Debates anb timed:ling% in giarliament.

PRINCIPAL BUSINESS ow THE WEEK.

Holm or Loans. Monday, April 30. Lord Wharncliffe's Motion for Irish Poor-law Returns—Adjourned at 7 b. 35 m. Tuesday, May I. Lord Brougham's Motion for Hallway Returns—Adjourned at 7 h. 10 m. Thursday. May 3. National Education In Ireland: DlectUalon raised by the Biahop of Cashell—Adjourned at s h. 30 m. Friday, May 4. Petition from Mr. Charles Saunders-31al000structIon of the House—Q5: Explanations by Earl Grey—Adjourned at 6h. 45 in. [Time occupied in the four sittings, 10 h.

since the beginning of the Session, 73 h. 15 m.] House Or COMMONS. Monday, April 30. Rate-In-aid Bill read a third time, and passed—Supply Votes—Adjourned at 12 h. 15 m. Tuesday. May I. Privilege: Mr. John O'Connell and the Reports of the Times—Capltal Punishment : Mr. Ewart's Mo- tion negatived—Adjourned at 912. 15 m. Wednesday. May 2; noon sitting. Canada. Questions by Mr. Berries, and Statements by Lord John Russell—Cattle and Sheep Stealing (Ireland) Bill, put off for six months—Clergy Relief Bill, considered In COM- rnittee—Adjourned at 5 it. 53 m. Thursday, May 3. Marriages Bill : second reading debated—Mr. Reynolds's Savings Banks Committee nominated—Adjourned at 111.. 30m. (Friday morning.) Friday. May 4. Land Improvement and Drainage (Ireland) Bill, considered in Committee— Marriage Bill further debated—Adjourned at 121,. 30m. [Time occupied in the flve sittings, (with 30 minutes in the extra sitting of Saturday. April 28,) 37 h. 12 in.

since the beginning of the Session, 441 h. 36 m.]

THE RAILWAY SYSTEM.

Lord BROUGHAM called the attention of the Peers to a subject second to none in magnitude and great national importance—the railway interests of this country; loading in its remote consequences to very great national advantages, yet in its present condition filling the mind with no small ap- prehension and alarm.

He reminded the House, that if any had neglected to warn Parliament against the gambling mania, he was not One. As far back as 1837, he, with his lamented friend Lord Ashburton, had warned the country and the Parliament against the progress of the disease; hut in vain. Railway bills had been allowed to pass as a matter of course, with the most extraordinary powers for disposing of private pro- perty in land and collecting enormous subscriptions. Everything seemed to be sacrificed to the one thing needful—locomotion; destroying the old comfortable rate of travelling at ten miles an hour with the aid of horses, when one had the benefit of inns, and the opportunity of occasionally stretching one's legs. This in- creased speed was not unattended with some inconvenience, and some loss; be- cause Parliament enabled parties who cared not one straw whether one inch of railway was ever constructed to go on without the least regard to anything but railway surveys and solicitors' bills. And there was another class with whom Parliament made itself accessory before the fact—the gamblers and traffickers in railway stock. In the session of 1846, no fewer than 519 railway bills of all kinds passed through Parliament. Their Lordships had no conception of the careless- ness with which clauses were overlooked in those bills; and he remembered how astonished his noble and learned friend on the woolsack was, when be informed him that a clause in one of those bills enabled the Great Western Railway Com- pany to give in evidence, in any court of justice, an extract from their books, copied, it might be, by a charity boy, without being obliged to prove that it was a correct copy. Without including Ireland, India, Demerara, or Jamaica, 180,000,0001. had actually been paid up in calls made by these companies. No wonder that there should be a commercial crisis! He had looked one-fifth through the alphabet in the Parliamentary papers just issued, and he calculated that 150,000,0001. of calls still remain to be paid; that amount of good money may still be called for and thrown after the bad money already spent. We may well fear another panic when 180,000,0001. is insufficient to satiate the maw of this ravening pest, and 150,000,0001. more remains to be raid. He looked um this pest of speculation, this plague of gambling, this nuisance of overtradmg, as the gigantic and monster evil of the present day.

" Parva meta primum; mox sese attollit in auras, Ingrediturque solo."

