Oeliats antx Prarrennz# in Variimcnt.
1. THE REFoitm BILL. 0mm the Speakel's leaving the chair on Monday, Mr. A. Tituvou rose, pursuant to notice, to move the inser- tion of Stockton-upon-Tees in Schedule D. Ile inentioaed its in- crease, from 1811 to 1S31, of revenue, from 40,0001. to 8i00/. ; of ships outward-bound, from 1,262 to 2,1V4; and of ships inward-bound, from 316 to 454.
Sir C II-1121LS WETaintinz thought tbe claim of Stockton much bet- ter thau that of Briliten. 31r. CaoK I! a alluded to the ease of Tox- teth Park, which 1111 been described as Mt calling for a member; while, on the contrary, as thr back as 3lay last, a memorial had betn forwarded to the Home Secretary on that subject.
Mr. TREVOR did not press his motion.
Ashton, Bury, Chatham, Cheltenham, Dudley, Walsall, and Frome, were severally added to the schedule.
When Gateshead was proposed, a long conversation took place on the question whether it or Merthyr-Tydril should have a member. The claims of Alerthyr-Tydvil were supported by Colonel Wool), who moved the substitution of thot town for Gateshead ; by Sir JANI STUART, Mr. K. Dorm.As, Mr. irelisoN, and Mr. R. WA SON.
Colonel DAr.avmPLE spoke of Appleby as preferable:to Gateshead.
Lord G. Sum asEr noticed several new boroughs which were inferior in population to Merthyr- Tvdvil. Ile remarked also on the injustice of allowing such places as (!alne, Tavistock, and Horsham, with no more than 3,000 inhabitants each, to retain a member, while one was refused to Merthyr-Tydvil, which bad above 2 WOO.
Lord Tons RussmA. asked if Lord 0. Somerset wished to add to the disfranchised boroughs? If so, let hint bring forward a motion to that effect, and he (Lord J. Russell) would not be backward to sup- port it.
If the noble lord were to carry the general principles into effect in Wales, lie must disfranchise a number of the old and small boroughs in Wales; which Ministers, finding tiLt it would be mote satistitctory to the inhabitants of Wales to keep their old boroughs, had preserved. They found one of these close to Merthyr-Tydyil, and they thought it was quite consistent with the principles of representation which already existed in Wales, to unite Mertbyr-Tydvil with that borough. It would have been more handsome of the noble lord, if he hat offered to resign the third member which Monmouth had received, and give him to Merthyr-Tydvil, instead of taking one from Gateshead.
Sir ROBERT PEEL expressed a wish to bring the question into as small compass as possible ; and would therefore, by way of a test of the correctness of the Ministerial proceeding, compare the case of Gates- head with that of Toxteth Park. He proceeded to institute an ela- borate comparison between these two places.
Mr. EWART repeated what he had stated last week, that Ile bad not been aware of any public meeting having taken place at Toxteth on the subject of petitioning for a representative ; nor could he see, if Toxteth got a member, how the House could refuse members to the other suburbs of Liverpool ; as little could he see, with what consistency Sir Robert reel could ask for a representative for the suburbs of Li- verpool and vote against giving members to the suburbs of London. At the same time, Mr. Ewart said he would most cheerfully join in any endeavour either to enfranchise Toxteth Park, or to give a third member to Liverpool.
Lord ALTHORP said, it was unnecessary to follow Sir Robert Peel's statement ; the question before the House respected Merthyr- Tydvil, not Toxteth. Sir Robert's argument might be properly urged in' fa- vour of the disfranchisement of some of the smaller boroughs in Sche- dule B, but it had no bearing on the case of Gateshead.
Sir R. VYVYAN and Mr. CROKER spoke of the clearness and con- vincing- nature of Sir Robert Peel's argument. There could not be a
stronger proof of the necessity of Toxteth Park getting a representative, than the fact of Mr. Ewart's having on a former evening so misstated the opinions of its inhabitants. Mr. Croker admitted, at the same time, that Merthyr-Tydvil had a stronger claim than Toxteth Park, inasmuch as it was connected with no other place, and exceeded Tox- teth Park both in wealth and numbers.
Mr. EWART replied to the charge of Mr. Croker with some heat— He had not mule any misstatement on the subject. He had merely mentioned that the fact had not come to his knowledge until he had heard it mentioned hy- Sir Robert Peel. If he had been inclined to indulge in misstatements, he might easily have taken a lesson from Mr. Croker himself; for who was there who was not acquainted with the singular accuracy of that gentleman's historical state- ments, which were only to be equalled by the modesty with which they were delivered? He sought not to rival the right honourable gentleman in his pro- verbial inaccuracy and tergiversation.
