Elrbatesi antr Prorraingg in Parliament.

1. Iman TITHES.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, the order of the day for go. ing into Committee on the Irish Tithe Bill having been read, Mr. LITTLETON rose to explain some alterations which Government had thought it advisable to make in the bill, in order to induce the tithe-payers to submit to a voluntary rent-charge in lieu of tithes on their estates. There was a strong objection to submit to a compulsory rent-charge without the power of redemption, which the recently. omitted clauses of the bill gave to the Irish landlords. It was there- fore intended to offer such advantages as would induce them voluntarily to agree to a rent-charge, in lieu of the land-tax to be substituted for the tithes. Such landlords who declared their intention to submit to the rent-charge previously to the 1st November 1836, would be em- powered to effect the arrangement on the following terms. It was proposed that the amount of the renL. charge should be determined by the relative number of years' purchase fairly applicable to the land from which the land-tax should arise. It was proposed that the estate should be liable to a rent-charge which should be a sum equal to the interest at ai per cent. on the amount of the land-tax multiplied by four-fifths of the number of years' pur- chase which the land might be fairly worth. He thought that the landowners should be subject to no greater interest than 34 per cent, on the amount of the land-tax thus determined by the proportion of years' purchase of the land ; but that the difference (constituting the bonus to the landlords) between the amount of the rent-charge and the amount of the land-tax should not be less than 20 per cent, or more than 40 per cent, on the amount of such land-tax. This would afford a considerable bonus to the landowners. It was proposed that the amount of the compositions should be paid by warrant, as originally proposed to the tithe-owners, subject to a deduction of 2211 per cent. on the amount of SCI much as might be thus converted into rent. charge. But as the amount allowed to the landlords would be greater than the deduction from the payments to the tithe-owners, it would be neces- sary to find some way of making good the deficiency. It was therefore proposed, that in the first instance the Consolidated Fund should be chargeable with the amount of this deficit, which should be made good out of it. But the question would arise, in what manner was this charge on the Consolidated Fund to be made up ? for perhaps it would be too much to expect the State to incur so large an amount of charge, though Parliament and the country might think it well worth their while to make an ample pecuniary sacrifice with a view to the peace and tranquillity of Ireland, which never could be purchased without a satisfactory arrangement of the tithe question. On a full and calm consideration of all the difficulties of the case, Government came to a determination to recommend to Parliament to apply the amount of the per- petuity purchase fund in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, under the 3d and 4th William IV. chap. 37, for the purpose of indemnifying the Con.

colidated Fund for so much of the loss or deficit as Omen arise in the fund ap- plicable to the payment of compositions for tithes due to ecclesiaetiral persons. After providing for the payment of the expenses for which the vestry eess was formerly levied, and certain other charges on the fund arising from the income of suppressed bishoprics, and the sale of bishops lands,

there would be a balance of about 67,000/. per annum, which he in- tended to apply towards making good the deficit in the Consolidated

Fund. It was not intended to allow any landlord, whether incurring a voluntary rent charge (in which case he received the bonus), or becom. ing liable to a compulsory rent-charge, to levy more from his tenants

than the amount of what be himself actually paid. He hoped that, after cool and calm consideration, the people of Ireland would be satis- fied with the plan deliberately adopted by Government. Mr. Littleton concluded by moving that the Speaker leave the chair.

Mr. SHAW said, it was extremely difficult to comprehend this corn • plicated plan. Was it intended in any case to make the rent-charge compulsory?

Mr. LITTLETON replied, that

. . . . rent-charges might be voluntarily incurred before the 1st of Novem- ber 1S:143; and at the end of a period of five years—namely, on tl.e 1st of No. vember 1830—in all cases where a rent-charge of the amount already stated should not have been created, then a rent-oharge equal to four-fifths of the land-tax should be compulsorily imposed and become payable by the owner of the first estate of inheritance.

Mr. O'CONNELL asked, in reference to Mr. Littleton's hope that " after cool and calm consideration his plan would be approved of," what time is afforded for calm and cool consideration ?* Was it right to ask the I-louse to go into Committee on a totally different bill from that which had been read a first and second time?

This bill had been printed months ago, but it was so altered as to he now no longer the same measure. And now, after altering the bill over and over again, and printing eight additional clauses not originally contained in it, a fresh state- ment was made introducing entirely new matter, not thought of before. He conjectured he understood Mr. Littleton's statement, because he was familiar with the subject ; but he did not feel at all sure of the matter, for the state- ment was hurried and complicated ; but he (lid not hesitate to say, that it was quite impossible for nine-tenths of the Members of the Horse to understand the bill, on which they were asked to go into Committee. Was this cool aud deli- berate legislation? Mr. Littleton's statement could have conveyed no know- ledge of the Government plan to the majority of his auditors. The clauses should be printed, that Members might see what they were, to understand them, and to compare one part of the bill with another. Ile hoped there would be no objection to postpone for a little time the proceedings on the measure. One of the strongest arguments for postponement consisted in the nature of the pro- posed amendments. Was there any objection to print this new projet before discussing the question further?

Mr. LITTLETON said, that it was unnecessary to postpone the Com- mittee; because no question could arise respecting the alterations till they came to the 1:12d clause of the bill; before which time, the new clauses would be printed, and sufficient time given for their considera- tion.

Mr. O'Cosseu. argued, that the new clauses effected substantial alterations, not merely in the details, but in the principle of the measure. Therefore delay was necessary.

With respect to this bill, Government pursued its usual weak and vacillating course ; at one time holding out some prospect ofjustice to the people, then offer- ing a bonus to the landlords, with a view to avoid doing justice to the people. Ministers wanted to screen themselves behind the prejudices, the passions, and, worse still, the interests of the landlords. He had never heard any thing more astonishing than this total alteration in the plan of the measure. lie wanted to know whether Ministers were ready to declare war against the people of Ireland in the most unmitigated shape ? He asked whether the English Parliament was ready to support a Ministry which did not understand its own measures, or continue to act for half an hoar consistently or upon its own responsibility? If British Members of Parliament thought it right to support Ministers in such proceedings as the present, let them do so, provided they had sufficient confi- dence in what might be, or chanced to be, the present Administration. Let English Members, however, support the bill deliberately ; let them understand the nature of this proclamation of war against the people of Ireland.

lie reminded the House of the plan he had proposed ; which was more satisfactory to the people of Ireland, and more liberal towards the Church, than the one proposed by Government. But even his plan was unpopular, because the people of Ireland demanded an entire abolition of tithes.

In the late debate on his motion respecting the appropriation of Church pro- perty in Ireland, it was remarkable to observe the different tones of the different members of the Cabinet who spoke on that occasion. There was not a greater variety of notes to be heard in "the music-shop over the way" (the Abbey) than were sounded on that occasion by the members of his Majesty's Cabinet, from the stout bass of the Secretary at War, down to the minor key and quaver of the Member for Cambridge. (Laughter.) The resolution which he pro- posed on that occasion was negatived ; and now they were called on to go into Committee without the slightest promise that the principle involved in that re- solution would be acted upon in this measure, or in any other.

He again called for delay. Members who had voted for the second reading of the bill had been tricked and deceived. The bill they sup- ported was not the bill before the House • which threw overboard the Jay impropriators and the clergy, for the salte of the landlords, who had always plundered Ireland. The King was to be the great tithe-owner, and he was to collect his dues by force of arms; but the project would miserably fail. He would ask the House, was it ready to do so? Was it ready to go along with the King's Government in declaring war against the people of Ireland for the collection of tithes ? He would appeal to those Members who stood forward for the support of the Established Church, to pause before they gave their vote for the Government on this occasion—to pause before they again by their vote retained a Ministry in office whom once or twice during the present session they had by their assistance kept there ? The 147th or appropriation clause had been thrown out of the bill of last session. But now, let the High Church Members in that House observe what the Government proposed to do. They proposed that the ecclesiastical revenues in Ireland should be collected in the shape of a land-tax, and paid over to the Consolidated Fund. Was not that a step towards the principle of the 147th clause? Why did not the Ministers speak out ? Why did they not proclaim the principles upon which they were determined to act? There should be no special pleading—no concealment on the subject.