Daring the course of this mania, there had arisen a practice of carrying on those speculations in one particular way, but varying in the different phases which it assumed; the object being, not to make railways, but profit by the shares. The first thing that the shareholder did was to get hold of a large number of shares without the least intention of keeping them. Be did not obtain them for the pur- pose of qualifying himself for a director. No such thing; unless it were that, by becoming a director, he could obtain that control over the transactions of the com- pany which he might be able to turn to better account than the mere love of power. With that view only he took the shares to qualify him as a director, in order that, when qualified as such, he might proceed to act as a shareholder. But he did not continue so long. He did not hold too fast by his shares. He was not of opinion that "Brag was a good dog, Holdfast a better." He preferred Holdfast for the present, but he played Brag too. The first thin which he sought was to enabled to dispose of his shares at a profit. How was that to be done? By making it appear to the ignorant and vulgar that those shares were of an ex- tremely great value. He calculated that the shareholders would get 3,1 per cent on their shares as the real profits of the line; but, not stopping there, he guaran- teed 7, 8, and 10 per cent for the money invested in the shares. "Oh, then,' said the poor widow, who was starving upon the two or three score pounds she got annually from the Funds, "if I can double that pittance by getting some of Mr. So-and-So's stock, I shall be able to live comfortably on the dividends." He knew the case of a poor man who had been a surgeon in a town in the Midland districts, a very able man, and of some considerable practice, who had been en- gaged in his profession for upwards of twenty years and had saved a few thou- sands, which he had invested in the Three per Cents as a provision for his old age, and from which he was getting some 1201. or 130/. a year. This man was induced to invest his savings in shares. The dividends are paid one year, but next year they are not; there is something to pay up for calls on the shares: the poor surgeon has invested all his money in the purchase and cannot pay; he has neglected his practice; his 3,000/. savings are gone; his shares are with- out dividend, and have fallen from 20/. premium to par, and thence to 201. discount. Mr. Iloldfast has pocketed the money, and his dupe has been ruined. In the case of one railway where the shares were purchased at 1871., the price soon came down to 110L, then down to 1041.; and the person who had pur- chased at 1871. lost of course half his purchase-money. He would refer to the case of the London and North-western; he would not refer to the North Midland; he purposely abstained from doing so under present circumstances. A large capi- talist in the City had taken every means in his power to cry down the value of the London and North-western shares, until he had got them down to 1051. or 1061.; he then came in with his capital, and purchased as largely as he could, and immediately did all in his power to raise them; and succeeded in gettiok. them up to 1341., when he was no longer Holdfast, but adopted the usual game ot Brag. In another line, not the London and North-western, 10 per cent dividend was guaranteed by the directors ; that guarantee had the effect of raising the shares 20 per cent: what was the result? A Mr. Holdfast then got rid of all his shares; he had 2,000. He got rid of the whole 2,000, and made 40,0001. profit upon them! The line would not pay 101. per cent: the capital was absorbed, and the shares are now at a discount. What do these Mr. Holdfasts care for guaranteed dividends, or whether there was a farthing of revenue to pay them? Their secret is simple—to pay out of capital; that is the patent invention by which they preserve their monopoly. or all these concerns are monopolies. There never could be such a thing as competition with them; they could not have two lines running parallel with each other; and the consequence is that the public is placed entirely at the mercy of those companies. A worthy friend of Lord Brougham's—Mr. Hutton, an Official Assignee in the Court of Bankruptcy —was left executor or legatee to a shareholder in the South Devon Railway, and felt it his duty to examine their accounts. They made much difficulty in letting him see them, consenting only on his threatening exposure at a general meeting; but at last he got sight of the books. They would not allow him to take ex- tracts; but, being conversant with accounts, he carried away result a without the aid of detailed figures: instead of a balance at their banker's of 32,0001., which this company professed to have, their balance was a trifle less than 2,5001.; tee remainder was made up of over-due bills, trash not worth a halfpenny; and 11,000L of this trash, he was sorry to say, had been paid to the company for eine on shares by their own solicitor, whom Lord Brougham had always consi- dered the head ot a respectable house in the City. Mr. Hutton proceeded to ask

about the payment of the other calls; and it turned out that the secretary of the Great Western Railway, Mr. Saunders, who enjoyed the sum of 3,000/. a year for his services as secretary to the Great Western Company, had beea allowed to run je arrear of his calls 13,0001.; he had only paid 2,0001. out of the 15,0001. calls which had been made upon him. The other gentlemen, the attorney to whom he

nfeered, and whom he would not name, owed to the company 190,0001.; he having

received from the company, at various times, different large amounts, to pay for the land required for the pueposes of the railway. He had been allowed sums of 20,000/, 40,000L, 60,000/., and so on, from the company, without having been

called upon to show any vouchers for the money he had paid. It might be asked why the company did not sue the party for the amount. The aeswer was dear—the attorney was not worth a halfpenny, and it would only have been an additional expense to the company if they had done so. None of these things were spoken of by the directors. If they had done so, of coarse down would have come the shares; therefore it was that the truth was concealed from the share- holders mid the public.

