely ; it was intended to give the new boroughs charters, which would obviate in future the necessity of having recourse to the Sheriff.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL objected to the clause, as giving power to the -Ministers of the Crown. They appointed the Sheriff, and through his means they might influence the returning officers.

Sir JAMES SCARLETT recommended Government to constitute the enfranchised towns into corporations, for. the purposes of the Bill ; the other privileges and immunities of boroughs could afterwards be given to them by charter.

Lord ALTHORP observed on the great difficulty of any other arrange- ment. In selecting the Sheriffs to nominate the returning officer, the Government lied taken what appeared the best and most practicable method of getting over a difficulty, which, he repeated, was purely tem- porary. The charters meant to be granted to the several enfranchised towns would in future fully provide fbr the case.

The conversation was continued for some time, by the present and the two ex-Attorneys-General, by Sir E. SUGDEN and Mr. Sergeant WILDE ; but no division took place.

Clause 12th—respecting the divisions of Yorkshire—was agreed to, after some amendments which the reports have rendered wholly unin- telligible.

Colonel SIBTIIORP divided the Committee on Clause 13th (the division of Lincolnshire): for the clause, 195; against it, 64; majority, 131.

The blanks were then filled up, say the Gallery gentlemen; but how, or with what, they leave us and the public to guess.

The 13th Clause brought the Committee to the twelfth hour. It was agreed, before going into Committee, that the Reform Bill should not be discussed on Wednesday. The Chairman, in consequence, ob- tained leave to sit on Thursday; when, Lord ALTHORP said, " the Ministers would take their chance of going forward with the Bill after the questions that stood on the books had been disposed of."

The House got into Committee last night at a comparatively early hour. Mr. Croker objected to the 14th (the Division of Counties) Clause, which was the first to be put; and intimated his intention on a future occasion of discussing its expediency.

Sir Robert Peel offered a suggestion, which he thought might ob- viate the necessity of the division : when a right of voting arose from any freehold property situate in a town sending members to Parlia- ment, to let that sight be exercised in the town only; freeholders of towns not sending members to Parliament he would permit to vote for the county. He put a ease, in which a man having a freehold in a town, might be deprived of his vote both for town and county, by the county barrister estimating the freehold over and the town barrister under 10!.

Lord John Russell observed, that the suggestion was not new ; Mi- nisters had already considered and rejected it, because of its tendency wholly to separate the interests of the county and the town, and to create- members of classes, not of the community. There was another ob- jection to it—what was to become of non-resident freeholders ? Were they to be disfranchised ; or was the principle of non-residence, which the Bill put an end to in other cases, to be acknowledged in theirs? Again, in smaller boroughs, such an arrangement would place the elec- tion entirely in the hands of freeholders.

Mr. Gore Langton moved the omission of the dividing clause, on the ground that the division would be injurious to the independence of small landholders.

Lord Milton expressed his intention of supporting, and Mr. C. Fer- gusson of opposing the clause.

Lord Althorp pointed out two advantages that the division gave : it greatly increased the importance of towns, and thus tended to com- pensate the supposed weight it went to bestow on large landed pro- prietors; it greatly diminished the expense of elections, and thus opened competition to men of moderate fortune. The consequence of the di- vision might vary in various counties ; but in many, he believed, it would destroy instead of augmenting the influence of a few great estates.

After some further conversation, in which several members on both sides took part, Mr. Croker went into a long arithmetical argument to prove, that if the whole of one county were twice as great as the whole of another, the half of the larger would be greater than the whole of the smaller. He instanced this rather plain proposition in the cases of Devonshire and Cumberland and others. His inference was, that- small counties would, by the division, return more members than large ones.

Lord John Russell observed, that Mr. Croker had assumed through- out, a principle which the Bill gave no countenance to,—namely, that it meditated an arithmetical division of the country.

Mr. Hunt supported the clause, because he would diminish the power of the aristocracy, "who had always returned the members for the counties. [Hear ! from both sides.] See how they had voted last night. [Cheers from the Opposition.] Why, he had heard one of them say that the Ministers had a bad case, but that he must vote with them to help them out." [Cheers and laughter.]

The House at length divided: for the clause, 215 ; against it, 89; majority, 126.

Lord Milton expressed himself strongly opposed to the rth Clause, for giving three members to certain counties, both in point of principle and of selection. Colonel Sibthorp also spoke against it. Mr. Stuart Wortley remarked, that it was unprecedented, and even single repre- sentation was of comparatively modern date.

Lord Althorp admitted the novelty, but denied the injuriousness of the arrangement.

Colonel Wood thought the third member would be a perpetual oc- casion of struggle, and the cause of heartburning and dissens:on.

A very long conversation took place on the clause ; and the House was at length cleared for a division, but none took place.

On that part Of the clause being read which confers additional men- hers on Carmarthen, Denbigh, and Glamorgan, Mr. R. A. Dundas asked '.thy-'.thy-additional members were given to Welsh counties and not

to Scotch?

Lord Althorp said, the Welsh county members were not taken from Scotland ; which had, Moreover, received already an inereaye of eight


The line of argument adopted by Mr. Dundas was also taken up by Mr. C. Fergusson, Mr. Dixon, Mr. Pringle, Sir George Clerk, Sir George hurray, and two other members whose names are not given.

Mr. Stanley remarked with some severity on the gross inconsistency of the Anti-Reformers: the very men who had supported General Gascoyne's motion, which must have deprived Scotland of even one additional member, now clamoured for a reduction of English mem- bers, in order to extend the number of representatives in that country.

Sir Charles Wetherell, in opposing the clause, begged members not to express their approbation in the usual way, lest they should disturb the enviable repose of the Chairman.

Mr. Bernal was fast asleep, but the laugh that followed this notice roused him, "like a rattling peal of thunder."

The clause having been agreed to, the House resumed; and the Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again on Tues- day; to which day, because of the interjection of the -martyrdom of Charles the First, the House stands adjourned.