Mr. Caoimit retorted-
" Sir, the honourable gentleman says he will take a lesson from me : he shall have one. ( Cheers from the Opposition.) My lesson is this. He himself ac- knowledges that the charge which I brought forward against him was stated in an open, fair, and Parliamentary manner, and without any reserve whatever. I never deal in low insinuations. Will he now take a lesson from me, acid learn to scorn all mean and calumnious sarcasms? ( Cheers from the Opposition, with some calls of, Order P from the Ministerial side.) Will he tell me what action of my life can justify the observations which he has made, or rather the insinua- tion in which lie has indulged? What words have I ever uttered in the various addresses which I have delivered in this House, what statement did lever make, upon which he can put his finger and say he can contradict it? When a man has a bad cause, it is not unusual with him to quarrel with hisneighbonr : now, Sir, I had no wish to quarrel with the honourable gentleman, but, if he wishes to quarrel with me, he can have no great difficulty." ("Hear!" and cries of " Order!") The CHAIRMAN put it to the good sense and Parliamentary ex.
perience of the right honourable member, whether he thought it worth while to pursue this subject any farther.
Mr. CITOKER--" Sir, you have put the matter to me in a way that I cannot resist ; it is not worth my while. (Loud Meetly.) After some further discussion on the question at issue, Mr. STANLEY adverted to the squabble between Mr. Croker and Mr. Ewart, and ex- pressed a wish that it might be mutually and amicably explained.
Mr. Ewani• said, in using the word "tergiversation," he did not mean any imputation on Mr. Croker's character.
Mr. CROKER said, he did not object to the charge of tergiversation so much as to that of proverbial inaccuracy. If any offensive insinuation were attaehed to the latter, he must still adhere to his original reply.
- Mr. Ewitar explained, that be applied the 'word inaccuracy to Mr. Croker in no other sense than Mr. Croker had applied it to him. • The House divided on Colonel Woon's amendment : for it, 167; ngainst it, 214; majority for Gateshead, 47. Huddersfield, Kidder- minster, Kendal, Rochdale, and Salford, were then added to the clause, and the I rouse resumed.
On Wednesday, Schedule D was proceeded with. On South Shields being put, Mr. CROKER contended strongly against its right to stand as one of the new boroughs. He read a list of thirteen non-repre- sented towns, every one of which had, in population and assessed taxes, higher claims to representation than South Shields. As to the junction with it of Westoe, if the townships in the neighbourhood of the towns he enumerated were also joined, there would be no difficulty in procur- ing- an equal population as South Shields and Westoe conjoined.
In the course of the conversation that followed, Mr. HODGSON, of Newcastle, questioned the accuracy of Mr. Croker's calculations.
Mr. .ClioxFat having referred to the reports of the Commissioners in corroboration of what he had advanced, said—" And now that I have confuted Government out of their own documents, does the honourable member dare to repeat his contradiction ?" (Cheers and laughter.)
Mr. fionasoN answered, that he would never so far violate the rules of the House as to notice the expression of Mr. Croker in the lan- guage it deserved ; but be would tell him, in all Parliamentary courtesy, that he flung him back his offensive term with indignation ; and should be venture to repeat it elsewhere, he could assure the right honourable gentleman that it would elicit from him a very different kind of reply. (Cheers.)
ME. CROKER explained.
After some further conversation, South Shields was placed in the schedule ; as were the other boroughs down to Wakefield, which finished the labours of the evening. The Chairman obtained leave to sit again on Friday; and Lord A untoer gave notice that he would call on the House to sit on Saturday also.
• Last night, on Walsall (Staffordshire) being put, Mr. CROKER went into the same argument that he had made lige of in the case of South Shields ; and read a list of twenty-six places, all of which, taking the compound ratio of houses and assessed taxes, calculated by the method of Lieutenant Drummond, he contended were superior to Walsall and Whitby. He added, that if additional population were wanted, the neighbourhood of these towns offered ample means of procuring it. Croydon would afford 20,000 ; and Margate and Ilamsgate, which were only two miles [four miles?] apart, would also give 20,000. :11-r. Croker then went into a long argument to prove that Ministers had done wrong in joining the "foreign" of Walsall to the town itself; and that there was no better reason why they should do so than in the case of Reigate, where they had distinctly negatived that principle.