Lord Brougham explained a mode which had come into existence of adding one concern to another, in order to raise further capital upon what are called

preference shares." A railway is started with a capital of 1,000,0001; the directors find they want more money; they apply to Parliament to raise

more money; the public won't hear of more shares; they have got to the end of the rope: the directors therefore create a new sort of shares called "preference " shares, which have a guaranteed sum over and above the profits, while the holders of the original shares remain exposed to the jeopardy and risk as to their divi-

dends. The secretary of the Great Western Company, and the solicitor to whom he had alluded, who was so great a defaulter, both held preference shares; and so

long as they were not called upon to pay anything on them not a word was breathed about their illegality. All that time they answered to the name of Hold- fist. They kept their preference shares, and never once dreamt of such a thing as their illegality. When they were called upon, however, to pay up the calls on the preference shares, they turned sharply round on the company, and said they were all illegal, all fraudulent, and they were not bound to pay anything on them: the company might sue them if they thought proper, but they were not worth seeing.

Lord Brougham diverged into a sarcastic criticism of the railway pro- ceedings of" another place," concerning some features of which he declared himself to be the victim of a most insatiable curiosity: he called it "the Canadian Assembly ": he rated that House for not adopting measures to check jobbing equally stringent with those adopted by the House of Lords. He had seen some of the bills connected with the proceedings before that House. They were of course most honest and conscientious Parliamentary agents and solicitors who had shown him these accounts. They were unable to pocket a single halfpenny, but they were not incapable of applying shares in the right places—"right shares in right places" was fine Parliamentary agency. Those shares being applied in the Canadian House to Honourable Members at the proper time and at the critical moment, would account for what he had seen in the votes of that House, namely, that some half-sedozen would come down and vote for bills, who had never heard a word of either the argument or the defence. God forbid that he should slander any person, much lees those worthy Canadians, for whom he entertained so great a respect. • * • He would give their Lordships one

fact: an honourable friend el his had-told him, that he had had 5,000/. offered

him if he would give his name to one of these railway companies; another had had 1,0001. offered to him if he would allow his name to appear as a director in a cer- tain concern; and a third had a similar offer made to him. His honourable friend said to the party offering, 'Do you mean in shares?" "Oh, no," replied the other, "in whatever way you please: you shall have it in shares or in hard cash if you wish it." His friend said, very properly, that he would disdain to do such

a thing, or be a party to any such transaction. Well, but there were 658 mem- bers in that Canadian House—Oh, he forgot--(Laughter)—he was thinking of another House, which was of coarse incapable of such a thing. (Renewed laughter.) But there were say 150 Members in that Canadian House, and among that large number they might expect to find some persons who would per- haps like to be told that there were so many shares at their disposal—go and vote for the bill.

The whole subject called for the interposition of their Lordships. The first evil is that of giving power to a body of men to cheat the unwary by a false and fraudulent manufacture of returns and accounts. That is the root of the evil,

and is not unconnected with the second mischief, the gambling mania ; with which it is more difficult to deal, but not impossible. His opinion was, that much

might be done to prevent the frauds of which he complained, by giving perfect, nasparing, and absolute publicity to all the affairs of these companiee. The other plan would, he hoped, be found efficient. It was contained in the motion with

which be was about to conclude, but which he would not read over, as it con-

tained a vast number of details. If the returns took many months to prepare, he would greatly prefer to get speedily half a column, or a quarter, or a fourth or fifth part of that which could be found; for everything at the present moment depends on a speedy exposure; and whatever could be got in a month or six weeks would be preferable to the whole if it must be delayed until the next ses- sion of Parliament.

In conclusion, Lord Brougham hoped his noble friend Lord Ilonteagle would not be discouraged by the result of the efforts made by him last session to obtain an effectual system Of honest and stringent scrutiny into the affairs of railway companies, but would bring forward another measure on the subject.

The Marquis of LANSDOVi'NE acknowledged that the time had arrived when that House and the other House of Parliament were bound to pro- vide by law for the effectual security of that class of persons who from various circumstances had invested considerable parts of their fortunes in those undertakings.

