The most important occurrence in Parliament last night was a con- versation that took place in the House of Lords, on the Montpensier cor- respondence. The Earl of ABERDEEN wished to know if any answer had been received to the last despatch of Lord Palmerston, in reference to the Spanish marriage; and if so, whether it would be laid upon the table in ad- dition to the correspondence already produced?
"It appears to me but reasonable, my Lords, that as this correspondence com- menced with a letter from this country, it should close with a reply from the other side of the water. I do not wish to give any opinion on the subject-matter of that correspondence, and I hope that the House may not be called upon to give any such opinion. ("Hear, !learn But, my Lords, I will venture to state, that I have a very strong belief that this House and the country both desire to see that correspondence come to a termination. ("Hear, hear! ) It must be manifest, from that portion of the correspondence which has been already produced, that it is now continued without any definite or practical object—("Hear, hear! "from Lord Brougham)—and that, if it be continued still further in the tone and tem- per which it has now assumed, it can only be apprehended that it may lead to the production of serious consequences."
The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, that the answer had been shown to Lord Palmerston that morning by M. de Jarnac, but until that evening he would not be in possession of a copy of it. Lord Lansdowne was as de- sirous as Lord Aberdeen that the correspondence should be brought to a termination; but he, of course, could not say whether the despatch referred to might or might not require an answer. One thing be would say, that Government had no wish to suppress or withdraw any one circumstance connected with the whole transaction.
Lord BROUGHAM made a few remarks, in which he commented on M. Gnizot's declaration that the marriage was " un fait accompli ": that was no apology for wrongdoing. But he could not help thinking that his ex- cellent and distinguished friend had been misreported. Lord LANSDOWNE hoped so too.
In the other House, replying to Mr. FINCH, Lord PALMERSTON said that he should lay a copy of M. Guizot's last letter on the table.
Mr. BARC.LAY asked for some further information respecting the issue of letters of marque in this country under the Mexican flag. Lord PALMER- STON replied, that since the subject, had been last mentioned, he had had a communication from General Mendoza, the Mexican Chargé d'Affaires, in which he was informed that there was no person in this country authorized to issue letters of marque under the Mexican flag. Under the Foreign En- listment Act, no armed vessel could be equipped in this country without the permission of the Crown; but it could not go forth that foreign sub- jects abroad engaging in such enterprises become amenable to laws as pirates.
The Distilling from Sugar Bill was read a second time, with some trifling opposition from Mr. FoRREs ManEENzaE. The Rum-duties Bill was post- poned till Monday.
Mr. FREDERICK DUNDAS and Mr. MACKINNON asked for some explana- tion respecting Government measures of relief for destitution in Scotland. Sir GEORGE GREY said that the Government did not contemplate establish-
ing any system of relief, with respect to the Islands and Western Highlands of Scotland, other than those now in existence. Under the Drainage Act, much employment had been obtained; depots for food had been established;
the Loan Commissioners had assisted those applying to them; grants had been made in a few instances to aid local subscriptions where the Scotch Poor-law was not sufficient for the emergency. Returns would be laid on the table immediately, showing all that had been done. Mr. Macxisaiox wished to know if seed would be supplied, as in the case of Ireland. Sir GEORGE GREY said, no application had been made for seed; but if there were such an application, it would be duly considered by Government.
In reply to Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN, Lord JOHN RUSSELL stated the order in which the Irish measures would be taken. On Monday night he would
first take the bill for rendering valid certain proceedings in Ireland under Mr. Labouchere's letter. That might lead to a general debate; and if so, it might occupy the whole evening. After the second reading of that bill, he would introduce the measure for giving temporary relief to the distressed people in Ireland; and then he would proceed with the permanent Poor- law Amendment Bill for Ireland.
The subject of the Irish pauperism that flows into Liverpool and Glasgow was alluded to in the House of Lords; where Earl Firzwurasst moved
for returns respecting the number of paupers landing in the Mersey and in the Clyde. The returns were ordered. Lord Fitzwilliam observed that the, Irish paupers would not remain in Liverpool, but would spread to the
other towns of England. Lord BROUGHAM stated some further particulars which had been furnished to him from Liverpool, showing the amount of claims upon relief made by Irish paupers— Between January 18 and January 26 inclusive, the acts of relief amounted to 173,513. Not that there were so many persons relieved, because one person might be relieved, perhaps, two or three times. The number of rations a day was 2,500; the number of soup-tickets 7,800. The increase in out-door relief since the cor- responding period of last year was 4081., of which increased expenditure, 3781., or
19-20ths of the whole, was rendered necessary by the large numbers of Irish poor. The increase in the payments to the resident poor of Liverpool was only 22/ a week above the corresponding period of last year.
At the time of private business in the House of Commons, Mr. GREENE moved an instruction to the Committee of Selection, not to appoint the sit- ting of any Committee on local improvements bean* the let of March next; his object being to allow time for dealing with the general bills on the sub- ject which are now in course of preparation. Agreed to
Both Houses adjourned, at an early hour, till Monday.