2. TREATY WITH BELGIUM. On Thursday, the Earl of ABER- DE.EN introduced this treaty to the attention of the House o5 Lords, with a view to a censure on its provisions. After sonic observations on point of form, in which he dwelt at length on the inconvenimee of announcing in the Royal Speech any treaty which had not at the date of the announcement been regularly ratified,—an inconvenience which Lord Aberdeen when foreign secretary had always sedulously avoided, —he went on to consider the arguments made use of by Ministers and their friends, when pressing the necessity of the King of Holland's ac- ceptance of the treaty in question. He denied that the King of Hol- land was at all actuated in his refusal to accept it by anY promises of assistance from without. In proof of this, he referred to the large supply of 4,01)0,000/. voluntarily and unanimously voted by the States- General far the purpose of supporting the King; and to the army of 200,000 men, which, from the enthusiasm of his subjects, William had been enabled to raise and maintain. He contended that these facts were wholly unaccountable, on the theory of the King of Holland's being encouraged in his stand by the Emperor of Russia, or by any other cause than the concurrence of the people of Holland in his views. Lord Aberdeen briefly traced the history of the annexation of Belgium to Holland in 1814; and then went on to consider the question, how far the King of Holland had complied with the terms of the treaty of annexation. He defied any man in any place to deny that he had done so in every tittle. " The excellent conduct of the King \ YRS indeed universally admitted, until, two or three years ago, he saw fit to insti- tute a prosecution against an atheistical attorney and two or three sedi- tious editors of newspapers, from which time he lost the support of many of his liberal friends throughout Europe." Lord Aberdeen traced the other causes of discontent,--first, the article of the treaty which prescribed strict equality between the various religious persuasions, and the union which arose out of it of persons of opposite beliefs to embarrass the Government; secondly, the French Revolution; thirdly, the mixture of Belgians and Dutch in the army of the King,—for if the troops had been all Dutch, and 20,000 in number,. the King could at once have extinguished a revolution, the most senseless and unintel- ligible that had ever happened in any country. The revolution brought about, the Dutch King and his people, who entertained as strong a desire for the separation of the two estates as the Belgians did, natu- rally refhrred the arrangements to the Allies, by whom the annexatim: had been made, and the Conference at London was formed. Lord Aberdeen denied that the separation had taken place when he quitted office : the only separation the former Ministry had sanctioned was an administrative separation ; the governing power of the two countries remained precisely as it had been before the Revolution. Having noticed what he termed a monstrous proposition laid down by the Con- ference, and the error of which run through all their acts,—namely, that the Allies having once had the power of disposing of Belgium, should retain that power in all time coming,—Lord Aberdeen went on to nar- rate the history of the various protocols, the rejection of the Prince of Leuchtenberg, and the appointment of Prince Leopold to the sove- reignty of Belgium. He came at length to the treaty of the twenty- four articles, which it was the object of his speech and motion to im- pugn. He objected to the guarantee of the payment of the interest of the debt by Belgium; to the free navigation of the Dutch rivers, in reference to which Lord Aberdeen repeated to their Lordships all the objections taken by the Dutch Government, and answered some weeks ago by the Conference,. he then turned to the article relating to Lux- emburg, which he equally blamed, and indeed the whole of the articles in the treaty, and most of all, the spirit in which they had been drawn up,--which was, he declared, much less conciliatory than that which had characterized any act of the Holy Alliance itself. He concluded with the following motion— To assure his Majesty that we duly appreciate the efforts of bis Majesty to termi- nate, in conjunction with his Mlle% the dissensions which-have prevailed in the King- dom of the Netherlands, and to maintain inviolate the peace of Europe, That without calling in question the necessity of facilitatinr,“ a separation of Holland and Belgium upon just and equitable principles, we beg buntbly to represent to his Majesty, that we have seen with much concern the project of a treaty which has been made public, :toil which has for its object the provisions consequent upon a final separation of the two States; but which, in our htunble apprehension, contains stipulations incompatible with the interests of this country, tout injurious to the honour of your M;ijesty. Humbly to express to his Majesty our conviction that an engagement to guarantee the execution of all the Articles of which the said Treaty consists would be improvi- dent and dangerous. That we fear it might lead to th-• neeessity of imposing additiunal burdens UpOILhis Majesty's subjects : and, as the interest s whiell are it,volved iii ,,oine of these articles are various and rompli,at tits the interferenve requisite to insure their execution must be so frequent, that u ye:tuna but contemplate the probability of fitture discussions calculated to affect lit stability of the general peace. umblv to submit to his Majesty. that stipulations entered into without the parti- cipation or consent or the King of t he Netherlands, by which. a privilege is giver to the

subjects of a foreign state to navigate iu the internal waters and canals of and to carry roads or canals through the Dutch territory, must be regarded as a ma .titirst violation of national indepinaleni.m, and as destruct (Attie rights of sovereign: y. Humbly to remind his Majesty that it has long been the established pulley oft his

country, and the practice of his Majesty's royal predeceSSMS, to the St1 WtINt union with the Dutch nation -a union which has hcretufm, been considered :is arratly confluvive to the seourity of both :4tates, and as the best support of the liberties of Eu- rope; and which is still not only agreeable to their respeciive interests, but essential to their common welfare.

That to dictate a treaty to the Patch Government, by which the interests of Iful land are so deeply affected, and to c, mpel that thrvernment to accept it with r,o,! cation, We cannot but consider as Idust, anti as likely to prove fittail to the L.ait ,:en- once er that ancient and intimate alliance which has so happily subsisted Itettt..ittl t:Itt two countries.

Humbly, therefore, to pray that his 7qiijesty will be gracionsly pleased to issue such directions as may render the said treaty in the articles ahON's, referred to mom consistent with the regard 1.01k11 is else to the honour of his Miiies: v's crown, to the seemit v of our own permanent interests, and to the just claims of his Majesty's faithful and natural ally.

Earl GREY, in commencing, put the question mooted by Lord Aber- deen in what he considered to be its proper shape—

The object of the noble Earl, linperceived, WPS, to prevent the execution of a treat y which, after a long.anxions.zitul laborious negotia I ion, Ind been brought at last tottettn-

elusion negotiation, moreover, on whichthe pea ce of Europe in a gt,..1 .1oTroi, depended The no!de was ,ziopinion that the interests or England were sacritived-t hat heir 1101101W ,10!Wadt.lt-- commerce was oomprontked ; and all this he attributed to his Majest y's present Ministers. Much ability, and exert ndinary power, and asto- nishing influence, then. I Itt• noble Earl, it appeared, was pleased to aserilt to Govern.- men% when he suppo,,I I hat I hey, through enmity to an old ally, ant act fug on mali- cious motives, were aide to induce all the other members of the Conit.ronce, hm.ing equal interests, to join with them iu thus destroying the independence of Holland Un- the aggrandizement of France.]

He spoke of the difficulties in which Ministers were placed on enter- big into office,—difficulties arising out of past events, in which they had no share, and present circumstances over which they had very little

control— was it owing to him (Earl Grey) that this country had been engaged in a twenty-lira years' war ? was it. owing to any encouragement front him that she had incurred so man v millions of debt ? was it owing to hint that a system had Leto i•st alaished at the conclusion of the war, which was rife with the elements of Oltore disc, ? Again, was it owing to him thatthe late Revolution hail takeu place in France, or tint :mother had tweurred in Belgium, in consequence of which an notion Mat never be re-estab- lished but by force, even on the admission of the noble Duke and those who had tided with him? When he came into Wheelie Mond that Itelgium was already separated, and that Holland was about to continence the work of re-est ztblitzhing to system. It was easy for a noble lord to say, You should have done this, mud you should have dune that ; but he should meanwhile recollect that they acted in no POMO:, bows, and under (dreumsthnees of no ordinary excitement. They undertook the zulministration at an mra of revolutions. An honest and well-intentioned government in France hal arisen, amidst all the party heat incidental to a recent change or dynasty. They were consequently beset by a violent war-faction, agitated by all the violent passions which make WWII reluctant to listen to reasonable terms. Belgium was :miler the precarious control of a Provisional Government ; and thus the English Ministers found them- selves surrounded by magazines which a single spark was oily woofing to ignite.