The powers delegated to public bodies were so delegated as a trust upon con- ditions which it was the duty of Parliament to see faithfully executed ; and he

felt that those companies who had been managed by persons faithful to their

trust would be among the first to hail the measure that should place them on a different footing from those whose misconduct was notorious to the world. He

therefore joined to Lord Broughanis invitation the expression on the part of her

Majesty's Government of their hope that Lord hlonteagle who had devoted BO much attention to the subject, would be prepared again to take it up, under, he

trusted, more favourable auspices than when he brought forward a measure with respect to it before. To such a bill her Majesty's Government would give the utmost support in their power. If his noble friend introduced such a measure, they would give him every assistance he required; and if from any motive he ahould decline to introduce it, then it would be the duty of the Government to introduce such a bill themselves. Ile did not believe it could be introduced in a Meaner more likely to insure its success than by his noble friend. Lord MONTRAGLE said, he felt the necessity for introducing such a bill; lie was quite ready to bring it forward, and he thanked the Government for the promise of their support. [The following is a summary description of the returns for which Lord Brougham moved, and which have been ordered accordingly. To set forth in full the capital authorized to be raised by their respective acts of Parliament—the number of shares issued, and the number allotted to each director—the amount of each share—when the calls on such shares became due —when they were received—the capital raised by each railway in the United Kingdom on the security of their debentu es—when such debentures were issued —date of act sanctioning issue of such debentures—amount of them—rate of in- terest paid to lender—terms for which such loan was made—commission paid by railway companies to the broker or agent for obtaining loans on security of de- bentures—cost of the construction of each railway, exclusive of land purchases— Parliamentary expenses and law charges ; also the total law charges, stating whether taxed or not—money expended in purchase of land and property—Parliamentary expenses—engineers' chsrges—cost of railway plant—amount entered in each year's printed account for depreciation of plant—total annual receipts from pas- sengers and for goods from first opening—total annual expenditure contingent on the working of the railway (exclusive of interest paid to debenture holders); also the mode by which the fixed dividends which have been paid to various share- holders were ascertained.

On Thursday evening, Lord Brougham made an addition to the form of his returns, requiring them to set forth further particulars; n imely, the loans made by each railway company to any other railway company or person, to whom, and when, at what rate of Interest, and when repaid—the amounts of subscription paid and agreed to be paid, and guarantees given or agreed to be given, of capital or interest, by any railway company or person to any other railway company or person—the time when paid or given or agreed upon, and for whet purposes—the persons of whom the shares were taken—the date of any act of Parliament au- thorizing any railway company to subscribe to, or hold shares or interest in, any other railway company, and to what extent.]

THE COMMONS IN SUPPLY.

In Committee of Supply, a vote of 391,934/. being proposed for charges of Naval Establishments, Mr. FAGAN complained that only 373/. of this vote was to go to the naval establishment at Haulbowline; and he com- plained that so little of expenditure for naval establishments goes to Ire- land, compared with England. In 1846, Lord Auckland promised the erection of a battery at Haulbowline. Sir Faewcis BARING explained, that a difficulty of title had stopped the works. Admiral BOIYLES, in defend- ing the general scale of our naval expenditure, somewhat countenanced Mr. Fagan's advocacy of Cork as an admirable naval station: whereupon Mr. HENLEY regretted to hear countenance given to the desire expressed by the gentlemen on the other side for increasing our naval establishment on no other earthly ground than because it would be beneficial to Ireland in general and Cork in particular. Other Members joined in general criticisms of the naval expenditure. Sir H. WILLOUGHBY found that 1,366,749/. had been voted for Plymouth breakwater and 1,464,640/. expended. Sir WILLIAM MoLeswoara ob- served, that in 1845, '6, and '7, the Admiralty gave 675,000/. as the esti- mate of these works; in 1848, 1,200,0001.; and now 1,300,0001. The works proposed at Keyham in 1844 differed as much from those subse- quently projected as the foundation from the superstructure of a house.

Great blunders had been made. Firstly, they are on the wrong shore; secondly, there is not sufficient depth of water at the entrance; thirdly, the entrance to the harbour being at right angles to the current of the stream, it is dangerous to steamers; fourthly, the design was altogether extravagant in extent; fifthly, the works were undertaken prematurely, and on the most absurd miscalculation as to the benefit to be derived from them. The interest of the money expended would go far towards defraying the expense of our steam navy. By voting 30,000/. on our estimated expenditure of 400,0004 Parliament had been led into an expenditure of 1,300,0001. He believed that by stopping the works they would save from 500,0001. to 600,0001.; and he therefore moved, as an amend- ment, to reduce the vote by 120,0001.

Mr. CORRY admitted that if the question had been originally referred to a Committee it is probable the works at Keyham would never have been commenced. As to the estimates, he was perfectly ready to admit they were not in the first instance properly prepared; but the practice had been to include only the estimates of the works actually contracted for. The alleged blunders are matters which admit of much difference of opinion.