The British treasury was to be burdened with the punctual payment of 430,000/. annually for five years, whether that sum was collected or not. If peace were purchased by this expenditure, the money would be well laid out. But inste .d of tranquillity, this measure would bring a I tempest. Would half or a whole million be enough to pay the army I that must be employed to collect tithes ? It would not be sufficient.

I If they passed this bill, they would introduce all the misery of civil war ia Ireland. The war generated by tithes had been going on there for seventy-four years ; but it would become worse, infinitely worse, if such a bill as this should be passed. If they passed such a measure now, he and others, who were anxious to preserve vested rights at present, would not be able to do so next year The object of the Government now was to put the landlords between them and the tithes. But when the people found that tithes were exacted from them in the shape of rent, would not they who had opposed tithes then also oppose them- selves to the collection of rents? In the year lO, tithes as well as land were for sale in the various markets in Ireland ; and while land sold in different coun. ties at twenty years' purchase, tithes were sold at twelve years' purchase. This bill raised them to sixteen years' purchase; and it went therefore to raise the value of tithes in Ireland one-fourth. Was that the way in which they proposed to give relief to Ireland ?

.Again he demanded postponement till next session. Let 300,000/. be advanced to the tithe-owners to keep the country quiet, till Parlia- ment met again. The advice of Irish Members was disregarded as the idle wind. He called upon Ministers to pause. lie would oppose this bill in all its stages ; and he now moved that the House should go into Committee upon it that day six months.

Mr. T. ATTWOOD seconded the motion.

Lord CLEMENTS gave Ministers credit for good intentions, and thought that they should be allowed to go on and settle this question in their own way this session ; though he himself approved of Mr. O'Con- nell's plan, which was a remarkably good one.

Mr. LITTLETON defended die conduct of Ministers ; who had con- sulted many Irish Members, and exerted themselves honestly to make a satisfactory settlement of this most difficult subject. He again pressed the House to go into Committee.

Mr. STANI.EY observed, that it was admitted by Government that the bill was very different from what it was when first introduced. There- fore delay was necessary ; and on this account he should be compelled to vote with Mr. O'Connell ; though he had never expected to see the day when they should be voting together. The alterations now pro- posed were not omissions, but the insertion of new clauses, certainly not part or parcel of the original bill.

It was not easy to follow Mr. Littleton in the proposal he hail expressed with referense to this most difficult and complicated question ; but he had urdorstood him to suggest, that it would be very desirable that the landlords should take upon themselves the rent-charge for the period of five years. During this time, an inducement was held out to them to take upon themselves the burden. Formerly 15 per cent. had hem lick! out as an inducement, but now that did not appear a sufficient boon, and therefore it was now said that t.10 to 40 per cent. was suggested. This was most undoubtedly a monstrous bonus to be en- forced by a most summary proceeding. If the landlords did not complain on being thus made responsible, the people of England had a right to complain; and if the people of England, also the Church of Ireland, was justified in rais- ing the voice of complaint. After much discussion and great deliberation, this House had, under the expected difference of opinion with another branch of the Legislature, abandoned the principle of converting to the State that very pro- perty which Mr. Littleton now called upon the House to take. The Consoli- dated Fund could not afford the necessary supply consequent upon the adoption of this proposition ; and therefore the State must be at a loss, and the remedy for .bat loss was such an appropriation as the House had already discarded. On these -ry grounds, the 147th clause of the bill of last year had been abandoned. On the oiscussion which ensued upon that clause, the doctrine of appropriation of Church property to State purposes was repudiated by the House, and that of its non-interference in this respect was established.

He thought it would be more decent, in the existing state of the question, for Ministers at least to grant delay.

Lord ALTHORP contended, that the House might be reasonably called upon to discuss the other clauses of the bill, though the new ones might be postponed. The plan itself, as contained in these new clauses, was equitable.

It had been said that the proposition of Mr. Littleton would in effect be merely a boon to the landlords. This he denied ; and, on the contrary, was prepared to contend that the landlords only obtained an equivalent for that which was taken from them. Neither could he believe there would be such a deficiency as 100,000/. per annum (the amount he had utak, • oil the Member for Dublin to state) between the amount of the rent-charge ,ceived by the State and the sum paid to the clergy. He admitted that, in taus applying the perpetuity fund, the Government scent back to the principle contained in the 147th clause of the bill of last year : but the difference was this—that accord- ing to the Church Temporalities Bill, the perpetuity fund was to be applied to State purposes; while by the present measure it was to be applied to increasing the security of the revenues of the Church, as an inducement to the landlords to take upon themselves the rent.charges, the effect of which would be greatly to facilitate the collection of the impost, and secure the safety of those who were to receive it. He did not think Mr. Stanley would vote for the actual rejection of this bill, though he had said thatit was the duty of the Government to protect property.

Mr. OTERRALE was in favour of the bill, with the new clauses. Mr. O'Cososeta. said, all he asked for was delay. He wished the bill to be printed, that it might be examined as a whole, and the bear-

ing of one clause upon another be seen. Mr. LirmeroN was anxious that, at all events, the bill should be committed pro forma. Mr. SHAW said, that, in the first place, the new clauses should be printed. Without them the bill was little more than a piece of ma- chinery. The Government had, by the course they had pursued, got themselves into a difficulty from which they would be very glad to escape. The course now pur- sued was only one of expediency; and he for one was not willing that by any side wind his Majesty's Ministers should he enabled to get out of the difficulty in which they had placed themselves. At all events, the House had a right to see the complete measure upon which it was called upon to deliberate.

Mr. LITTLETON finally consented not to press his motion. Ile hoped that on Friday the bill would be printed, and that the House would go into Committee on that day.

The order of the day for going into Committee on the bill was then postponed till Friday.

Last night the House resolved itself into a Committee on the Church Temporalities Bill, on the motion of Mr. LITTLETON; who proposed to insert a resolution, preparatory to going into Committee on the Irish Tithe Bill,—this resolution being necessary in order to enable him to

carry his proposed alteration in that bill into effect. He went into some explanations of his plan; and read a table, from which it appeared, that where land was valued at twenty-eight years' purchase, the bonus to the tithe-payers, who took upon themselves the rent-charge voluntarily, would be 2l per cent.—where the land was valued at twenty-five years' purchase, the bonus would be 30 per cent.—and where twenty years' purchase was the value, the tithe-payer would haven bonus of 44 per cent. Mr. Hems: moved an amendment, which would have the effect of restcring the famous 147th clause of the Irish Church Temporalities Bill : it would render the surplus of the funds in the hands of the Commissioners under that act applicable to make good the deficiency in the payments to lay irnpropriators, as well as clerical, and thus relieve the Consolidated Fund from the charge about to be imposed on it. This amendment was rejected, by a majority of 354 to 71; and then the House divided on the following resolution proposed by Mr.

LITTLETON.

" That it was the opinion of the Committee, that for any defivit that might arise in the sums limning to the Commissioners of his Majesty's Wools and Forests out or the laud tax or rent charges payable for the composition of ecelesiast lent tithes in Ireland, for the payment of which the Consolidated Finul was rendered liable. Hie Cense,- :Mated Filiel should be indemnified by the revenue., at the dkposal of the Ecelesiast I. eat (',.ramissioners in Ireland, and out uif the Perpetuity Porch:eau. Fund plaeed it their disposal by the act of last session, entitled the Irish Church Temporalities Bill "

For this resolution, 235; against it, 171 ; Ministerial majority, 64. A very long debate preceded these divisions. The speakers did not very strictly confine themselves to the questions involved in the reso- lutions, but indulged in remarks on the general conduct of Go- vernment.