He proceeded to defend the course which the Ministers had adopted in the progress of the negotiations, as the only one which, without plunging the country into an inevitable war, was left open to them. With respect to the various intrigues, with which Lord Aberdeen was probably better acquainted than the Ministry were, for placing on the throne of Belgium this or that prince: he denied that either in those that had failed or in that which had succeeded, had they taken the smallest part. He alluded to the Dutch invasion, the history of which was very amply discussed last session, as adding to the embarrassments which beset the Conference in their attempts at a settlement of exist- ing differences; to the march of the French army, which lie justified on the necessity of the case; and to the stay of the French officers in Brussels, which he said was not a day longer than was required to give something like form to the Belgian levies, and thus to exclude the chance of the French being called on again to fight King Leopold's battles. Lord Grey concluded by defending the treaty of the twenty- four articles from Lord Aberdeen's objections, in nearly the same terms as it had been defended by the Conference, in the paper drawn up by Lord Palmerston in answer to the Dutch memorial. He concluded_

lie wished their Lordships to consider whether abetter arrangement could have been made, and whether it deserved the character which had been ascribed to it by the noble Lord. It had secured to Holland her independence and her station in Europe, without exacting from her any sacrifice incompatible with her interest or injurious to her ho- nour. She might be encouraged by speeches in that House, and by comments out of that House, to persevere in a course prejudicial to her true interests. Stock-jobbers and speculators in securities, if they could get one farthing per cent. on their time bargains, would not scruple to risk the peace of Europe: those persons, by the events of the last war, and by the enormous increase of the debt. had obtained a pernicious influenco which might endanger the peace of Europe, -an influence which might be described in two lines of the poet-

' Hine usura vorax. avidumque in tempore fmnus, Et concussa fides, at multis utile helium."

If the negotiations were broken off, and the, ratifications were not exchanged, Ito should be glad if other measures of security could be devised; but in his opinion, there was very little security that the object in view could be attained. His end was to obtain that security, whilst he endeavoured to preserve the honour of the country concerned- Their Lordships might decide to-night on a vote of censure upon Ministers, covered by an address to his Majesty, in order that he might call in other Ministers and break Mr the negotiations-for that must be the consequence-negotiations brought so nearly to a satisfactory conclusion.

The Duke of WELLINGTON addressed their Lordships, at considerable length, in support of Lord Aberdeen's motion ; and Lord GODERICH against it ; after which, Lord ABERDEEN spoke shortly in reply. The point which the Duke and Lord Aberdeen chiefly contested was, the proposition of Lord Grey that the only guarantee given by England re- specting the Belgian portion of the common debt, was that it should be regularly transferred to the Belgian great book. The Duke and Lord Aberdeen were decidedly of opinion that the guarantee extended much farther ; and that by the articles of the treaty we were bound, not only for the acknowledgment, but for the payment of the debt by Belgium. They did not state to whom we were bound. When Lord Aberdeen

sat dOwn, the House divided-. For the motion Present, 39 ; Proxies, 56— 95 Against it 59 73-132 Majority for Ministers 37 The House sat till half-past one o'clock.

3. RUSSIAN DUTCH LOAN. Mr. IhriniEs brought forward, on Thurs- day, his resolutions on the payments in liquidation of this loan. lie began by stating the grounds on which the payments were originally agreed to— There wa,.: an additional art it in the convention of the 13th August 1814, which was the groundwork of our engagement. The preantble to this additional article staled, that " In order the ',MOT to provide fir the defence and ineorparation of the Heigh. provinces rvith Holland." it was agreed that his Britannic NittHsty should take upon himself and engage to defray certain charges. Oae of theta was the payment of 1,000,0001. ;0 Striation ; secuudly. the advance or 2,000,000/. to be applied, in concert wi: h the Prince Sovercign or the Netholands, io ;lit of to equal sum to be fur- nish..,; him, towurtd, ttat:menting and improving 11 Iv dafenees or the Low c °unifies ; aud, bear equany with Holland suelt further eilarjoi as might he tt...reed -1111011 10•1, ....it fire said high contracting part;...; and their Ellie, towards the thud and sati,cacto.:y settlement of the Low Iotnirica, hi union with If onitod. and under the iltuttinitut of the lions, of Orange. not cxeeading in the whole the sum of 3,000,000& to be tle:Ta:...d I,v t engagement, in the original Frenell of the twat y, u a omen It d y tetpre,sed, titti, might Om: be trauslated.—" conjointly, and always in t,plal shares.- That itslclinite engagement to pay :unit further sums ror :nil ti it b toll:Old, i ILO Betgiii 144 W I:LOOS With Holland, O-■ not exceed 3.1mo,000/. was Is:, i:Li V.!. by a subsequent treaty- to a specitie and detirito ',eds. Care was taken that ; prr,til to 1110 2,1 treat!: stated, t hat, whereas his std :tf,t;..-t I he K ing of the Netherlands hal (Ii tr his own interests) resolved to Fawcett imin...1;ati•Iy to liN.1.1;11;1` with the t:1111,01'i It of IN ',la :1 ; and weal oil I,. wItioii his Britannicagrees to hea party. porsoanee ettga.4ent:mts taken by his said :Nlajesi v NVit h t he King of the Netherlands, in a con, emion signed at laneloo on the Ctlh August S14." This treaty teas I he origin of these payments to Russia, which were made iu referenet• to Holland.

Ile went on to remark, that all the treaties respecting these pay- ments were dovetailed one iTtto another, and in all of them we were bound to pay in equal shares with Holland ; and he argued, that it would be strange if; Holland having ceased to pay any share, we should be called on to pay for no general purpose, but for a specific one, in which Holland, and only Holland, had been interested when the treaty /CIA first entered upon. Mr. Herries called particular attention to a return made by the Treasury to the Finance Committee in 1828-- The return of course contained all the stuns paid, and to it was attached a brief state- ment of the conditions or the payment in thew words—" These payments to cease should the dominion of the Holgie Provinces pass from the King of Ito voter. it appeared that notwithstanding these distinctly recorded understandings as 1,1 the eirela of the loan nod the eontlitions,—notwithstanding the specific reduction in tlw treaties, and the dist ittet recegnition in the act of Parliatnent that the payments were to he made by the Lords of the Treasury, " When the saute may be front time to time pavable, as specified in Ilse said convention.--notwithstanding the strict limila- tion in the treaty, toul notwithstanding the occurrence oft he fact whielt metered it im- proper to make any payment.—yet, for some reasons which he host yet to hear. we had Mr the last three terms of payment continued to advance the money of this tountrv.