Sir JOHN WROTTESLEY ridiculed Mr. Croker's description of Wal- sall. There was, Sir John said, no distinction between the borough mid the foreign, but one which had been made for the easier imposition of poor-rates. The principal inn of Walsall stood in the very centre of the town ; and in front of that inn ran a small brook, which formed the only division between the town and the foreign.
Mr. CROKELL quoted 2d Barnewall and Alderson, to show that the town mid the foreign had been always considered as distinct.
Mr. GEORGE BANKES then moved his *lineament, to substitute the Isle of l'urbeek for Walsall.
Mr. CROKER said, if that amendment were lost, he would then move the substitution of Merthyr-Tydvil or Toxteth Park.
The House divided on this amendment : for it, 87; against it, 165; majority, 78.
A long discussion took place on the motion for placing Whitby in the schedule. The arguments adduced against it were the same as those urged against Walsall. The House divided on this question also : the numbers for retaining Whitby in the schedule were 221; against it, 120; majority, 101.
Schedule D being finished, the House proceeded to consider Schedule E; which was agreed to without opposition.
Schedule F was also agreed to without opposition ; as were Sche- dules H and G.
The Chairman then reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again this day. Lord ALTILORP, in answer to a question put to him, said he hoped the third reading might be taken on Monday sennight.
2. IRISH TITTLES. The report of the Select Committee of the House of Lords was brought under the notice of the House on Thurs- day, by the Marquis of LANSDOWNE. In recommending to the House certain resolutions founded on the report, the Marquis went into a view of the facts connected with resistance to tithes in Ireland, the effects of • During the division respecting, Gateshead, and while strangers were excluded, there was a vast deal of laughter and cheering in the House. The cause M it was—Lord Nugent. His Lordship, just previous to the division, was busily engaged in conversa- tion with some member in the Opposition camp. Not noticing the progress of the divi- sion, his Lordship quietly kept his scat and continued his conversation ; nor was he aroused from his agreeable chat till he found himself being counted as one of the oppo- nents of the question ! His Lordship wanted to retreat ; but it was too late. Too glad to have caught a lord—and a Lord of the Treasury into the bargain—" voting against Ministers," he was compelled to remain, as the caanting had commenced; and it was added, that his Lordship was actually countedas 1. 41 voting against "Gateshead" and the Ministers!—Moraing Herald. Ithat resistance, and the inferences arising out of both in as far as they were connected with a legislative remedy. In proof of the systematic opposition to tithes, he read the evidence of the Reverend S. J. Roberts, and two other clergymen ; which proved, not only that the resistance
had spread to Tipperary, Kilkenny, Carlow, Wicklow, Queen's County, and Kildare, but that it was rapidly extending in the other parts of Southern and Western Ireland. The Marquis cited, in corroboration of these statements, the evidence of Colonel Harvey, Mr. Fitzgerald, and Mr. Greene, magistrates of Tipperary, and of Major Tandy, a magistrate of Kildare. Lord Lansdowne quoted from Major Tandy's evidence an instance of the resistance-
" At Maynootb, there were processes served upon different persons ; and the process-server came to me_, and told me (Major Tandy) he received two threat- ening- letters through the Post-office, to deter him from going. to Maynooth. I told him he should 11;14 every protection. The man went there, and when the tithe cases came to be called on, the attorney declined to proceed. He told me that he was afraid to proceed ; that he received two threatening letters, for- warded to his house in Dublin through the Post-office; and that he went to one of the principal clergymen by whom he was employed, and showed him those letters; and this clergyman said, ' I see your lifels in danger, and therefore I will not press you to proceed upon it.' The consequence was, that this gentleman was afraid to proceed upon any of the tithe cases; and they all fell to the ground, to the number of one hundred and sixty."
Lord Lansdowne proceeded to lay before the House the plans which Government proposed,—to give relief to the suffering clergy, according to the scale laid down in the appendix to the report, allotting a larger proportion to the poorer and a smaller proportion to the richer among them; to adopt such measures as might be necessary for the prompt and effective enforcement of time
e law, n order to remunerate Govern- ment for the sums thus advanced to the clergy ; to substitute for the present mode of paying the clergy, one which might be generally ac- ceptable to the people. The Marquis made sonic observations on tithe generally- - It had been mooted in that House and elsewhere, whether tithe was a tax upon the landlord, the occupier, or the consumer. His own opinion was, that tithe operated both as a direct and indirect tax on the consumer; and no doubt exi-ted, that when the laws relating to the import of corn came to be re- vised, both landlord and tenant would take into account the diminution of their produce eaused by tithe, which was, pro tanto, a diminution of the fertility of the soil. In this way, tithe might be considered a tax upon landlords. But it WZN also a tax upon the occupier ; for there was no one who did not take land with a prospect of milking some improvements; and thus, if the effect of the tithe system were looked into, we should see that it caused a diminution of the rent of the landlord, and also was a tax upon the labour and capital whirls might lie laid out ; and that the effect of this impost was to make the tenant's interest less productive, and consequently deprive him pro tanto of the remuneration lie had a right to expect over and above his rent to his landlord. Not only did it thus discourage the occupier from reclaiming barren land, hut prevented him from applying to other land that additional capital and labour which would bring linn an increased produce. Tithe would thus be found to be a tax bearing not only on the landlord and the occupier, but upon the consumer, as tending to diminish the supply of food ; and in consequence of this, there was scarcely a country in the worn in which this property had not undergone an essential mo-
dification. .