Mr. STANLEY distinguished himself by an exceedingly acrimonious speech against his former colleagues. He corn lained of their havin

tit tic e emption-c auses, on w nc 1 r. itt eton imse bad in

so much stress, were now struck out of the bill. Ministers had adopted a system of plunder ; not of avowed, open robbery, for 111r. 1.irrle4on wog ernid. shu • ie. and cunnine in his s 'stem of plunder. His

• 1 1 1 •

spelt at country ang. le jugg ers as e tic spectators to ta e any tab e

they chose—this table or that table; but whichever they chose, the re- ault was the same—they were cheated out of their money. To speak more seriously, he considered the plan as a piece of injustice and bud policy, in all its parts. He maintained that from the bill it was impos- sible to say whether the landlords were or were not after all to have the power of redemption, as well as the bonus of 40 per cent. The Con- solidated Fund, too, was to be charged with 125,000/. a year, which it could not afford to make a present of to the Irish landlords. What did Ministers intend to do? Every thing relating to the Church question was contingent and unsettled. eir ',resent plan was a mere petty Itircenv project; and no one could tell what they intended to do with the surplus which their famous Commission might find to exist. Ile called upon Ministers, if they wished to avoid acrimony, bloodshed, and murder, t ' I their miserable abortion of a 'mninis ' - which had been begotten, conceived, and broirght to light in the course of a week, and sent into the world in so hideous a shape that the dogs must bark at it. He would most certainly divide the Committee against Mr. Littleton's resolution.

Lord A LTHORe parried these blows. ( Ile was not at all surprised at the cheering with whieh the speech of his right lio- incurable friend was received; for when he was a NI iuister, though he always admired big speeches, Ile often thought that if ever lie became an Opposition speaker he would be still more el non (Cheers and lanyhter ) Ile had made an excellent Opposition • 1, 1 le-rig, plunder. and robbery. bore a conspicuous part Mr. Stanley haul mentioned his own measures when Secretary for Ireland. Lord Althorp bad no doubt they were well-intended, but untbrtunately they were too late ; and he was very sorry that he could not congratulate him on their success. (Cheers.)

Lord Althorp went on to argue, that it was the duty of Government to adopt other plans, seeing that Mr. Stanley's projects had been miserable failures.

Mr. HUME remarked strongly upon the conduct of Lord Plunkett, in continuing his connexion with a Ministry which now avowed a prin- ciple formerly denounced by that noble Lord as one of spoliation and robbery.

Mr. O'CONNELL commented sarcastically on the conduct of Mr. Stanley, the failure of his own measures, and his present position. He also assured Mr. Hume, that there was no danger of Lord Plunkett's retirement; he and his young " Hatmibals " would keep fast hold of their fifty-five offices. He again reproached Ministers with rejecting Mr. Ward's plan of Irish Church Reform.

Mr. Isesuos: denied that the new tithe project would give peace to Ireland or strength to the Establishment.

Mr. LAMBERT was at first disinclined to support Ministers; but the unnatural allianc“if Mr. Stanley with the Tories had determined him to alter his line of conduct and vote with them.

Mr. Straw said, Ministers did nothing but shuffle. They talked, and talked about their principles ; but, for some private reasons, they were afraid to act upon them. Nothing but shuffling.

Mr. SHEIL asked Ministers, if they were not roused to act like men isy the contemptuous jeering of Mr. Stanley and Mr. Shaw ? It was amusing to observe Sir James Graham sitting close beside Mr. Stan- ky in interesting juxtaposition—two brothers in resignation—Sir James sodding assent to all that fell from Mr. Stanley, but not saying a word himself. He charged Mr. Stanley with gross inconsistency and want ef foresight, in supporting Parliamentary Reform, the abolition of Church-rates, the suppression of bishoprics, &c. ; and now stopping short, as if Reform could stop short.

Sir lloarsr PEEL said, Ministers in all their difficulties resorted to the mean, vulgar expedient, of putting their hands into the public purse ; a course, in all times and countries, symptomatic of weakness and decay. He dwelt at great length upon their inconsistency in aban- doning the principle of redemption ; and asserted his entire belief, that sotwithstanding all their boasted unanimity, the Government was still a divided one. They were only united in one thing—they would do any thing, say any thing, to get through the session. He asked why Lord Broughatn was in their travelling commission, and Lord Plunkett was out? Lord Wellesley, Lord Plunkett, and Mr. Littleton, all stood pledged to different opinions on the subject of the Irish Church.

/teeing the ambiguous policy that WU pursued—tho devious sad rivor-varying path that was taken—that at the very moment be was speaking, them was no such thing as an tooted Government in the country—that the Cabinet Wits, in fact, a double-minded one. unstable, unequal to the rigorous execution of the functions of office—Sir Robert would consent to no such proposition as the one which had been submitted, the ultimate consequence of which Ministers themselves were totally inwlequaie to comprehend.

Lord Jowl RUSSELL repeated the arguments of Lord Althorp and Mr. Littleton in defence of the Tithe Bill ; and asserted distinctly, that the Cabinet was unanimous on the subject of the Irish Church.

Mr. ELLICE and Mr. LITTLETON also defended the conduct of Government. 111r. LIT TLETON said that Mr. Stanley's ever shifting schemes for settling the Tithe question proved him to be the greatest performer of legerdemain.

2. RENEWAL OE THE COERCION ACT.

. Earl GREY, on Tuesday, moved that the bill for renewing the Coer- cion Act for one year—that is from the 1st of August 1804 to the 1st of August 1835—should be read a first time. He supported his moi ion in a long speech, full of details, figure statements, and extracts from letters; which, however, lie read in so low a tone of voice and with such rapidity, that the reporters had much difficulty in attempting to follow hun. He began by stating the pain it gave him to be again under the necessity of seeking the concurrence of Parliament to so severe and extraordinary a measure. That measure, however, had been productive of good effects : and he read some returns relative to the decrease of crime in Kilkenny, King's County, Westmeath, and Gal- way, which had partly been placed under the provisions of theCoercion Act. In Kilkenny, the number of outrages in the year ending 31st of March 1833 had been 1550 ; and in the year ending 81st March 1834, during nearly the whole of which it was under the Ccereion Act, the number of outrages was only 331. A very great reduction in the amount of crime had likewise been the consequence of the measure in the other districts to which it had been applied. The neces- sity for reLewing the act was, however, undoubted ; and he read a number of letters and returns from the Inspectors of Police in the four Irish provinces in proof of the necessity. It appeared that the number of crimes of all descriptions, officially re- ported in Ireland, from the 1st January to the 31st May 1834, was 7869; and of these 3296 were assaults connected with Ribonisin. Those of an insurrectionary character amounted to 1953. In the province of Leinster, more than one half the crimes are of that description ; while in the other three provinces, the proportion of such offences to the whole is very small. On the whole, there has been a decrease of 79 in the number of offences committed throughout Ireland during the first five months of the present as compared with the first five months of last year; but this decrease is altogether in Leinster. In the other provinces, there has been an increase of 603 in Ulster, 424 in Munster, and 200 in Connaught. The decrease in Leinster is 1306. Earl Grey was happy to announce, that one part of the act, which had encountered more opposition than any other, be meant the Court-martial clause, would not be renewed. It was the opinion of the English and Irish Attornies- General, that the Quarter-sessions could, without any special enactment, take cognizance of the offences which might be committed against the act. He then alluded to the connexion which, he main- tained, existed between prwdial and political agitation, and to the neces- sity of enabling the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland to put down dangerous societies and meetings. This power bad been leniently exercised ; as was proved by the fact of meetings having been permitted which were held for the purpose of petitioning in favour of the repeal of the Union. He was sorry that be could not hold out the expectation that the state of Ireland would soon become such as to render the continuance of this measure unnecessary. After a few remarks from Lord WICKLOW,—who expressed his ap- probation of the measure, and of Earl Grey's manly conduct in again bringing it forward,—the bill was read a first time, and ordered to a se- cond reading on Friday. In the House of Commons, on Wednesday, Mr. O'CONNELL said, lie had been informed that the bill, in the shape in which it haul been pre- sented to the house of Lords, was not approved by the Irish Government : on the contrary, he had heard that the Irish Government objected to the reenact- ment of the measure as it was proposed to renew it ; and for this reason he gave notice, that he would also move far copies of all correspondence between the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland and the British Government.