Mr. COBDEN supported Sir William Molesworth's amendment.

"1 think that it is high time for a plan of these works to be laid before Par- liament, and as yet we have had none. . . . As to the necessity for con- structing a steam basin at all in this spot, the Committee of last year came to a resolution that there were already steam basins enough, and that if Keyham ba- sin had not been begun it ought never to have been undertaken. There are ample basins enough at Portsmouth and Chatham, where there are, at each place, large establishments. These are quite enough to provide fur the repairs of steam- ships daring a great war. For my own part, 1 deny that it is good policy to con- struct such works at all. The private steam-ship builders have no steam-basins. Napier has none at his works. All that he has is a wharf on the Clyde, where his steamers are brought alongside to have their boilers taken out or put in. . . . All these great works are, in my opinion, only so many schemes for expending and idly wasting the public money; and my belief is, that if the Government had a Cali- fornia or a Peru to go to, instead of having only the pockets of the people to tax, they could not have shown a more reckless degree of extravagance." The House divided on the vote, and it was carried, by 101 to 27.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

Mr. EWART supported his annual motion for leave to bring in a bill to abolish capital punishments, by a statistical speech, directed to the proof

that crime has not, as has been lately asserted, increased with the amelio- ration of our criminal code, but has on the contrary diminished since the changes in the laws by which capital punishments have been dispensed with. He explained away a large proportion cif the increase which has apparently taken place in convictions for particular crimes, by exposing the false statistics. For instance, many acts are now constituted legal at- tempts to murder, which used not to be included under that head; the old indisposition to prosecute has been removed, and the ratio of con- victions to prosecutions has in fact nearly doubled; in regard to forgery, it was once customary, as the Home Office acknowledged, to omit from the register all crimes not visited capitally, and at the present time every crime whatever goes into the register. A return on the table of the House showed that there has been a diminution in eighteen of the twenty crimes in the punishment of which changes have been effected, during the five years following the change.

Sir GEORGE GREY denied an assertion he had met with, that the crime of murder had increased; and he asserted, and quoted returns to prove, that this crime, to which alone the extreme penalty of the law now attaches, is the only one that has not very materially increased. The object of the punishment is to deter by terror; and he believed that this effect is at- tained, because, notwithstanding a vast increase in the population, and in

the number of temptations, the commission of this crime has remained at almost a fixed standard during a long series of years. He vindicated the accuracy of the statistics which Mr. Ewart impugned, and repeated his conviction that offences which had ceased to be capital have generally in- creased. He fully agreed with Mr. Ewart in deploring the great evils arising from public executions; but referred to the strong feeling which prevailed against private executions.

Mr. BRIGHT effectively reviewed the general arguments on the question; insisting especially on the brutalizing and crime-suggesting effects of public executions. He urged the fallibility of all human tribunals; and enforced the view that punishment as a means for the prevention of crime is much overrated. He recalled the frequency with which innocent men are hanged; contrasted the injustice of the sentence of hanging for crimes of unequal atrocity; and commented on the reprieve of Annette Myers, in opposition to the execution of Harriet Thomas.

After some further debate, the House divided; and Mr. Ewart's motion was negatived, by 75 to 51. [The announcement of the numbers was received with cheers by the minority, on account of their increased strength.]

MARRIAGES OF AFFINITY.

The House of Commons was occupied nearly the whole of Thursday evening in the debate on the second reading of the Marriages Bill; which Mr. 1Voamar simply moved without any speech.

Mr. GouLaraue moved as an amendment, that the bill be read a second time that day six months; and proceeded to recapitulate several of the stand- ing arguments against the measure. He contended, that if one step were made in the way of relaxing the law of marriage, others would follow: so that the question really at issue was, whether the prohibition should still extend to degrees of affinity or be limited to degrees of consanguinity. He repre- sented that the case against the prohibition which prevents the widower from marrying the sister of his wife had been got up by a very active or- ganization of legal gentlemen; that it was onesided; that its statistics were manifestly exaggerated, especially in the number of unlawful marriages alleged to have taken place in defiance of the prohibition; and that several reverend witnesses before the Royal Commissioners proved that the incon- venience resulting from the prohibition is very slight. Mr. Gault:mum quoted the authority of Cranmer and the other Commissioners in the time of Ed- ward the Sixth, interpreting the Levitical prohibitions to hold good; and enlarged upon the argument that a change of the law authorizing such marriages would painfully interfere with the freedom 'between brothers and sisters-in-law.