. He noticed, in addition to the other objections against it, the differ- ence in its amount in different counties ; in some rising to a shilling in others falling to sevenpence. He quoted the evidence of Archlop Whately, to show the impossibility of its continuing on its present footing. The Archbishop says-
" But as for the continuance of the tithe system, it seems to me that it must be at thi point of the bayonet—that it must be through a sort of chronic civil war. The ill feelings that have so long existed against it, have been embodied in tit; organized a combination, that I conceive there would be continually break- ings-out of resistance, which must be kept down by a continuance of very severe measures, such as the Government Might indeed resolve to have recourse to for once, if necessary, but would be very unwilling to resort to habitually, so as to keep the country under military government. -And the most intelligent persons, and the most experienced Ihave; conversed with, seem to think that nothing else will permanently secure the payment of tithes under the present system."
He quoted also the evidence of Mr. Grace, to show that composition was, in the present circumstances of Ireland, hopeless ; and that the only use that could be made of compulsory composition was a prelimi- nary to commutation. The Marquis concluded— It was to be recollected also, that in Ireland the flocks of the clergymen did not receive, or did not conceive they received, any compensation for the tithes; although, from what he had seen of the clergy, and from what he knew of their conduct in many Catholic parts of Ireland, he believed confidence would be placed in them by the people, except for the perpetual recurrence of these tithe demands. It was from that, and from a wish to render the clergy independent of this collision, and perpetual collection of dues, amounting in some instances to ten or twelve collections in the year from various titheable articles, and all these from the lowest cultivators,—it was from this, and with a view to put an end to the heartburnings which were of daily occurrence, that he wished to make the clergy independent of the people, and give them land, or do as had been done in Scotland, where so beneficial a change had been effected in the reign of Charles the First. By this the industry of Ireland would be excited,—an encouragement
i
more wanted n Ireland than in any other country in Europe; and this could he effected well by an exchange of land for tithe, instead of that cumbrous and ir- ritating system which, even although there were not any extortion by the clergy, —and of this they were guiltless,—still had such evils m itself. He would say, that if the Legislature provided a remedy for this evil, they would confer the greatest benefit that had been bestowed upon the country. He had now done ; and in taking the liberty of recommending these resolutions, even although the present was a time of great excitement, he trusted be might look to their Lord- ships for that absence of party feelings which had distinguished their decisions heretofore on questions relating to the peace of Ireland.
The Earl of WICKLOW spoke of the report as the report of Govern-
ment, not of the Committee. He expressed his regret, that so little information was afforded the House on the most interesting part of the inquiry in which the Committee had been engaged,—namely, the sub- stitute for that system which was now to be condemned. He trusted, in applying for a new law in order to the more effectual collection of tithe, Government would not content themselves with the arrears of one year. He hoped that the extraordinary powers of collection would continue at least until the permanent arrangement was concluded. The Earl said, the impression that Government were hostile to tithes in Ireland was general, and magistrates were in consequence placed in a very awkward predicament. In proof of this, he noticed the ease of Captain Graham, who had been dismissed from the magistracy for his conduct at Newtownbarry, notwithstanding two grand juries had ignored the 'bills preferred against him, and the judge on the bench had declared that not the slightest imputation rested on his character. Lord Wicklow contended, that wherever a proper degree of vigour was shown by Government, there the resistance to tithes had been put down. He was decidedly opposed to converting tithe into a rent charge; the plan of a commutationfor land was a much more reasonable one.