Mr. SHEIL also said, that be was told that the Marquis of Clanricarde, Lord-Lieutenant of Galway objected to the renewal of the bill.

A dispute arose in the House of Commons on Thursday, between Mr. Littleton and Mr. O'Connell, relative to the conduct of the former, as Irish Secretary, in supporting this bill, and also with respect to an imputed breach of confidence on the part of Mr. O'Connell in reveal- ing the terms of a conversation be held with Mr. Littleton at the Irish Office, on the same subject.

Mr. O'CONNELL commenced by asking Mr. Littleton, whether the statement published in the newspapers was true, that the renewalot the Coercion Bill, in its present shape, was called for by the Irish Government—that is, by Lord Wellesley and Mr. Littleson ? Mr. LITTLETON said, that although it was not a matter of course that he should reply to a question which referred to a bill not before. the House, yet he had no difficulty in saying, that the introduction ot the bill had the entire sanction of the Irish Government. .

Mr. O'CoNNELL—" That is not an answer, nor any thing like an answer to my question; which was, whether the bill had been called for, or directed by the Irish Government ?" Mr. LirrLErots—" I can give no other answer."

Mr. O'CONNELL—" That is an exceedingly safe course. I will further inquire whether the Secretary for Ireland will bring forward the measure here?" Mr. LITTLETON—" That is still a matter for consideration. It will certainly be introduced by some member of the Government." Mr. O'CONNELI.—" Then I can only say, that the right honourable gentleman has exceedingly deceived me."

Mr. LrrreErou then said, that Mr. O'Connell bad rendered it abso- lutely necessary for him to trespass for a short time on the attention of the House ; and he proceeded to speak as follows.

" Although called upon unexpectedly. I do it with most eatin, confidence, that what- ever political fettling may divide the different parts of the House, Members will be actuated hz the feelings of gentlemen and sentiments of honour ; and therefore that

the House ti at all times, and undo all ciretuastatioss, a safe tribunal for any man, Id

hint be connected with what party he may. I need hardly tell the House what are the facts to which the lemourable and learned gentleman alludes : I have a plain unvarnished tale to tutfold, mei the result, as Mr as I am eoncerned, may he, that I shall be accused of gro,s: indiscretion. What may be the result as regards the conduct atul character of others, will be nor the House to judge. Members are aware. that frequent applications were made by questions here. for the purpose of elieit tug a premature 111.0as:ditto re- specting the renewal of the Coerciou Bill. As no satisfactory reply was given in this place, means elle taken to obtain the informal hat elsewhere. I ant at liberty to state, that the decided intention tif the Government at that time w.ts to renew: the Coercion Bill, with cutain limitations ; and I may a,1.1, that tip to within a short time of the period whoa the measure introduced in the other I Ioase. the Government, thinking It uaght to have as lung a retrospect as possible, hail not vorne to a decision upon the ttrecise e:.tent of the reenactment. acten pet. It was reeiNed that it was the intention a the

I and learned Member for Dublin to nut a violent course upon this subject, under the excitement of hia feelings. Standing as I do in connexitm with tlw Irish Gove:nment. I pay him no compliment when I in the avowal, that I felt his conduct upon the subject a matter of daep intereat in a public point of view. I also felt that it wind. I be an act or some kit:dues. tew a obi him to cautiou him as to the course he ap: reared disposed to take, and to beg and implore or him not to IIIO ulge those feelings which ;equated his mitni. Acaordinet . eons Olin.. ith friends in whose judgment

711111 Ili-erction I am e out ra confide. I on :in authority I considered stillieitee, ask for an opportunity of e1111111111/11e,ting to it It the henourable and learned geetleinau. to,I thii.,S1017 11111)11411 a vontasoi :old soma hours after my wish had reached hint. Im came to the Irish (Olive, where I than was. Immediately he entered 11:e vine... I told hint that the bet oeration I had to give was such as I conceived would afford hint pleasure. I cautioned him that w It I had to state must necessarily be of a mod secret ittrl confidential eat me. I imposed upon him the seal and injimetion of the utmost s give 110.11011‘e to add, he received and aeknowledged. If he did not, it w otild be better that lw sheubl now contradict me before I go further."

Mr. O'CONNEI.1.—" I mean to answer the right honourable gentle- men \ellen he has concluded : he has said mach already that I must

contradict."

Mr. LrrusToN continued.

" Under this Mime:thou, I stated to hint my regret, that I observed, in bia letter to the people of Wesnott, suell a disposition to pursue a violent COW'S... I k11CW I Iii in C(111VV7117.111:0 that I.:laid result from the exereise of his influence; and therefore I thought I was adopting a mndent mode of proeeediug. I 111) telt know that I said this to hint. but I certainly acted nutlet that conviction. I told hint, however,that be having fre- quently applied to me to learn whether the Coercion Act was or was not to he renewed; und I bovine inhumed him ton previous OCCaSi01114 that tin deCiSiOU 11a11 been come to on the pant, I thought it but fair and honourable to caution and to tell him, that I knew he rettewal bad been decided upon, and that the limitat lett' not yet been &tenni lit.). I probably also mentioned the day on which tha decision had taken place ; and I 11177 17171111111(.1111111. for the just illeat ion of my au ti cha raeter —which is supt.rtor bite...7y Ater consideration, although I may thereby incur tlw eharge of iniliscretion—that I said I entertain. d the strongest feeling or aversion Ii, tlw renewal of that part of the I.ill which prohibited meetings, mei that I did nat thi :k those clauses would be renew ,al. 1 believe that I may have used even a strouger plira,e; but the 110117111 Will reel all lite delicacy ;old embarrassment of the situation in which I ant placed. (Cheers.) There is much eteinected ii it i the ease which I :LIU by the duty I owe to my office not to ilk:dee. I expressed my sttougest eonvictien as an individual. that that portion of the bill e ouhil not be continued; but 1 tout him that be should receive the earliest comtannieat ion of the dCtiSi llll of Goveanment upon the point. In the COUtS1, or a few days. I heard remours, about the lioness nud elsewhere, whieh made it impossible fot me not to believe that the honourable :mil learned Member had divulged to others my private communication to him. I, however, said malting. I merely resolved that 1 it mild hold no further intercourse of the kind it it hi him."

As S0011 as the measure was resolved upon, Mr. Littleton consulted the friend he had before spoken to on the subject ; and it was resolved to communicate the intentions of Government to Mr. O'Connell with- out delay ; although he knew that it would be most desirable to have 31r. O'Connell's assistance in the discussion on the Irish 'lithe Bill, which was to come on that evening. Not content with having com- missioned his friend to inform Mr. O'Connell, he %vent across the House, and a-ked if he had seen the individual alluded to; and Mr. O'Connell said he bad.