On the other side, Mr. COCKBURN, the chief supporter of the measure, recapitulated the authorities which sanction by an immense preponderancy the particular marriage. He cited the practice of all the Protestant Eu- ropean and most of the American States. He cited the well-known pas- sage in Leviticus, interpreting its prohibition as limited to the lifetime of the wife; he demolished the authority of the Canon law, by showing how completely its prohibitions in other respects, as in the marriage of the clergy, have been set aside; he showed that the prohibition against the marriage of a widower and sister-in-law originated with the ecclesiastical servility to the tyrannical and lustful purposes of Henry the Eighth; and he repeated the arguments derived from the hardship to a particular class who labour under special restrictions for which no substantial authority or argument of expediency can be adduced.

The bill was further supported by Lord BRACKLEY, Mr. MONCKTON MILNES, the Earl of ARUNDEL and SURREY; opposed by Mr. HAGGIT, Mr. SEYMER, Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL, and Mr. ROUNDELL PALMER. The last ac- cepted Mr. Cockburn's challenge to show that the authority of Scripture is not against the marriage; contending that the dry naked letter must not be taken, but the spirit and context of the whole; the principle of which is distinctly laid down thus—" None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to you."

The debate was adjourned till next night, on the motion of Mr. BUN-

BURY. CLERGY RELIEF BILL.

On the order of the day for going into Committee on the Clergy Relief Bill, Mi. LACY moved and Mr. MILNER seconded an instruction that pro- vision be made for relieving persons in holy orders without their declaring themselves Dissenters from the Established Church. Mr. Bouvartin ob- jected to the instruction, as foreign to his bill, which aimed at supplying a specific remedy for a specific grievance; whereas the instruction was cal- culated to enact a general law enabling all clergymen whenever they think fit to retire from the Church of England. It was opposed by Sir GEORGE GREY, Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND, and Mr. CLAY, on the same ground; and by Mr. GLADSTONE and Mr. A. B. HOPE on Church grounds. Mr. SPOONER, Mr. W. J. Fox, Mr. AGLIONBY, Mr. THOMPSON, and Mr. BRIGHT, supported the instruction. On a division, it was negatived, by 132 to 65.

On clause 6th, Mr. PETO moved the omission of a proviso intended to protect from penalties or liabilities clergymen who should refuse to ad- minister any rite or sacrament to any clergyman taking the benefit of the law proposed by the bill. Mr. GLADSTONE, MT. ROUNDELL PALMER, and several other Members, supported the clause as originally framed by the Committee: to amend it thus, would be persecution to those clergymen who should conscientiously object to administer rites and sacraments to the new class of Dissenter contemplated by the bill. Mr. WaLroLE, Sir GEORGE GREY, and several Dissenting Members, supported the amend- ment on divers grounds. On a division, the ameeilment was carried, by 118 to 57; and progress was reported.

EDUCATION IN IRELAND.

Presenting two petitions from Protestant clergymen and laymen in Ire- land, on Thursday, the Bishop of CASHELL made a general complaint against the state of education in Ireland. By a minute of the Education Committee of the Privy Council, in 1847, the attempt to establish "one general system" was abandoned, because Ministers found that it would be impracticable unless religion were excluded: Ministers therefore resolved to aid the different denominations severally, and in December 1847 they announced that they would give aid to the Roman Catholics unaccompa- nied by interference with their religious opinions. The Protestants of Ire- land therefore, finding that the "one general system" had been abandoned, asked that they might receive the benefit of a grant without being com- pelled to participate in the National System, which excludes the reading of the Scriptures among the scholars; nay, inasmuch as the children can- not be compelled to receive religious instruction during school-hours, there exisla no power to put the Bible into the hands of the children against the objection of the parents; in which case they would receive nothing that could be called religious instruction.

The Archbishop of Maws corrected the extraordinary delusion upon the subject which prevails both in England and Ireland. The Scriptures are not excluded from the National Schools, though they cannot be for on the children. The Scriptural schools, for which certain parties are calling, might more properly be called coercive Scriptural schools. is other samples of the ignorance that prevails on the subject, Dr. Whataiy mentioned an Irish clergyman, of high connexion and fortune who sap. posed that the Douay version of the Scripture was used in the National School of his own parish; and the misapprehension that repentance is translated " doing penance," though he had corrected that mistake sixteen years ago. In hundreds of parishes, the Protestant children are too few te warrant the establishment of a separate school for them; so that the proposed change would either exclude them altogether or bring them more within the power of the Romish priests.