The Bishop of LONDON rose to correct the assertion that the report was the report of Government. As a member of the Committee, he had signed it, and he entirely approved of its substance, although here and there he might have wished a change of expression. True, Go- vernment had, as it was their duty, submitted to the Committee the substance of the report ; but no, part of what was so submitted had been agreed to Nirithout due deliberation and discussion.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH complained that Lord Lansdowne had spoken of tithe as a tax.. and Ile contended that the argument of the Marquis against Irish tithes, was applicable to tithes everywhere. He went on to say, amidst the laughter and cheers of the Ministerial benches, that the resistance to the payment of tithes was never heard of. until the present Cabinet came into office.
Lord LANSDOWNE said, he spoke of tithe as a property—he never spoke of it as a tax; had Lord Ellenborough employed both his ears instead of one of them, he would have been satisfied of that.
Lord MELBOURNE observed, that the seeds of resistance to tithe in Ireland were sown and had sprung up long before the present Cabinet was formed. Lord Wicklow had complained that the remedy proposed was not clearly defined : now he insisted that it was.
Lord WICKLOW—.." What is it, then ?"
Lord MELBOURNE—" The principle of the measure is, that provi- sion for the clergy shall be made hereafter, either by a commutation of tithes for land, or by the imposition of a tax on the land in lieu of tithes."
The Duke of WELLINGTON concluded, from the language of the Bishop of London and the silence of the rest of the Bench of Bishops, that they concurred in:the recommendation of the report, and the reso- lutions to be founded upon it. He inclined to attribute the present state of Ireland, in a great measure, to the artful system of agitation carried on there ; and contended, that unless that agitation were put down, even the settlement of the tithe question would not restore peace to Ireland. With respect to the plan of converting tithe into a rent charge, the Duke thought that in the case of existing leases it would be a great injustice : if adopted at all, it ought to be adopted in respect to future leases only. To the other alternative, the substitution of land for tithe, he saw no objection, provided the Bishops approved of it.
Lord TEYNHAM objected to Government taking upon it the office of tithe-collector. It was the duty of Government to vindicate the law, but not where an entire nation was opposed to it ; in that case, the law had already fallen to the ground.
Lord ELDON expressed his disappointment, when a measure was brought forward which went directly to annihilate Church propeity, that no member of the Episcopal Bench should rise to defend its in- terests— He thanked his God that he should not be amongst either the ecclesiastical or the lay supporters of this motion; that he would not give his assent (his oppo- sition he saw would be useless) to a measure which went to deprive the Minis- ters of the United Church of England and Ireland of that which constituted their entire support, and to which they had as much right as there existed to any lay property in any part of England. It was perfectly absurd to suppose that what would take place in Ireland in this instance would not be sure after- wards to take place in England also. (" Hear, hear !") His long life had been thrown away. in supporting the interests of the United Church of this em- ;fire, if those to whom the interests of that Church were intrusted did not come forward to protect them when a measure was proposed which extinguished the Church property, unaccompanied by a plan for providing a substitute for it. He so entirely despaired of support for the Church of Ireland, from that quarter from which it should be expected, and to whose support it was entitled, that he begged to intimate to their Lordships, that the humble individual who now ad- dressed them would give them no further trouble on this subject. (A laugh.)
The Archbishop of CANTERBURY said, the attack on the Bishops by Lord Eldon was wholly unfounded injustice. Dr. HowLEY stated the i reasons which induced him to concur n the resolutions—.
The attacks made by the enemies of the Church of Ireland had always been founded on the payment of tithes; and if they could place that Church on a fair footing with the country, and at the same time make a just provision for the clergy, he did think that a very great benefit would be conferred, both on the country and on the Church of Ireland. The first thing they ought to do was to adopt some measure to render the tithe-composition system universal. Three-fifths of the country had acceded to the Tithe-Composition Act, and he wished that the other two-fifths should be placed in a similar situation. If this were done, both the clergy and the people would find themselves in a much better situation than they were at present. That ought to be the first step, and a most desirable one it would be. There would afterwards be no difficulty, or very little difficulty, in taking into consideration whether the clergy should be permanently provided for by a charge on land, or in any other manner which might appear most desirable. By pursuing this course, he hoped they would be able to secure the peace and tranquillity of the country. He should always 'assert and maintain his conviction, that the Church had as much right to its property as any other body in the country had a right to theirs; but if the mode of collecting; that property were found to be inconvenient—if it were found to _operate disadvantageously for the Church itself—then, he asked, would it not be wise to alter it?-
The Earl of ABERDEEN remarked on the absurdity of calling on Par- liament to agree to an alternative measure on which Government had not yet made up their own minds. What if some third plan, better than either, should be struck out—would not the House be completely stultified by agreeing to the present resolution ?