" iIiiggiil of him (said Mr. Littleton), whatever might be his feelings or opinions, to refrain from the expression of them until a more public a nnouneement of the inten- tion of Ministers had been M/1410 117 the other llouse. This is the statement I have to make; :ma I 11WII that the conduct of the honourable and learned Member has satisfied me. aml perhaps it may satisfy the !louse. that I cummitted an act ofgross indiscretion in the communication I made to him. I know not on what ground or in what manlier he may justify his disregard of the solemn engagement into which he entered to con- sider what I said entirely confidential : that is a point of much importance. I am not conscious of having misstated, or inaccurately stated, any of the circumstances ; and I repeat, that I was animated by a double desire—first, to discharge a public duty in the situation I occupied ; rind secondly, of kindness towards him. to prevent Lis prematurely taking it course Ile might hilVe reason to repent, and which the Government might regret, on account of the injury it needlessly inflicted upon his country. My hopes and wishes were cruelly disappointed ; and what has passed has convinced me, tha, on public mat. tern, it is unsafe to comminsicate with the honourable and learned Member, excepting across this table." (Meets.) M. O'CONNELL then spoke as follows.

" The course the right honourable gentleman intends to pursue with reganl to me is quite site'; for hereafter it will be impossible for me to confide in any thing he may sits. the has been exceedingly cautious as to dales, and very prudent ill suppressing a great deal of what occerred. I will nut involve the names of others in lids dhetgrevable discussion: whatever he may have done, it is unnecessary for me in that respect to follow his example. The right honourable gentleman began by saying that many pre- mature questions were asked respecting the Coercion Bill. Does he inean to iii ittuate that I asked them, or that they were asked by any hotly connected with me? I do not think he does mean it, because it is utterly contrary to the Md. Some gentlemen, of a different way of thinking. asked the question before the Cambridge and Edinburgh elections; bat the Government ought to have known its own mitol upon the 1

it

least in time roe those questions. If the right honourable gentleman has made any ino pression upon the Ifonse upon this point. it is a false impression. because it is founded upon false data. Having announced the sort of experiment I was making, that of a total cessation of agitat iun. and of no longer. in this session at least, urging any person on the subject, dear to nearly all my countrymen, of the Repeahan election occurred in the county of Wextbrd. On that I published a letter, and took a part, not consulting the right honourable gentleman, and having indeed nothing to consult him about. 'When he talks of motives of kindness towards me, I beg to ask what kindness he can dome? I never go to his (Alice for a favour or an indulgence. I do lit it:dick him for a place or an appeintment ; although some Members were the other night reminded of having done so. I asked him for nothing, and I wanted nothing. I published a !peter, calling upon the electors to support the Repeal candidate in the county of Wexford ; and I grounded myself on the announced determination of Ministers to renew the Co- ercion Bill. I thought I should hear nothing more, and that any question between me and the Government was at an end. I did more. I prepared an address to the Re- formers of England, and sent it to be prittled. My letter being at that moment actually in type, I was sitting as Chairman of the Committee on Inns of Court, when the honour- able Member for Kildare was sent to me to beg that I would come to the Irish Office, us the right honourable gentleman opposite had something to communicate that wonbl be highly gratifying to me. he it remembered, that the right honourable gentleman sent for me. Ile had no right to send for me to his office. 1(1111 not want him, nor any thing from him. If he wanted me, he might know where I lived by inquiring at the Vote 011ice. It was his business to come to me; but I went, because I was told that he wished to see me as a Member acting within party in this !louse, 411,1 messing, at that moment, the election of a particular caudidate. I hope the House wid bear in mind, that one candidate fur Wexford was a Whig, and that I was setting up a Repeal Mem- ber; that was the situation we were in when the rigid honourable gentleman sent for Me. Tim conversation between hint and me I certainly never would have repeated, if lie had not, by means of that conversation, tricked me. I do not r71071111 to use the word indelicately or ofTensively—but deluded me, and obtained a decided advantage for the party to which be belongs."

Mr. O'Connell went on to say, that Mr. Littleton told him, very significantly, that he had seen his letter to the electors of Wexford, and ,

alluded to other cGntitlential communicatious with him ; especially one with the Marquis of Anglesea, who observed that Mr. O'Connell was the only person in whom he could place confidence. Nothing more wits said about confidence ; but it turned out that 3Ir. Littleton had invited hint to see hint confidentially, in order to make his own use of the interview.

" Ile told me that the Irish Government was opposed to the renewal of the Coerciou Bill ; that it was not called for by them, and that his °an opiuion u-as against it. For this WaS011, he added that I way in the wrong to pnweet1 as I tool done with the Wexford eledion. I thought it enough, since he assured that Ole Irish Government had not vaned for the renew ,t1 oaf the Cuereion Bill—that the Loot-Lieutenant was opposed to it, and that he himself was against It. Having heard this satisfactory communication, I Was going away Very cheerbilly,Itaviim resolved to regulate my own conduct accordingly. and to act uptet the bithrtnation in the only way- l could act upon it, by commuuMating, without gems; into details, that the mice ed 1.74,ViCi011 Bill was to contain nothing but meaaurea to suppress agrarian disturbances, it whielt I heartily commute' ; and I was ready to lend nty assistance in carrying the law into effect. 'flu right homemade gentleman. I n., Able, added, as I was going oat of the room, that I might he certain. Whoever brein:Itt tile bill into the House, he ii iii! not be the person. I then made my bow awl rot Mal." Alr. O'Connell then asked the House to see the advantage thus gained over him. 'Ile candidate for Wexford, in whose favour he had written, declined the contest ; and an unpopular gentleman started. Earnest applieations were made to lino to send over one of his family to canvass with him • but he sent nobody, and the consequence was, the success of tl.i• candidate, on the first day's poll, though his

majority of 114 had been since struck down. But if the should

('airy' the election, it would be in consequence of Mr. Littleton's de- ception, which had closed his mouth. After having gained a Arember to his side by these means, is Ile to come into the House and carry that bill of which he &dared he heartily disapproved ? All this occurred a fortnight ago ; and lie had been silenced during the interval which he would have used in exciting public feeling against the bill. An advan- tage had thus been gained over him, and he had been deceived by Mr.

Littleton, who bad told him what was not the fact.

What (continued Mr. tec■ lllll teoitid his 014711011a tre have been, if I had sent for hi a to toy house, velif bad him of a paatiealar line of conditet I intended to adopt. anti bad afterwards followed a directly different course? Ile ilia not tell me Cud Government haul thee: mined not to recital the Coercion Bill in its ohjectionable patts, but there wag every reasonable probability or it, awl if it were otherwise, why Ohl he soul for me ? I I talks of indisrretiun ; but lie is not so yelltle as not to Le able to understand w hat he is ithout. Ile sc tit for me with a view to regulitee toy onatnet, and

II, did iesulate it : deeei‘ed awl he has leaped the advantage of Ida deeeption. Hut it is going a great deal too far to obtain an ink:int:me, under the seal it' secrecy.

I do not assert that he still what till for the purpose of deceptiou ; Intt let me ask who has had the benefit of the ileveption ? Let it he remarked, that we are not much at variance as to the itature of the eouversat lea between us ; but I leave it to the Howe and to the country to decide upon the merits of that speeies of government is huieht is SU unsteady and unfixed iti its notions, as to make one thing to 110 believed. and afterwards to act upon the very contrary decision. I wish the right home:table getitletnan joy of his deletniination not to commit:lit:ate with me 1115 it'll in nit ore. Perhaps he may change his mind upon this point also ; but I am Tilly sure that he shall :atver 110CCIVe 111e again." (t. !leers.) ?.Jr. Lrrrt.c.roNt observed, that his statement had not been im- pugned. Ile Inaba:lilted that a most glaring breach of confidence had been committed by Mr. O'Connell; who ought at least to have spoken to him before divulging what passed in their conversation. The fullest reasons were given to satisfy every Minister of the necessity of renewing the Coercion Bill; and he asked Mr. Warburton on Thurs- day, to inform Mr. O'Connell of their intentions with regard to re- newing it. These were the facts.