The petitions were supported by the Bishop of LONDON and Earl of

WINCIIILSEA.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE would hold out no hope that the system established in Ireland, which has received the support of successive Go- vernments, could now be altered. The education grants are intended for the benefit of the masses of the poor, those masses being in Ireland Ro- man Catholics; and 500,000 Roman Catholic children are now receiving instruction under the system.

RATE-IN-AID BILL.

The third reading of the Rate-in-aid Bill was opposed by Captain JONES; who moved that it be read a third time that day six months.

Viscount CASTLEREAGH Once more recorded his opposition to the mea- sure; adding to his protest the weight of a statistical speech, to prove that Ireland already pays a larger share of taxation than England. Her local taxation amounts to 8s. 4d. in the pound of the whole rateable annual value of her property, while that of England is but 3s. in the pound of her yearly value. She has also suffered far more by the loss of agricultural protection than England; her agricultural population being 64 per cent of the whole, and England's agricultural population being but 22 per cent of the whole. He earnestly warned Government against levying further taxation on an overburdened and wretched people, at this epoch of critical agitation amongst the people of the European nations.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose, not to renew arguments on the measure, but to make statements to the House in consequence of special accounts re- ceived from Ireland.

He had lately informed Mr. Hume,—whose absence now he regretted, and re- gretted more particularly as it was owing to indisposition,—that it would be the duty of Government to advance from the Civil Contingencies such sums as are absolutely necessary to prevent the people sustained out of the grant of 50,0001. from starving while this bill remained under the consideration of Parliament. The sum of 50,0001. has been completely exhausted. "Last week the last re- maining portion was sent from the Treasury; and the accounts we have received from the Poor-law Commissioners in Ireland are still more dis- tressing, and private destitution has increased. I said, in answer to another question of the honourable gentleman, that I did not conceive that more than about 6,0001. was necessary to be issued from the Civil Contingencies for the purposes which I have stated.: but, with these accounts before us, and con- sidering that, if the House agree to the third reading this evening, some time must elapse before the bill is actually taken into consideration by the other House of Parliament, I do not think we shall be justified in keeping within that limit." Lord John alluded to the warning part of Viscount Castlereagh's speech, threatening Ministers with the effects which the rate-in-aid was to produce in Ireland— He should not be alarmed at those words; for he happened to have seen a most excellent letter written by the Marquis of Londonderry to his tenants in Ire- land, in which he says that whatever may be the objections to the rate-in-aid, obedience to the law is so well rooted, that should this bill pass into an act of Parliament, there will be no resistance to that which is the law of the land. Lord CASTLEREAGII—" They will all be gone to America." Lord JOHN RUSSELL—" Then the resistance in Ireland will not be very great.' It did the highest credit to the noble Marquis to express those sentiments; and his expression of those sentiments much diminished any apprehensions Lord John might have had. Mr. BAILLIE COCHRANE bad no confidence in the Administration with regard to their conduct of Irish affairs. They had no comprehensive measure to offer. Their condition was aptly de- scribed in a play that was acted at Sadler's Wells not long since. Lord John Russell had probably forgotten it now, but there was a passage in Don Carlos that ran thus-

" The ships at sea becalmed, "Whose sails flap to and fro with scanty measure." (Laughter.)

The 10,000,0001. had been thrown away, and Ireland was in a worse state than ever. A heavy responsibility rested upon the Government; and if their present policy continued, a very great stimulus would be given to the cry for repeal of the Union—and justifiably, for unless Ireland could be better governed, repeal would be a benefit to her.

Mr. POULETT SCROPE repeated his grounds of opposition to the rate-in- aid. Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD and Mr. HENRY GRATTAN confirmed the statements of the distress of their country; Mr. Crawford stating that three-fourths of the people in Mayo are without clothing, or houses, or em- ployment, and the best men emigrating; Mr. Grattan assuring Lord John Russell that what is now wanted in Ireland is a baker, and he was sorry V) add an undertaker, and not a minister of state. Air. JOHN O'Coriserz protested against the doctrine of the superior loyalty of Ulster. Colonel DUNNE reinsisted that half the people of Ireland will be unable to pay the rate required by the other half: On a division, the third reading was carried, by 129 to 56—majority 74. A verbal amendment in the title of the bill was proposed by Colonel Raw- DON—that the rate should be called " separate ' and not "general "i bat withdrawn without division. The bill then passed.

IRISH DISTRESS RETURNS.