Lord LANSDOWNE, in his reply, defended the course pursued by Mi- nisters, on the ground, that although the Committee had not yet made up their mind as to which of the proposed plans was preferable, they had fully made up their minds to adopt one of the two. He thought the individual would be indeed stultified who looked to any resource but the land for the payment of tithe. The resolutions were agreed to. The same question was discussed, though in a different way, in the House of Commons, also on Thursday; when Mr. STANLEY moved that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, in order to take into consideration the views of Government as embodied in the report of the Commons' Select Committee.
Mr. Baowsmow proposed, as an amendment, that the debate should be adjourned until the Committee had gone into a full inquiry into the
subject of tithes, and the appropriation of Church property in Ireland, and until the evidence and report of the Committee came before Par- liament. Adverting to the practice of the House in the case of the Catholic question, Mr. Brownlow observed, that the mode then, and what he thought ought to be the mode still, was for the member who moved that the House should go into Committee, to explain fully the nature of the resolutions which it was his intention to move when in Committee. He proceeded to criticise the report of the Committee on Tithes. He protested against it as partial—as giving undue weight to the claims of the Established clergy, and neglo ting the considera- tion of other interests—as attending solely to the Church, and utterly forgetting the congregation, where there happened to be a congregation. He strongly deprecated laws of further coercion, as fatal to the clergy and injurious to the Government. He complained that, in considering the resistance to tithes, the Committee had entirely left out ofsight the grounds of the resistance. It was not in the severity of their ex- action, for they were .exacted in a much more lenient way in Ireland than in England. In Tipperary, tithe did not exceed a twelfth part, and in some eases not a thirtieth part of the rental; while in E:g-land it amounted in many places to a third. The real grounds of resistance were to be found in the fact, that the religion of the people and the re- ligion of the Established Church were not the same—that the Church, which taxed the whole people, gave service only to a small minority of them. In England, at the Reformation the tithes were taken front the Catholic and given to the Episcopal clergy, because the people could not see why the majority should pay for ministrations in which they had no share : but a different rule was observed in Ireland; for there, by a bull which had not even the redeeming feature of humour to recommend it, the tithes were taken from the majority to be con- ferred on the minority. This original error had been the fertile source of all the misery, crimes, and distractions that had since distinguished Ireland.
Mr. HUNT seconded Mr. Brownlow's motion.
Lord MILTON objected to the amendment, because it would occupy the night in profitless debate, and prevent the House from arriving at that information the want of which Mr. Brownlow complained of.
Mr. M. O'CoNNELL said, that to remunerate the suffering clergy, and enforce the existing law, no one objected ; but it was understood that there were ulterior measures to be proposed by Government ; and to these, feeling that in Ireland the law was sufficiently strong for all rational purposes, he must decidedly object. Nothing could be more uncalled for than extended powers just now, seeing that last year, when Ireland was on the eve of a civil war, none were thought necessary.
Sir ROBERT PEEL defended the manner of proceeding adopted by Government, as strictly agreeable to form. In the first place, no money resolution could be voted unless in Committee. Secondly, there was a standing order, aimed against improvident changes in Cie religious institutions of the country, which directed all such changes to be first agreed on in Committee. There was a third reason for discussing a resolution in Committee, that thereby members were afforded a second opportunity of speaking their sentiments on the bringing up of the report.
Mr. SHEIL, who had risen with Lord Milton, again presented him- self to the Speaker's eye on Sir Robert Peel's sitting down. He spoke strongly against the designs of Ministers. The question, he contended, had been injudiciously introduced by Government, and partially con- sidered— Out of eighteen witnesses, they had examined only one Catholic witness, and then they produced their report and went on with their examination. It was as if the Jury were desired to retire on the closing of the plaintiff's case ; to find their verdict, to have judgment pronounced, and then to request the defendant to proceed with his case. Was this just—was this fair dealing ? Was this pure, impartial British justice? Eight Clergymen, four Policemen, a Secretary to an Ecclesiastical Commission, a Register to an Eccle,iastical Court, had been examined ; and on such evidence a report, recommending coercion to the People and largesses to the clergy, was produced. This was monstrous. If the Com- mittee had confined themselves to the recommendation of charity to tl!e clergy, the Irish members could not complain; but they came here with a purse of gold for the Church, and a rod of iron for the People.