Mr. O'CONNELL--" And I declare upon my honour as a gentleman, that he did use those words." (Confusion continued.)

Mr. Lrrrt.Erosr—" I repeat most solemnly, upon my honour as a gentleman, that I never did say so." (Cries of " Chair, chair ! " and great disturbance on both sides of the House.) The Speaker rose from his scat.

Mr. 0' CONNELL—" Does lie mean to deny that I spoke of the neces- sity for his resignation ?"

Mr. LirrsErosr—" Something was said about printing the Report of 1832; but I positively deny that I said there was no occasion for it." Mr. O'CoNNEt.r.—‘, But I did not make the motion for printing it. Wily did not I make it." ( Cheers, and calls for the interference if the Speaker.) LirrLEroN—" It is impossible for me to say why he altered his mind. It is true that he did say to me, 'Then you have nothing for it but to resign ;' but he did not add, to my knowledge or in my hearing, any other words. My answer was simply and plainly this—, Whatever your opinions or feelings may be, do not disclose them now, but wait until you have more public notice of the intentions of Government in Lord Grey's speech to-morrow,'"

The SPEAKER here interposed; the matter terminated, and order was restored.

Mr. O'CONNELL then moved for a copy of the correspondence which had passed between the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland and his Majesty's Government relative to the renewal of the Coercion Bill. The cor- respondence would enable the House to decide whether the Lord- Lieutenant was or was not against the renewal of that bill ; and Mr. Littleton was bound to proauce it in order to bring his statements to the test.

Mr. LITTLETON said, that all the correspondence necessary to justify the measure should be laid on the table.

Mr..0.1leere.y said, he was not likely to take part with Mr. O'Con- nell, with whom he had not spoken for two years ; but he thought Mr. lettleton f•bOnid produce the correspr,ndence in his own justification ; for his statement was not satisfactory. The question was of too much importance to be evaded as it had been by Mr. Littleton. He had hitherto supported :Ministers but his ere:lir:epee would be diminished unless they furnished a more satisfactory explanation.

After some remarks front Mr. H. GI vent N, who, said that he should move to call over the House when the Cuercion Bill was introduced, Arr. SHEIL said, he had a question to esk Mr. Littleton.

Was not the Marquis of 'Wellesley Lord utenant of Ireland, in 1823, under 3 Tory Administration? and did not Mr. Li:tiemn, then on the Opposition side of the House, insist—when, on that occasi.,n,e tin coercive meaSures were proposed, for Ireland—insist on the producr:on of those despatches of the Lord- Lieutenant on which those lih.■011104 were founded? Now the noble Marquis was Lord.,Lieutenant of Irelaud under a Whig Administration. How, then, when his side of the House asked for the production of the correspondence which contained reasons for the alleged necessity of a renewal of the Coercion Bill, could that correspentience be refused by Mr. Littleton? Were there no private reasons ?— for this attention to dates was most important to the settle- ment of the question bets. ecn Mr. Littleton and Mr. O'Comiell.

Mr. O'Coxeoit said, that they bad been deceived into the belief that the Coercion Bill of last year as not to be renewed ; and so would ho lot ye been also, had he not doubted the truth of the stetement, when he was told it had been made by Governinent. Mr. O'Connell had not communicated to 'Ma the name of the individual who was his inform- ant, but simply said he had the cominunication from Government. That was all he had heard about it, until the bill was brought in ihe other evenine into the Lords.

' O'Cueseet. would not divide the House; but would have his moeon entered on the journals.

The house eould not fail to see the predicament into which Mr. Littleton had brought himself by refusing to produce those papets which alone could vindicate his character, and by contenting himself with the production of those of

WI

posite tendency. The bill was read a second time last night in the Lords. Lord DURHAM briefly stated his objection to the bill as it stood. He was glad that the Court-martial clauses were to be withdrawn, and re-

great(' that the which prevented public meetings were to be retained. lie was quite willing to agree to meaeures for suppressive agetrian disturbances; but the Irish people had as good right to hold their public meetings as any other people had.

Loh! Buouen AM contended that it was absolutely accessary to put down the meetings of the agitators; for those meetings caused egrarem disttabaeces. It was certainly an in of tlw constitution to put dowa peblic meetings, but it was a greater infraction to prevent people going aliout their business except in the day-time. He wae Sorry -that there was an increased necessity for renewing the bill.

The Duke of IVELLINGTOS read an extract from Lord Wellesley's ktier to Ministers, calling for a renewal of the bill.

Lord FARNHAM, Lord AItmeeteve, and Earl Guev, spoke in ravens of the bill. The latter said, in reply to an allusion by Lord lariffiam to the communication of Mr. Littleton to Mr. O'Connell

An Hutl he could say was this that those negotiations—if such negotiations i It,'„:.• place 11101 he did not believe that lie ever dhl—but if ;my voininunication..0

or negotiations, did take place, it was totally unkno,u to him ; act it :le

been aware tel any sneh meo. _Cr miuntunieation Isimr in,. tided, not only li.• lone di,approved or it, lint aoola have done all in his 1,,“wr to have it. That was the prilleiple on W11,-11 he 11.0 always acted. Ile had never c,notatuicat-il with tho.e whose polit lea! con.lnet he thought injurious to the country.

the rase, he need hardly sa) that be bad nothing to the, with any ueeiIllIiliit ccii ii 1q15 w- gociation such as that alluded to.

The Earl of 1VICKLOW hoped the bill would not be frittered away in the House of Commons, to conciliate a fictions enemy or an imprudent friend.

Lord BROUGHAM said, in reference to Mr. Littleton's conduct— Ile did not believe that any negotiation such as that alluded to had cue'. taken place; but a commtuniration on the subject might have takers place, win iii mi,„1.i be very innocently intended. Ile would give an instance in pint, which to lle had lately had some conversation with a noble Lord, whom 11.• then observed in his place on the cross benches, in regard to the renewal of the Coercion Bill In the course of that conversation, lie stated, that there were two parts of the act which he should like to see omitted, if they could possibly be ihopped. The Dile was the insurrectionary clauses. awl the other that regarding paid ■e meetings. That was before he had seen any or the papers or statements regardim; the present state of Ireland; but when lie saw the pipers, he changed his opinion, and thought the clauses cored not be dipensed with and the consequence was, that he then vai,w to the opinion whith he bad that day frankly and candidly expressed to their laa-dships.

A few words from Lord STOURTON and the Marquis of WESTMEATH closed the discussion.

3. POOR Lew BILL.

Lord Al.TIIORP, on Tuesday, moved the third reading of this bill. Mr. Holmes moved, and Sir H. WILLOUGHBY seconded the amend- ment, that the bill be read a third time that day six months. A hing debate ensued; in which Mr. W. WHITMORE, Mr. SLANEY, and Lord ALTHORP, supported, and Mr. Coiterre, Mn-. ROBINSON, Mr. FRYER, Mr. LEECH, MT. G. F. YOUNG, and Mr. O'CONNF' , opposed the motion. The speeches on both sides contained no arguments but such as had repeatedly been urged: before. The House at length agreed to the third reading, by a majority of 187 to50.

Mr. Mesmer: then moved the omission of the bastardy clauses; but the motion was negatived without a division.

On the motion of Mr. Jenvis, clause 0, which relates to the re- striction of actions against the Commissioners acting as a board, was struck out, with the consent of Lord ALTHORP.

SOIlle minor amendments were agreed to. Mr. POULETT SCROPE declined pressing an amendment of which he had given notice, relative to the extension of Poor-laws to Ireland; and the bill finally passed.