The ease, be contended, stood on this distinct ground : the payments in question were to be made only so long as Holland and Belgium were conjoined : if they were expedient after these two countries became se- parated, Ministers ought to have come down to Parliament and asked its authority for their continuance. Mr. Herries concluded by moving three resolutions,—two simply expressive of the facts of the case ; the third to the effect that Ministers were not warranted, by treaty or act of Parliament, in paying the sums they have paid with reference to the Russian loan.

Lord A [AMMO' said, the question ought to be met, not as one of pure economy, but as one of national honour. What they were called to decide on was this, vas the public faith pledged, by the treaty of 1815, to the payment of certain sums to the Emperor of Russia ? He was ready to admit, that if they confined their views to the mere letter of the act, framed with a view to carry into execution the provisions of the treaty of 1815, the inferences of -fir. Herries were not unwarranted ; but he maintained, that if they impartially examined the treaty itself, they would arrive at the conclusion that we were bound by it to make good the payments complained of lie went on to contend, that the separation contemplated in the treaty, and that which had actually taken place, were wholly different : the treaty looked to a separation of free- will, the actual separation was one of necessity and of force. It was neither assumed nor supposed that Russia had any control over the act of separation: why, then, on any.principle of equity, should Russia suffer by it ?

As between one upright man in private life and another, so he thought it should be between two nations. If one pledged himself to the payment of a debt to which there was also a third party, lie thought it would be highly dishonourable to take advantage of the 611min:dance of that third party having refused to fulfil his engagement, as a legal reason for also refusing to ram your engagement. If the conditions on which a debt was contracted are :tiered or broken by circumstances over which the creditor had no control, did it follow that the moral obligation of the debt was also broken ? And as between man and man, so it ought to obtain between nations : what would be disho- nourable in the one would be dishonourable in the other; and what was morally bind- ing to the one was morally binding in the other.

He then went into the history of these payments as far as he was officially concerned— When the question of the Russian loan first came under his notice, he referred it to the Law Officers of the Crown, in order to ascertain whether, under the circumstances of the ease. this country was bound to continue the payment of the monies paid, agree- ably to treaty, to Russia on the head of its loan to Holland ; and the answer of the Law Officers was,• that we were bound to continue these payments by the treaty, of which the act of Parliament was a mere formal legislative sanction. In consequence of the opinion of the Law Officers agreeing as it did with his own, a legal Treasury check was Milled for the payment, and the money' was paid. It was but right to observe, that the noble Auditor of the Exchequer did, when the matter was first submitted to his con- sideration, express a doubt whether we were bound to continue these payments ; but when the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, and the grounds on which it was formed, were submitted to Lord Grenville, he expressed his concurrence with the pro- priety of these. opinions, and consequently with the course pursued by the Treasury. It was true, that in some cases the Auditor of the Exchequer is bound to obey the Trea- sury when it takes upon itself the responsibility ; but in the present instance, the grounds of the whole proceeding were explained to Lord Grenville, and conviction produced in his mind of their justness. These were the steps which Lord Milanp had pursued with respect to the subject matter of Mr. Herries's statement, and for which be felt himself responsible. He did not shrink from his just responsibility ; if he was wrong, lie was the responsible member of the Government. spoke on the question of law. Mr. O'CONNELL, Mr. G. ROBINSON, Sir EDWARD SUGDEN, Mr. C. WYNN, Mr. HUNT, and Sir ROBERT PEEL, also spoke against Ministers. They were defended by Sir WIL- LIAM HORNE (Solicitor-General), Mr. SPRING RICE, Sir THOMAS DENMAN (Attorney-General), Dr. LUSHINGTON, Lord JouN and Lord PALMERSTON. There were repeated calls for adjournment towards the close of the debate ; and Mr. PAGET moved an adjourn- ment till Tuesday ; but, on the request of Lord Auruone,—who re- marked, that it was not usual to adjourn questions of censure on Mi- nisters,—he withdrew the motion. The result of the division was as follows : For the first and second resolutions For the previous question



Majority for Ministers 20 Fur the third resolution 214 Against it


.Majority for Ministers


4. TITHES IN IRELAND. An incidental conversation on Irish tithe arose on Mouldy, out of some remarks:on a petition flout Leeds, pre- sented by Lord MolueETii, praying that the liouse would nut coin Io the extension of poor-laws to Ireland, until some portion of the Church property there IVI:S appropriated to its original object—th:y feeding of the hunpy and the clothing of the naked.

Mr. 11 cm': remarked, that the House of Commons might vote as they pleased, but the people of Ireland had determined no longer to pay tithes; and therefore, the Tithe question being thus effectually settled, that only thing left for Ministers to consider Isms, the proper management and application of Church property.

Mr. J. WEvi.AND strongly objected to such language. If the people had settled the question of tithes, they must have done so by disobeying the law—the last course that any member should mention with appro- bation. If the law were bad, let it be amended ; but the mere fact of its being broken, was an argument to which, if they yielded, they would disgrace their character as gentlemen and as members of the Legis- lature.

Mr. DLACKENEY confirmed Mr. Home's statement, that tithes in Ireland were at an end, as far at least as the counties of Kilkenny, Wexford, Tipperary, Queen's, and Kildare, were concerned.

Sir EDWARD SUGDEN said, those who could encourage or defend such a system of opposition to the law as Mr. Blackeney described, were the worst subjects of the King, and the worst enemies of the country. He asked, would not the extension of the political franchise to be granted by the Reform Bill augment the evil ; and was it wise, safe, or prudent, under such circumstances, to grant it ?

"Mr. O'CoNNELL thought Sir Edward, before he spoke of extension

of franchise, would do well to inquire into the matter of fact. Before the Union, Ireland had 300,000 voters; now, it had not more than 16,000, and the Reform Bill would not give it 300 more. As to dis- obeying the law,. no such disobedience had been practised. The people were not compelled to purchase goods taken in distress fez tithe; and he defied Parliament to compel them to purchase such goods, or any other goods, that they did not like or want.

Mr. SADLER endeavoured to bring back the House to the question before it, by observing, that the rack-rents of the landlord were as rigo- rously exacted as the tithes of the Church, and ought equally to con- tribute towards the support of the poor. He was of opinion, that if poor-laws were not introduced into Ireland, until, in the language of the petition, the whole of the Church property formerly appropriated to the service of the poor were refunded, their introduction would be indefinitely postponed. The question of the Poor-laws pressed itself upon the attention of the Legislature, and must be attended to before they entered on the interminable question of Tithes.