He noticed the cases of suffering to which the attention of the Com- mittee had been drawn
Dr. Hamilton, of Knocktopher, had refused a just composition, and he had also refused twice to produce his books in order to enable a just estimate of his income to be made. Dr. Butler hints that he is a starving exile ; vet he ad- mits, that for thirty-six years he has received 2,000/. a year. He 11"as fourteen parishes, with scarcely a single Protestant. This splendid sinecurist—he may be a good man—has got 60,0001.; and he is one of the objects of eleemosynary commiseration to the Committee.
Mr. Sheil spoke of the disgrace of convertine. the Lord Lieutenant into a tithe-proctor, and the exasperation which such a proceeding would produce. He spoke of the consequences to the Ministerial
interest in Ireland-- •
"It is your turn this session, but it will be ours the next. What are you doing? Succouring a clergy from which you expect nothing—affronting and irritating a nation from which you look for much—opening the boilinm fountain of popular indignation—leaguing a nation against you by your threat; of coer- cion. We have served and supported you, and stood by you in many an emer- gency., and have received your praise for our zeal, our vigilance, our devotion to your interests; but, alas ! what can we do for you in the hurricane of popular passion, which you are about to raise? Our voices in your behalf will be like whispers in a tempest : our arms are not strong enough to swim against the tide that knows no returning ebb, and if we attempt it we shall be swept be- fore it."
• He called on the Opposition to look back to the history of the Ca- tholic Bill, and to reflect on the impossibility of withstanding the de- mands of a whole nation. He called on the Reformers to act on the principle which they had laid down in advodating the Reform Bill—.
• What course did you pursue in the conduct of this greatpraceeding? - Did you appoint a Committee? Did you refer Schedule A to the right honotitimble member for Tamworth? Did you name a Committee formed of all parties (this is the phrase), to inquire into the state of the boroughs of England, and the con- stitution of the House of Commons, and to report their observations thereon?' No—you saw that hesitation for a moment would be ruin for ever—you grasped at the irrevocable occasion, and you seized and held it. We must content the English people'—this was your answer to every objection. If it was urged that the Lord Chancellor had digested a very different plan of Reform, you replied, and well and nobly, It is too late—we must content the English people.' If it was said that Lord John Russell's book was at variance with Lord John Russell's Bill, still you answered, We must content the people of England.' If it was said that the representatives of the Colonies would be excluded—that the avenues by which Pitt, and Fox, and Burke had obtained admission to this House would be closed against genius—that the present system had saved the country at the Revolution, and had been concomitant with its glory since—still you well and wisely answered, 'We must conform to the great change and transition evhich has taken place, and must content the people.' And if this be true, as it beyond all doubt is true—if you find it necessary to content the English people, on a Reform in the Parliament—is it perfectly unnecessary, is it matter for con- sideration' scepticism, and Cabinet debates, whether you must not content the Irish people upon the Church ?"
Mr. WALLACE and Mr. H. GRATTAN followed on the same side.
Lord EBRINGTON said, if Ministers had recommended any plan of coercion, without at the same time proposing measures of conciliation, he would not have given them his support. At the same time, the in- ducements to the people to pay their arrears would be so liberal, that he confidently anticipated it would not be necessary to use the addi- tional powers that Government were about to demand.
. Lord ALTITORP did not think the argument against going into Com- mittee, derived from the precedent of Sir Robert Peel's introduction of
the Catholic question, of much force. On that question' there were a great many members opposed to the principle of the Government proposition ; and it was they who opposed the Committee. In the present case, the gentlemen who opposed the Committee, were those who most called for the alterations which Government were desirous to introduce. To the argument derived from the imperfect evidence before the Connnittee, Lord Althorp said, there was enough to warrant a proposition of change ; and surely that might satisfy those ado called for change— It had been proved that the clergy were in the greatest distress, and that there was the greatest difficulty in collecting tithes ;. that a combination to resist the payment of tithes existed in one part of Ireland, and was speeding over the Whole country ; and that if a change did not take place, the payment of the re- venues of the clergy would cease throughout Ireland. It was proved, therefore, that the state of things was such as to make a change of system necessary. rnder those circumstances, therefore, lie thought that the iairmation on the table of the House was sufficient to make it the imperative duty of the House to consider what remedies ought to be adopted.
Mr. LEADER said, Mr. Stanley had proceeded in a way that on an English question he would not dare to proceed. He ridiculed the no- tion of o distressed clergy, when it appeared that out of 800,000L there were but 80,0001. of arreats.
Sir Il Exav Pnuxord. said, the grand question was, how were the 'Government to proceed in remunerating themselves for their advances to the clergy ?