In assenting to a motion by Lord WHARNCLIFFE for copies of farther correspondence between the Treasury and the Irish Poor-law Commission: era since the last returns, Lord LANSDOWNE admitted the prevalency Of famine and destitution in the West of Ireland. The full extent of the misery consequent on the failure of the potato had not even yet beeo realized; renewed misery is again falling on those classes least able to bear it, those already most exhausted in their means. It is right that the peo- ple of this country should know the whole magnitude of the evil. The papers moved for should be produced in as short a time as possible.

CATTLE AND SHEEP-STEALING LAW FOR IRELAND.

The second reading of the Cattle and Sheep (Ireland) Bill was moved by Mr. Sol:num with a brief statement. In 1845, the offences within the min of the bill were 653; in 1847, they were 10,044. The principle of the bill is to make suspected persons show how they obtained cattle or sheep Rood in their possession. Sir GEORGE GREY and Sir JOHN JEnvis gave g qualified opposition to the bill; the Home Secretary suggesting that the second reading should be taken pro forma only, with a view to essential alterations; and the Attorney-General advising the House to consider duly bow far they should consent to an extension of summary jurisdictions. )1r. SHARMAN CRAWFORD, Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL, Mr. JOHN REYNOLDS, and Mr. BRIGHT, opposed the bill, mainly on the ground of its severity and exceptional nature; Mr. Bright characterized it as a measure which made it unlawful for an Irishman to have mutton in his house! Mr. HEN- Lay, Mr. VERNON SMITH, and many other Members, counselled its with- drawal, on the ground that it would need essential alterations in Com- mittee. Mr. GROGAN, Sir HENRY BARRON, Mr. NAPIER, Mr. SCULLY, Colonel DUNNE, and some others, supported the bill, but not strenuously. On a division, the second reading was negatived, by 86 to 67; and the bill therefore was lost.

SAVINGS BANKS COMMITTEE.

Mr. REYNOLDS renewed his efforts on Thursday to carry his own Com- mittee-list on Savings Banks, in preference to the list proposed last week by Sir Charles Wood, consisting of those who last year formed Mr. Her- bert's Committee. The name of Mr. John Abel Smith, standing next after that of Mr. Napier, who was rejected last week, was not opposed by Sir CHARLES Woon, as he was a member of Mr. Herbert's Committee. On the proposal of Mr. Grogan's name, Sir CHARLES WOOD moved the substitution of Sir George Clerk; and this substitution was carried, by 123 to 81. Instead of the name of Mr. Hamilton, Sir CHARLES WOOD moved the substitution of Mr. Herries's name; and carried his motion, by 120 to 61. At the entreaty of Mr. HERBERT and Mr. SPOONER, Mr. REYNOLDS here consented, "though he was fourteen divisions in arrears," not to persist further. The other names proposed by Sir CHARLES WOOD and agreed to by the House, were those of Mr. Poulett Scrope, Sir John Yarde Buller, the Marquis of Kildare, Mr. Ker Seymer, Mr. Shafto Adair, Mr. William Fagan, and Mr. Bramston.

PRIVILEGE: REPORTING SPEECHES.

Mr. Jon si O'CONNELL complained that, while defying the sessional order which prohibits the reporting of speeches delivered in the House of Commons—he would not then argue the good sense of that order—the Times does not give a fair, impartial, or accurate report. In the report of the debate on the Rate-in-aid Bill, much that Members said was omitted, much that they did not say put in. "As to myself, I find that a great deal of what I thought it my duty to say in this House on a question of great importance to Ireland, is either omitted alto- gether, or so utterly misrepresented, that, as might be said, I should not know my own child. Now, so far as respects myself this may be a matter of very little importance to the proprietors of the Times; but when I find that my conduct is canvassed in Ireland, I, as an Irish Member, naturally feel anxious that if a re- port of debates be allowed at all by this House, it should at least be tolerably ac- curate." The most trivial English debate is faithfully reported; the moment the subject is Ireland, the report is slurred and the speeches are misrepresented. If other Irish Members were inclined to submit to this, he was not. He moved that the printer and proprietor of the Times be called to appear at the bar of the House.

When the SPEAKER called for a seconder, there was a pause: ultimately Mr. SCULLY seconded the motion. Sir GEORGE GREY reminded Mr. O'Connell of the inconsistency of enforcing the rule against reporting as a means of getting a fuller report. After some bandying of compliments, censures, and wise saws, Mr. O'CoNNELL withdrew his motion; but threat- ened to renew it if the same system continued.

Mr. GRANTLEY BERKELEY—" I would suggest to the honourable and learned Member to send his speeches to the papers, instead of making them in this House." (Great laughter.)