Mr. HUNT said something about the Leeds meeting being a packed one, and the petition being got up by a Mr. Smithson; who, he said, had roasted the Bible, and written against religion.

Sir Roamer PEEL called on Ministers to protest against the doctrines of Mr. Flume. There was no doubt that the clergy of Ireland were as legally entitled to their tithe as any gentleman was to his landed pro- perty ; yet Mr. Hume had asserted that the clergyman's right had been practically defeated. If this were the case, what chance was there of the Church property being made available for any other purpose ? How could it be preserved even to the State, if its possession was thus wrested from its original owners by illegal combination ? The same. process which had been used to resist the payment of tithes, might be immedi- ately tried in resisting rents. If Irish landlords countenanced these ille- gal combinations in the one case, they would be the most deceived of mortals if they imagined they might not become their victims. It was for the Legislature to determine what modifications should be made in the tithe system ; but as long as the law remained as it was, it was their duty, as legislators and as members of society, not to lend their countenance to the defeating, either by force or by illegal combinations, just and legal rights.

Lord ALTHORP observed, that he did not think he was called on, whenever a member gave utterance to a sentiment in which he did not concur, to rise and enter his protest against it. It would very much aggravate the inconvenience of discussions on petitions were he to do so. He would merely observe, that any course of proceeding which tended to defeat the just claims of any man, clergy or layman, if not opposed and put down, must lead to the destruction of the whole frame of society. Whether such combinations were within or without the law, mattered nothing.

Mr. SHELL fully admitted the right of the incumbent to his tithe;

but in discussing this question, they ought to consider, not what the law was, but what it ought to be. As to the hint to the Irish landlords, it was unnecessary—their case was by no means so deplorable as Sir Robert Peel imagined. The parson had all the weapons which the landlord possessed; and out of the armoury of the law he was provided with still more, for the purpose of recovering his tithes; but against the tithe system the • public opinion in Ireland had revolted. Such a fact might be a deplorable one, but it was one that could not be denied ; •

and such being the case, what was the remedy? Could they enforce the payment of tithes in Ireland ? Was it a crime on the part of the pea- sant to refuse to buy the tithe-pig, or to go to the mart where the goods of his neighbour that had been seized for tithe were offered for sale?

Air. HUME said, a great deal of noise had been raised in consequence of his expressions. He never uttered nor insinuated a wish that the incumbent should be deprived of his tithe ; he merely assertnel a fact, and he had been amply borne out by Mr. Blaekeney's statement.

The subject of Irish Tithes was resumed on Tuesday, on the pre- sentation by Mr. Hem of a petition from. a parish ( St. Agnes) in Cork against Tithes and ChurTh-rates. In the parish from which the petition came, there were %WO souls, and of these only 14 were Pro- testants ; there was no church, no resident c.ergyinan, co service ren- dered of any kind. 11Ir. Hume ridiculed the notion that under these or similar circumstances tithes could remain as they ‘vere.

Sir RoltEla PEEL thought the subject too delicate to be discussed at that moment.

Mr. O'CONNELL said, he could draw no conclusion front the ex- clusion of Catholics from the Tithe Committee, but one—and that was, that the Catholics of Ireland had nothing to do respelling tithes but to pay them. The resistance to tithes was not at present universal, but it was rapidly spreading. .As to a proper provision to the working Protestant clergy, no man objected to it. All parties in Irelaed agreed that the working clergy ought to be paid.

?Jr. STANLEY defended the principle adopted in framing the Tithe Committee—

It was the wish of the Government to absLtin from putting on it the mune of any mcntber who had expressed an absolute and positive deter mmat .en Lett no change whetever ought to take place in the Church report y ; and it had :Ilse t:ieuelit it right to abstain frem appointing those who m.ge considered, beyond the reoch Of argument, bound to the opinion, that nothing but On entire change w as a sufficient remedy t he grievance complained of. The Government hail constituted the Commit:1, SO :IS to ho,l, out extreme opinions of both sides, mid make the great body of the Committee

,mast ef men of moderate and dispassionate 11.elings front both sides t he House, who wiwad eahnly weigh and consider tie evidenve. That was the.grelitel mlopted by 1:is Majesty's Government, after serious deliberation ; and they had I.Or.1:• I:I

shm that it would le more expedient to abstain ftom appointieg Roma:: Cat holies en hr Committee. That decision wasted takeu from euy doubt erany fear tied the Roman Catholic neeabers would not, under the oblieatitin impesed on them, conseieutiously portbrm their duties as members alibi, Committee.

He further defended the exclusion of Catholics from the Committee, on the principle that they had no right to sit on a Cominitoei which was to modify or reform the Protestant Church. It was only proper to de- legate that power to a Protestant Committee, that the reform might be voluntarily accepted, not forced upon the Protestant Church. On these principles, if Mr. O'Connell brought forward his motion to place Lord Killeen on the Tithe Committee, it would be resisted.

Mr. RteritvEN said, the principles so confidently relied on by Mr. Stenley were very little calculated to give satisfaction in Ireland. Wvsn observed, that the opposition to tithes which nlready per- vented six counties, would have spread much farther, had lo..t the people entnelained a hope of relief from the question being taken up by Go- verement.

Colonel PEnenv.11 denied that the atrocious conspiracy egainst tithes was countenanced by the Protestants of Ireland; neither were the Ca- tholic peasantry averse from paying them : the agitators were the.cause of all the evils under which Ireland was suffering.

Mr. SnEfi. denied in foto the assertion that the Tithe Committee was either indifferent or impartial. How could it be so, when three out of four of the English University members were upon it, and one of these a former Secretary of Ireland, and a stanch supporter of its Church ?

Lord Arvoone said, if Catholics were not placed on the Committee, at least the friends of Catholics were : there were seven members on it who represented large bodies of Catholics, and in whom they had full confidence. It was besides necessary to look to the feelings of Eng- lish Protestants as well as Irish, who were likely to be roused to jea- lousy if they were not at liberty to settle the question themselves.

Mr. 0' Coxxm.r. having adverted to a supposed change in Mr. Stan- ley:s opinions on the subject of tithes, Mr. STANLEY denied the impu- tation. He held it in the highest degree unjust in the Legislature to interfere with the property of the Church for purposes not purely ec- clesiastical ; but he had always held that they might properly interfere to regulate its application to such purposes.