On Wednesday, Mr. Ellice and several other members of the House of Commons brought the bill up to the Peers. Earl GREY moved that it should be read a first time ; and gave notice that he should move the second reading next mouday. The Earl'of MALBIESBURY, Lord Wee- -mate the Marquis of SALISBURY, and the Duke of WELLING-rose wished the bill to be postponed, if not till next session, at least until sufficient time had been given to examine its important provisions, many of which they strongly objected to. Earl GREY, Lord BROUGHAM, and the Bishop of LONDON, spoke briefly in defence of the measure: it

4. REDUCTION OF CUSTOMS DUTIES.

The House of Commons, on the motion of Mr. POULETT Titoetsost, resolved itself into a Committee on the Customs Acts Bill, on Wednes- day. Mr. Thomson then stated, that the bill would effect a reduction of duty on several articles, amounting in all to 150,000/. The articles were currants, raisins, prunes, animal, cocoa, palm, and olive oil, plan- taunt, pickles, and dried fruits in general. The duty on currants would be reduced one half ; on animal oil, from 2s. Gil. to Is. 3d. a gallon ; on palm and cocoa, from 2s. &I. to Is. &I., mid on olive oil from eight to four guineas per tun. The oil from the kingdom of the Two Sieilies was excepted for the present, as the Government was employed in ef- fecting a new commercial treaty on reciprocity principles with that country. The export-duty on coal was also to be taken off. He thought that this might safely be done, as we had a stock for 1100 years in the country. The duty on foreign books would be reduced from 5/. to '21. 10s. per hundredweight.

A great deal (he maintained) might still he thine in this way, by reducing the duties on tether similar articles, without injurieg the revenue. In 18:".0, be bad reduced the duty on drugs ; and flow the great additional con- sumption which took place, those manufacturers who meal large quantities of theta for their business, felt the reduetion tu be a great bonus, while the. revenue was not ii,jured by the alteration. The inerease in the consumption of articles was always very great. In the article of bitter almonds, for instance the con- r0-e upon thee reduction from 2000 cwt. to 8000 cwt. I he merely cited these articles to show the effect of reduction on the consumption of minor articles. Th., effect of the reduction on cocoa Wag rather curi,:us : the duty was formerly 6d. per lb., and it hall lawn reduced to 2d. per lb. : the conse- quence was, that the consumption itiereased front 500,00011E, which was the quantity imported in Ili:32, to 1,202,000,h. ; so that there was little or no loss to the revenue. Iti every ease in which a reduction was made, the colisumptiOn ased : so that, out of a reduction of 65,0001. only 3310001. was lost to the revenue.

:Mr. Thomson then moved a rest:It:time to the effect that the duties Ott the several articles enumerated should be reduced.

Mr. WARBURTON disapproved of taking off the export-duty on coal.

This was one of the articles which, according to Mr. Rivard°, might to be sublet tel an export-dutv, as it was one of which we had the exclusive iiion0- poly, and tlic duty tell therefore on the consumers. Ile could not COM' err in a redaction which would put the manufactuters ef neighbouring states tent a foot- ing Nt illt the..e countries in that important article. 'flee con,equence of the grest exhaustion of the coal-mines near the sea -shore was, that the price of coal inerea‘ed within 'lie last fort- years. r Cries f,r " No, ao ! On these grounds, he thought that some oilier article might he found than ct,a1 ten n WIlleh a redut•tion sltutehl be made. Ile lead no doubt that this was a Leon given to the powe, liii awl influential Members of the veil-districts.

1.0111 Al.enolie denied that such was the motive of Government. Tee reduction was made to relieve the producers of coal, that' whom no clues was more distressed.

.Mr. GROTE regretted that the duty on barilla was itot removed.

Tiro day on harilla was very high ; and the const•quence wonld be, Coat in a 5h1.11 time none tel it would be imported. The importation was filling ail' every year, and now met more than one half the quantity was hitt riduz!ed that was in- troduced three years ago. The duty at that time was or ly and now it was only 6000/. ; so that thee amount could be no object.

Mr. Hontesoe also reminded Mr. Poulett Thomson, that there were more than fifty articles charged with duty, which sltogether did riot tunotint to 40,000/. ; and which it would be wise at once to sweep off.

The resolutions were agreed to, and the report was ordered to be brought up on Friday.

5. REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS.

Mr. Broughanes bill for the registration of births and deaths passed through the Committee of the House of Commons, on Wedeestlay, with some atnensiments ; the principal of which was made in the ltith clause, on the motion of Mr. Hem:. By this amendment, a declara- tion before a justice of the peace is substituted in all cases where an oath was required in the bill as it originally stood.

6. BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.

The House of Peers assembled on Saturday last ; when Mr. Thomas Payne, the publisher of the Morning Post, appeared at the bar to an- swer for his conduct in publishing the libel on the Lord Chancellor. In reply to a number of questions, be stated, that though the publisher, he was not the printer or editor of the Paper; that he had not the least control over its contents, which indeed he did not always read. Ile also said, that the geetleman who was responsible for the articles which ap- peared in the paper, was the editor, Mr. Thomas Bittleston ; who re- sided in London, but Mr. Payne could not say exactly where. After some conversation, it was agreed by their Lordships at the request of Lord BROUGHAM, that Mr. Payne should be discharged; because, though legally and technically, be was not morally chargeable with the libel. It was also ordered, that Mr. Bittleston should attend at the bar on Monday. On that day, accordingly, Mr. Bittleston appeared, and underwent a long examination in the course of It tech he fully admitted his respon- sibility for the article in question, but declined stating who was the au- thor of it. He read a written defence of' his conduct ; in which the breach of privilege was admitted, but palliated on the ground of honesty of intention. The difference between what took place at the passing of judgment in the case of Solarte versus Palmer, and what was recorded on their Lordships' journals had misled him : some of their Lordships even had fallen into similar misconception, lie also reminded their Lordships, that the Morning Post was a paper which had always been conspicuous in defending the privileges of the Peers.

A long and desultory discussion ensued; in which Lord Bnouctieet, Lord DENMAN, Earl GREY, the Marquis CAMDEN, Lord HARROWRY, the Duke of HAMILTON, Lord FARNHAM, and the Earl of RADNOR, took part.

Lord BROUGHAM entered into a long defence of his conduct in the whole affair. He maintained, that his proceedings bad been much mis- represented; and that, under the circumstances of the case, it was de-

had been a sufficiently long period before the public to enable every one to make up his mind on its principle ; which was all that the second readieg pledged the House to. It was finally agreed, that the bill should be read a first time, and that the second reading should be moved on Tuesday.

cidedly right that the appellants in the cause of Solute versos Palmer, should be es, aliened to pay tile costs. The parties were not content with the decision of Lord lenterden, who had given a clear and decided judgment on the case, and never expressed any doubt respecting it sub- sequently; they were not content with the decision of the Judges in the Exchequer Chamber, but had the matter brought before the House of Peers by a vexatious writ of error. Lord Brougham also dwelt upon the fabricated charge of garbling the journals of the House—a thing utterly absurd on the very face of it.

Lord DENMAN spoke at length very much to the same effect. He would not believe, unless he bad it under the band of Lord Tentertlen himself, that he entertained any doubt on the subject of the case which had been appealed ; but at any rate, after the decision of the Judges in the Exchequer Chamber, the appellants ought to have been satisfied. He dwelt upon the enormity of the offence committed by the indivi- dual at the bar, and moved that he be taken into custo ly.

Lord BROUGHANI wished to intercede for Mr. Bittleston, and re- quested that he might be reprimanded and discharged.

This was objected to by Earl Gam-, and several other Peers; who thought the offence too serious to be so lightly dealt with. On the other hand, it was urged, that when the publisher of the Limes had li- belled the Earl of Limerick, he was only visited with a reprimand and then discharged.