5. Lusn MAGISTRATES' FEES. Mr. DAWSON, in moving, on Mon- day, for a return of the fees 'payable for the renewal of Irish Magis- terial Commissions, complained with great bitterness of the conse- quence of their exaction in leaving that country without a magistracy— Ireland was, in truth, without a government. The right honourable Secretary :lad not been there for six weeks. He was not to be heard of, nor was it known where he was to he tbund. It was. in fact, said of him. non est inventus, and the country was in the hands of three parties alternately—the member for Kerry and his partisans; the Marquis of Anglesey, assisted by Dr. Doyle and Lord Cloncurre ; anti the party of the Protestants. The nominal government was a laughing-stock to the Catholics, and an object of alienation and disgust to all the Protestants, and well would it be for Ireland whim Lord Anglesey, mice so popular, was recalled.

Mr. STANLEY said, the fees did not depend on the Government, but on an Act of Parliament. The act 57th George III. reserved to certain officers the remuneration due for labour employed. The fees were formerly 71. 15s. 6d. ; they were now reduced to W. 13.c. 6d. He did not deny the propriety of a law to assimilate the practice in the two countries ; but any such act would be prospective.

Colonel PERCEVAL said, the entire labour consisted in writing a name ; the dedicates were all printed. He did not intend to take out his ; and the whole of the Magistrates of Sligo were of the same mind.

The reason why the Irish Magistrates had refused to take out their commissions was differently stated by Lord WICKI.ow in the House of Lords, where also the subject was adverted to on Tuesday. His Lord- ship said— It was a libel on the Magistrates to say that any part of them were influenced in omitting to take out the commissions by so paltry a motive as unwillingness to pay the legal fee. The amount of the fee could not in itself be their objection; for they had before paid five or ten pounds, and it was now only two or three. 'He believed that their refusal tad two reasons,--first, the ries-weregreater-than those paid on similar occasions in this country; and the power which reduced the amount in Ireland from ten to less than three pounds, could have placed them on a level with the fees in this country : se- condly, they thought that the necessity for taking out new commissions arose out of the late act respecting Lord Lieutenants of counties; because tined of them had taken out commissions since the commencement of the reign of wninam the Fainvoi: nom they thought also, that the fees went into the pocket of the Lord Chancellorof I wheel. He Wag sorry that such an opinion should be a motif t. tbr their refusal. He lEdieved Lord Plunkett to be as honest, conscientious, :Lull zealous a publie servant as nay other upon the bench; but he believed that the unpopularity of the Government to which that learned Lori was allied had been visited upon MM.

6. SELECT VESTRIES MAIENDMENT 11/T.L. This bill was thrown out on AIonday, on the second reading, against -10. The Opposition was led by Mr. George Lamb ; whose chief argument against the bill teas, that it was premature, inasmuch as the act which it went to amend not (-cluing into force until the 1st of -starch, it sins yet int pessiLle to pronounce on its defects. The majority slam NI some singular combi- natiWIS of persons.— Lord .Althorp end Sir Hobert Peel, Lord Palmerston end .31r. Coulburn, Sir James Graham and Ain.. 'William llohnes, and many others equally umisual and ominous.

7. GENERAL FAST. Arr. PEECEVAL, on Thursday, rose to move an address preying that his Majesty would order a general Cast ; hut lnetOre he Inegnin his oration, he thought proper to enforce the standing order by which StraligeTS art! I'M:hided fronts the House. The public and the reporters were accordingly shut out from the benefit of the very singular speech whip it the reverend sinceuriq thought proper to deliver in the ears of the silent few. The reason' assigned by Air. Percovel for the exclusion of strangers, was to prevent the going forth of these blas- phemies" to which members might feel inclined to give utterance in reply to his motion. Mr. Pereevars speech, however, has been pre- served by sonic friend to publicity, and also a brief note of what fol- lowed. We may quote indifferently from the C/no.eietr or the "l'imes, as the report in the one is a fac simile of the report in the other,—with this difference, that the former gives the quotations from the Bible en- tire, the latter only indicates them : on this account, we give the Chro- nicle's version. The gallery being cleared, Mr. Perceval said— He couhl sleek with more boldness in the absence of the public. ile could per- suade the 11101111ICES \slut are all of theta baptized. and net allow the public le know the Idasplienti,s that mieht be spoken in answer it, his speech—that the 1e:1,p:egrets, if any, m t his House, might he It able to give publicity to their blasrhemies. That was his excuse fur cloning Ike 1 tense of stranger,. Gist was present amongst I hem, a ;el he weld,' witness :ill :bat p asAd. In the name id- I;thi 010 I H01104, 110 :11:11001,1 1110 IhwtsI': and as it sins written in his \Void, that he who reheeisi him tire epeeered iii the mere of Cod, despised hi:: that seta him. he I hat rejected him (Mr. jeeted Ids Cod, in whose name he mmeared. Iii \ rota,: risk being tedious. is ,roper to he understood. He was aquid 1,, read the book he held in his he (the Bible), lint he could read it. No man meld deity that the slate of the anti ei was truly deplorable. Notiliee had altered his opinion stie. he last addressed the I here ,nt this subject. 'fine natien trembled on theenze or destriattion. No man could entil:in, on sitherdinatiou is smeety : in every di'strizt there were di-sa,lers. There was :Os° the nightnii


iis'vnn el the two Houses ef Parliament. The heeses of the nobles and gentry were eubeesi atel pillaged ; inte of the dries 1111111,11 11.4 :110 robbed by Owned,. Twe part ies were threatectine a celitnet maniCest, that :anidst all these things, eve:': lady ■ if

eons:iterate mind sheet, cote titler ilmir ways and mewl them. Shall NV It down

Letlae that Goal whose latti to t1,--consitior MIT weys—and go down oe en: heees suppiicate that iii t' lieb is gem, feen us: He would read the grounds et* a !et- ! ifs presperity. This t,i iI it steeds es Jernetlete thrmerly stood. It her tr,e0 I !el

sitat. of true religion, and lei, ared. up the finest system t.f polity alt, I ever ex- isted: and it' Wt. Ilt` .11.111S:■11`la sins, ice itt t etplally :--

" Woe unto thee, Chore zin, we unto tie e. 11 11 su f, •r if the miehtv works. with+ were done in you were done in Tyre and :shloa, they it oeId have rer.taea Meg ago in sackcloth and ashes. " But I say unto you, it shell be mere tolerable for Tyre and Sidon the day of judgment than fur yon. " And thou, Capernenm, which art exalted unto Heaven, shall he brought down to I ill : for if the might, works which have been done in thee had been done in Sodom, it woeld have remeitted tintfl this day.

" But I say unto you, it shall he more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment than for pm."

Ile then read further :—

" And all these blessings shall come on thee, ana overtake thee, if thou shalt hearken unto the veice of the Lord thy God.

" Messed shalt thou be in the city and blessed shalt thou be in the Gehl. " Blessed shall be the fruit of his body, and the fruit of thy gtoand, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of tly kit., and the flocks of thy sheep.

Blessed shall be thy basket and thy store.

" Blessed shalt thou be vhieu thou contest in, and blessed shalt thou he when thou goest oat.