In the course of the discussion, all the noble Lords appeared to be somewhat bewildered. So many suggestions were made and questions put, that the Lord Chancellor himself admitted that he did not know Idiot question was before the house, or whether lie had formally made any motion himself. At last it was determined to proceed to the order of the day, and Mr. Bittleston was removed in custody.

On Tuesday, Lord WYNFORD presented a petition from Mr. Bittle- ston, acknowledging his offence, and craving pardon for the same. And it was agreed, after some discussion, in which Lord Bitoutaissi, the Duke of CUMBERLAND, and Earl GIIEY joined, that be should be brought to the bar on the following day, and discharged with a repri- mand.

On Wednesday, Mr. Bittleston appeared at the bar, and received the following reprimand from the Lord CHANCELLOR.

" Thomas Rittlestou, you have acknowlellg,11 that you are the publisher of a compo- sition which this House liaS unaniinowly pronounced to be a gross violatiOn or its pri- vileges. Yon have acknowledged that you It tlw sup.rilihttaience .ni.1 control of thu paper in which the publieation or th.t ..1,.....1i1.111 ‘111, 111:1,11., ;Ma that y.)11 et/t113 have pret'entell its publication, or have altermi it. co,oposition, if you had ■0 thought lit. Y011 have since ',resettled a petition to this Howie expre,sing your regret 1.tr the grave offence you have committed, atal you haVe 11110%Vil yourself on the nierey of this House, 1)ra3 ing that hi administeritig the jostiee due to itselk and duo to the King', s■ibjeos :It large—for its privilege,: are 11W pri,iieges of those bIll!il.(11S —it Is wild be 1J:cased to temper that justice with mercy. The 1 louse Ita, listen,- i :" ■0111 prayer, awl has di- rected me to reprimand you at the bar of the 'louse, and to tmler Ilmt yoit be tli- charged from the custody of the ollie.,r iii, Iiie payment of your lei,. lf any other person than myself had been the hull% lliial auto it .t whom the violati tti of the privi- leges of this House had been eonimilb :I, L s:a,ald have been ills's., sl to dwell at greater hm tl g..1 on . it .itt unparalleled. 1.1114.111i y oh this ollimee ; nor .1111 I to be deterred by a false delicacy from giving that of.i.-hee its p..aver appellat Mu, mutely because I was the individual against whom it was direet..1. it witl an tillimee direet..1 to.t against the man, but against the id--not the mite,' of a Peer in I& Parliamentary capacity, but against a. Peer in the emu..., oi hi, judicial otli,w--the bigitest taliee which any or till. Kin4cs Slibject!, rail e::.•:yisse; alai if 5111.11 au (Mime, coittil he pass,•1 over %% Wand. animadversion alla illr. plifii-::Ineld, 1 11,re %Wald lx• ail eli•! to 11,..j11.I•Cial antlimily which till: Howe allinini.t.•rs to 1...ent millions of the King's sul.leets liviog 11 :thin the 1i10te.1 Kingtiono being the 1.i.iliest t 'mat of Jo,tic.• hi tills kiwi:omit. Nevertheless. enough has been said to oN.press till' Illiallilliulls' reeling or ..1),,,a1;,1 enh.rhinm by this House with regard ot the 1'.:1,,pt.,ii lull of %rhich you haul: ilekiiinv ledged yourself the publisher; and let twit her you lior ally lullier person W110 IlearS "f this, flatter himself that if suelt an off•Lee is repeated, the lenity of this punishment will be suffered to form any the slightest p.ecislcut for visiting agam 8% iti/ tilt' 0111111 lenity any after offence of a like kital. Yon are hereby discharged limn the custody in which you now are on the payment of your fees."

Mr. Bittleston retired from the bar.

It was then proposed, as we find it stated in the Chronicle, that the reprimand should be inserted on the journals ; but Lord ELLENEOROLGII said the motion was unnecessary, as it would be entered as a matter of course. Subsequently, however, it was discovered that the motion was necessary; and accordingly Lord ELLENBOROUGII himself moved the insertion of the reprimand on the journals ; which was agreed to.

7. MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH. The report upon Mr. Poulter's Sabbath Bill, No. 2, was received in the house of Commons on Wed- nesday, after a division, in which the numbers were 30 and 7.

In the House of Peers on the saine evening, the Bishop of LONDON presented several petitions in favour of some measure to prevent the desecration of Sunday, and expressed his regret at the increase of im- morality on that day, and the growing dislike to legislate for its preven- tion which was manifest ill another place. He did not wish to compel people to go to church; but he thought all those who wished to go should be protected ill the performance of that duty. Lord Wvsroitii stated, that he should nut press his bill on the subject ; but should wait for Mr. Poulter's bill from the House of Commons.

ADMISSION OF DISSENTERS TO THE UNIVERSITIES. The House of Commons went into a Committee on this bill on Wednesday proforma, in order that certain amendments might be read and printed.

Sir GEORGE MURRAY expressed himself in favour of the principle of

the bill, but objected to the application of that principle in regard to the Universities.

He could not see how useful and general instruction could be afforded in :Universities, unless it were coupled with religious instruction ; and that religious instruction must necessarily be consistent with the principles of the Established Church of the country. He was, though friendly to allowing degrees to be *taken by Dissenters, not prepared to make them teachers within the Univer- l!ties. Indeed it was incompatible with academical instruction and the regula.. bon of the Colleges internally. PRIZE Foam. Mr. O'CoNNEss inquired, on Monday, whether any steps would be taken to prevent prize-fighting? No unswer was returned to this question. On Tuesday, Mr. O'CONNELL again put the same question ; when Lord Howlers said that no new enactment on the subject was contemplated. Mr. O'CONNELL gave notice, that in the course of a few days he should submit a motion respecting it. PUNISHMENT OF DEATH BILL This bill went through the tom- mittee of the House at the :norning sitting on Thursday, after some opposition from Mr. CHARLES Be ILER ; who objected to such paltry, partial legislation, on so great a subject as the revision of the Criminal Law.

PRISONERS' COUNSEL BILL. Some progress was made in Committee on this bill on Thursday : the first, third, and fourth clauses were agreed, to, and the second was withdrawn.

Usironantv or Wittus.Leave was given to Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, 011 Tuesday, to bring in a bill to establish uniformity in the mode of making and executing wills.

At present (he said) a will devising freehold property worth but M. required to be attested by three witnesses to insure its validity, while personal property worth 50,0001. might be bequeathed without the subscription of any witness tts the signature of the testator. He proposed that the Haines of two witnesses should be attached to every will, whether relating to real or personal property.

THE CURRENCY. The House of Commons was counted out oit Thursday, when Mr. T. Artw000 was about to bring forward a mo- tion on the state of the currency.

BRIBERY BILL On the motion of the Marquis of LassnowNr, this bill was read a second tune in the House of Peers on Monday, and referred to a Select Committee ; after some opposition front Lord E sm. N 1;01t01:611 and Lord FaitsatAsi, who objected to the details of the bill.

Wanwicts. Boeoreit BILL. Witnesses were examined in behalf of this bill the first four days of the week. Evidence to show illegal re- gistration of votes, and that riots had been gut up on a great scale, was r,prted as inadmissible ; and the proceedings were adjourned on Thurs.. day, to Wednesday next.

NEWSPAPER STAMPS. Lord BROUGHAM presented a petition front Hull, on Thursday, against the newspaper stamp-ditty. Ile said that he had paid some attention to this subject, and had been examined he- ft)i e a Committee of the House of Commons with respect to the laws relating to the press, and it was his intention to move on some future day that a copy of the evidence delivered before that Committee be laid on the table of their Lordships' House.

The petition was then laid on the table.

Nisvsesent Posraes Buss. On the motion of Mr. VERNoss SMITH, this bill was read a second time last night in the C0111111011S.