" The Lord shall cause thine enemies that rise up against thee to be smitten before thy face; they shall conic out against thee one way, and Its' Iwthre thee SC`V011 ways, " The Lord shall command the blessing upon time in thy storeheeses, and in all that thou settest thine haul unto: and he shall bless thee in the lul which the Lord thy God giveth thee. " The Lord shall establish thee an holy people with himself, as he bath sworn unto thee, if thou shalt keep the Cummandments of the Lord the 'net and with t a his ways. " And all people of the earth shall see that thou art called by the haute ,,i't he Lord, and they shall be afraid of thee.

" A ml the Lord shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the fruit of thy and itt the fruit at thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground in the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers to give thee.

" The Lord shall open unto thee his good treasures, the Heaven to give 11.e rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand ; awl thou sle.lt lend unto many nations, anti thou shalt not borrow. e Anti! the Lord shaft make thee the head and not the tail, and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath ; if that thou hearken onto the Commandments' of the Lord thy God which I command the this day to observe and to do them.

" And thou shalt not go aside from any of the words which I command. thee this do y, to the right hand or to the left, to go after (dher (nulls to serve them."

and glorious had been the conduct of England, when the Admiral wrote home that •• it Lath pleased the Almighty to bless his Majesty's arms" He then read the eon% •ral!— " li ii it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the Lord thy to observe to do all his Commandments and his Statutes which I command thee this day, that all these curses shaft come upon thee and overtake thee :

" Cursed shalt thou be in the city, and cursed shalt thou be in the field. " Cursed shall be thy bushel alai thy store. The Lord shall smite thee with the botch of Egypt. and with the ernerods, and with the scab, and with the itch, whereof thou caust not be healed

The Lord shall smite thee with madness, and bliudness, and astonishment of heart. And thou shalt grope at noon-day as the blind gropeth iu darkness, and thou shalt not prosper in thy ways, and thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled evermore, and no Imais shall save thee."

That pestilence is now in the land. and we ought to hasten to redress the Throne to proclaim a fast and holy day iu the land. We have here the truth. We have departed from oar God, and God has departed from us. And unless this nation come on their knees, destruction is on us. But if we return to God's ways, we may effect forgiveness and blessedness. England is not the country of peace, glory, and strength that it was, and we ought to repent and return from our evil ways. Although we deserve the psunshmeut of our sins, yet, if we repent, God's mercy is abundant, and we may yet be saved. I speak on authority not to be denied. The word of God has expressed it even when a curse against a nation has been

given- " If that nation against whom I have pronounced turn from their evil, I will repent

of the evil that I thought to do unto them."

• Innumerable were the instances of God's mercy—as when the Prophet went against Ahab, left he humbled himself, and God withdrew the judgment, There was the same fact in the case of Jonah in Nineveh-

" Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown." If these applied to Heathens, how much more will God's mercy be shown to a nation of Christians ? The honourable member then read the proceedings respecting Nineveh.- " So the people of Nineveh believed God and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them. " For word came unto the King of N i nevelt, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes.

" And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh (by the decree of the King and his nobles), saying, ' Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing ; let them not feed nor drink water.

" But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God ; yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands. • " Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, and we perish ni t. A ud God saw their works. that they turned from their evil way; and God repented him of the el it that he had said he would do unto them, and he aid it not."

So will it he with England, it' we faithfully, humbly, awl sincerely repent. I trust I shall be able to set before the nation the truth of its weakness—first, the increase of (mime shows the absence of religiou and piety ; secondly, the oppression of the poor was laiyouti his conception. lie was lost iu astonishment. The fact was so gn•at that he could not account for it. The first lived in luxury and plenty ; the labourer in a state of actual starvation, and a degree of distress that would harrow up your very souls. He could no!' point out the causes, but the filet was glaring. Ile appealed to Mr. Sadler to point oat the sufferings of the children of the poor. The heathens made their ehildren pass through the the to their God, Moloeh—we make our children pass through misery ihr our gain. The destroetion of Bristol is a sample of God's wrath when aleval in the land. Passing that and the pestilence, the state of the poor is enough to indece this Ilouse to address the Crown to order a fast. It mast not be supposed that lie was a fool to call on this House, which he did, as a body, only in love and truth. Yon sit here (said the hunoural de Met alter) infidels—you do not consult your Maker. This Ilonst, meets here, and talks on public affairs as if there was no God. Let every matt answer for himself. Yon have no more consideration than if you acknowledged no God. You are all Look at the public Press. the march of intellect, the spirit of the day is sheer idolatry. You forget God, and think of doing every thing by capital. by um- ellinery. by laws, Sze. ; but you are acting on a wrong principle. All those :ens of un- godliness had been practised by other nations. For example, the Freneh left out that "the King ruled by the grace of Goat" also that ldasphemy in England, "that all power was front the people"—sheer blasphemy, as all power is from God, and the duty of men is to submit and to obey! " 1.et every soul be subject unto the higher powers, for there is no power but of God; the powers that he are ordained of God. " Whew:wet, therefore, resisteth the lamer, resisteth the ordiaanee of God ; and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

1,1•r rulers are not a terror to geed {Yorks, but to the evil ; wilt thou then not be afraid of Litc power ? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same. " For he is the Minister of God to thee fee good : but if thou do that which is evil, be afraid : n la• betreth not the sword in vain : for he is the Minister of God, a revenger to exr,nit.• wroth upon him that Booth evil" See wine is eoing on in France and England. It is blasphemy to attribute power to the tesq,l.•. lie defied the Noble, Lord to point out a word in the Bible—that power was frooi I 'a. -enople; that slavish bowing to public opinion had robbed the noble Lord of all hi: henesty and manhotxl. In the Councils of the nation there were slaves to that 1,1,,,pikerny—but power was only firma God. He was aware he was speaking loud and with warmth, but not with violence; he was sincere, and was urging these truths in his n:aal way, when he was trader an influence. The motion belonged to each mem- ber individtailv. a, every man had twit baptized in the name of the Father, Sou, and loly ;host , and coned out disobey the precepts and laws of their God. They might disregard he laws—fat her and hrother, but would they refuse the precepts of God? " I was Ieh en up," said the Ito:lomat de member," on the death of my thither, by the station, which .thtiadantly ;del for me and mine; and i: is in gratitude for that kindness that l call on the Ilea,. I o address the er.avn to issie a Prorlatuat but for a 111-,■. It has been don., hefort• by Poi liament, and I do not admit the oh jection that this plaee is not a lit and proper place. Are we ma etto:en to mart anti advise what, as Christians, we ought to advise for the good of tile too. ion? ,\r, we to leave all religion at the door of the I tense, and listen lu Iln• wilrs id Basal? No. I stair 1 it last year, and I will re- peat the eharader of irlideliLy that pervad, the rad:, wind, At that time there was thin blamhenems proposition to admit Iii' Jew into this flutist,. If our Saviour was raised, mid is now in Heaven, at the head of his Churtb, sue we to admit a Jew to our The EdiaLinfii the fifth sign 4:f the infidelity- of the times, defended that. Man is a it:el in his he: t,. and sayetit t hote things. It was enor- mous that this body of Christians shonld Say, We are not inclined to consider of God's groat ra•ss and cm•rey; if SO ungodly as to eetermia the question, what a state was lit,. intim' in ? The bent of the human mind is now to set aside kings and priest:, and to se: np the people as the sovereigns; and I would call on the nation to humiliate themselves, and avert such evils. Let the kings and priests he expelled, and all such mummery be averted, unless you will listen to my voice lbr a fiett and humelation. If you agree, I will request the House of Lords also to suppliente for a fast, :old we all shall thou be bound up together in one solemn act. his would not withdraw his motion, as he did last year; he would not give way, but di, it,' the House. If, would three the Hoes,' of Commons to declare whether they would bend their knee 1,, their I hxl. If they would not, the nation should know their refusal. Ile would live Ile. whole nation, the Lords, and Commons, to join in the net of humiliation': The Ministors had not done it—the House of Commons had put it aside. But by that anoint;a1 name by which he acted, be wooed appeal to them, and it must be done. Moving the previous question would not do; the House must reject the motion. "If you do, all Europe would see (said the honourable member) that ye reject your Ged's :et t lenity. You cannot escape this charge. By the name, and bv the blood of that Savhair. I implore you to support this motion." He had been Uhl torment-, that in this bialdiemous and unhallowed athtesphere he ought not to have used tliat name. " But it is in that blessed name—the name of that living God. and Saviour, who now sees you and is amongst you—that I alone appeal and act. Christian men should love to see him call on the name of him in whose name von were baptized. Cast not off the reverence due to that name; beware of that infidelity that is creeping on you on both sides of the House, and depriving you of your manhood; for the safety of your own souls I- call on you to honour that name. I have done my duty to avert the evils that are coming on Christendom, preceded by the pestilence. Beware of the wrath that went forth on the plain against Sodom and Gomorrah—and those are a type of the judgment that is fast coming upon Christendom. My cry is, that God's 'mercy may be on its if we humble ourselves. Let all the people praise and sing for joy, and the desolating force of God shall pass by." The honourable member concluded by moving, that an humble Address be presented to the King, to order a day for a general fast and humiliation.

After a pause, Mr. J. WEYLAND seconded the motion. Lord AvraortP advised that it should be withdrawn, on the under standing that his Majesty would order a fast in the usual way.

Mr. PERCEVAL, with apparent reluctance, agreed to this : he would consent, he said, not to divide the House, because; seeing the majo- rity must be against him, he was " unwilling. to force the House to an act which would certainly bring down the judgment of God on the country." 8. EAST INDIA CHARTER. A committee was moved last night, pre- paratory to the discussions which must take place next Session on the renewal of the East India Company's Charter. Mr. GRANT stated the manner in which he was of opinion it ought to proceed in its labours.

In the Bad India House and in the- Board of Control, the business was divided into six depntments, each division having its separate functionaries. He proposed, therefore, that there should be at least six sub-committees, each taking one of these departments But it would be also necessary that there should be other subdivisions, and be thought that as many ns eight sub-committees would be necessary. This prac- tice was not new to the House, though it was seldom proposed. Sub-committees were generally taken for some specific purpose, and they afterwards returned to the general committee. Bat in this ease, each subject required constant and assiduous attention, and each muft be confined to one sub committee. Therefore, he should propose that there should be sew xi or eight sub-committees, and that they should meet at least four days it week. As it was necessary to provide for the unavoidable absence of members, aril as a sufficient n•unber of members, at least five or six, would be necessary in each sulseom- mittee, it wit; necessary to propose a numerous committee, and he should propose forty-eight or forty-nine.

9. PoLurtenr. Usroxs. Lord Londonderry expressed in the House- of Lords, on Thursday, his surprise that addresses were received from Political Unions ; which he said had been declared illegal in the Royal Speech. Lord Melbourne, in answer, observed, that a body of men were not illegal because they called themselves a anion, or because that union was political. The Speech referred only to certain species of Unions. This is a settlement of the question by authority.

10. Tim PERTHSHIRE PETITION. Lord LYNEDOCH presented the great Perthshire petition on Thursday night. In doing so, he noticed the Anti-Reform petition, which he understood had been carried from house to house, and signed by many under the impression that it was a petition for Reform.

The Earl of MANSFIELD remarked on some inflammatory language which he said had been made use of at the meeting. A freeholder of the county, he understood, had proposed to callon their Lordships to cut off " that wen the Bench of Bishops, which hung about their necks."

Lord LYNEDOCH said he did not hear the expression alluded to at the meeting, nor did he believe it was made use of. As a proof, however, how strong the opinions of the people of Perth were on the subject of Reform, he might mention, that on its being rumoured that the Duke of Wellin,4ton and the Marquis of Londonderry bad been killed by a London :nob, some of the inhabitants actually advised an illumination.

The Kel of Etoox thought there was a necessity for looking well to the Reformers. Those of Scotland were, it seems, disappointed that two ilolemen were not murdered; and those of Manchester ad- vised Ministers, instead of executing the persons found guilty at Bristol of the most enormous crimes, to hang Sir Charles Wetherell and the Twelve Judges.

11. SLAVE TREATY WITH FRANCE. Lord ELLENBOROUGH made a long speech on Tuesday night on the subject of this treaty. His objections to it mey he summed up in a few words,—first, it is not so extensive in its provisions as the treaties previously entered into with other powers; second, it contains conditions on which, should France feel inclined, she-may altogether defeat its object. • The Earl of ABERDEEN made another objection,—namely, that there WitS not an English as well as a French treaty. The English treaty, it appeared, was only a translation, not an original treaty.

Eerl Gm:v defended the treaty as it stood, on the grounds, that, front the jeelousy entertained by France on the right of search, it was the best that could be got; and it would, he believed, on the whole contribute much to the suppression of the slave-trade. With respect to Lord Aberdeen's formai objection, he said he would inquire into the cause of it.

Tire VArnms: On the motion of Sir R. H. Neils, seconded

br An.. 0' ( !oNNi• , a copy of the treaty by which 1] ;:eland stands I:lodged to afford protection to the Protestants of the Vaudois (the Wahl, n:cs zof ecclesiastical history) was agreed to be laid on the table. Sir It (;:nEter wished also for copies of all correspondeace between Eng- land and the King of Sardinia on the subject of the treaty ; but did not pre,s this part of his motion, on Lord PALMERSTON'S representing that the correspondence was very voluminous.