They had the most distinct proof, in the evidence given before the Committee, that the Government plan could not succeed. To his heowledge, that evidence aims most correct. He entertained not the slighte,t doubt that it would not succeed; there was not one of the birty or fifty Irish members who supported the Govermuent would tell the right honintrabie gentleman that the plan had the slightest chance of success. He would just ask the right honourable gen- tleman—was there any one of his Irish supperi C rS who gave Into the ,lightest encouragement to proceed? The present was, heleed, a serious ease, and one which could not be trifled with; and how did it stand? The right honourable 'gentleman brought forward a measure for tbe relief of the Irish people, and every one of his Irish supporters in that House was opposed to it.
Mr. J. GRATTAN said, there was no evidence before the Committee to make out the case on which Mr. Stanley relied.
Mr. STANLEY replied briefly to the arguments adduced against going into Committee— Did those who opposed the Committee mean to say that no change was ne- cessary? If they did, their opinions were at variance with that of all others, not only of Catholics, not only of Presbyterians, but of Ministers of the Church Establishment, who had been examined, and without whose testimony the ex- amination would indeed have been partial and incomplete. What was the mean- ing of this call for delay ? Were they to wait three, four, five, or six months, on a subject like the present; or did those who recommended delay think it would be more possible for the Government to Vindicate the majesty of the law at the end of that time than at present? There had been a. charge made against thic Government, that they had encouraged agitation in Ireland. It was a false, 'a foul, a calumnious accusation—but it hailbeen made ; and yet when the Go- vernment wished to produce a measure that would have the effect of quieting agitation, they were called On to delay for some time longer : and thus, while the charge itself increased the amount of agitation, the effort of the Government to prevent it was opposed and attempted to be frustrated.
The House then divided : for going into Committee, 314; against it, 31; majority, 283. The Speaker did not, however, quit the chair; it being agreed, on account of the lateness of the hour, to take the Com- mittee on Monday next.
3. IRISH EDUCATION. On Tuesday, Mr. GORDON presented three _petitions against the Government Board of Education; and a long conversation on the subject took place.
Lord ACIIESON spoke of a petition which had been intrusted to him- self by the Presbyterian clergymen of the General Synod of Ulster. It mentioned, as an objection to the Board, that by placing a Presby- terian clergyman upon it, the parity which the Synod deemed it a -matter of conscience to maintain among the ecclesiastical members of their body, had been destroyed. Lord Acheson admitted, that on this objection, the Synod, with whom it Was described as a matter of con- 'science, were bound to act. The Synod also objected to the principle of taking from parents the power of appointing and dismissing the 'schoolmasters. This objection he did not deem of much importance, as he thought the Board was not unlikely to be better judges of a
• schoelmaster's qualification than the parents were. The next and prin- cipal objection of the Synod was to the use of extracts in Board Schools, to the exclusion of the Bible entire and unmutilated.
• Now, one word concerning these extracts. He would -ask -whence this cud. den horror of extracts? Had we never heard of extract in Christian families? Were extra .N never in use in the Kildare Place Schools ? To be sure they were. Oh! but they were told that these extracts were to be agreed to by the members oF the Board belonging to different persuasions— Protestant and Catholic. If by this it was intended that concessions were to be made by Pro- testants, on points of religion,—if paseages were to be garbled, or to be altered, to suit Rom in Catholics,—he trusted that he should be behind no man in corn- ing forward to give his most decided opposition to such proceeding-a. Political concessions naught be at times highly expedient, and even necessary; but no man should eyer convince him that a concession of a religious principle, against the dictates of conscience, however expedient it might be on worldly grounds, was or could be justifiable. But if extracts were made, as they might and would be, involving no concession on either side, at the same time satisfactory to persons of b ith persuasions, he dill not see what grounds of discontent remained to either party.
On the charge that Government wished to deprive the Protestants of their Bibles, Lord Acheson said— He appealed to any fair and unprejudiced man who had an eye to read, or a particle of common sense to understand, the plan laid down by Mr. Stanley in his letter to the Duke of Leinster, whether, on the face of that plan, there waft a sentence which could be construed to imply swim a motive on the part of Go- vernment. He appealed to the House, whether, in the conduct of Mr. Stanley or of the noble Earl at the head of the Administration, any thing had ever ap- peared to justify such an insinuation. Why, the plan not only stated distinctly that two days in the week, besides Sunday, were to be given op to religious in- struction • but ministers were recommended to give religious instruction to the children of their respective persuasions before and after school-hours on other days; and it was expressly stated, that the extracts used as a school-book on days appointed for moral and literary education, were by no means intended to convey a perfect and efficient religious education or to supersede the neressity of religious instruction, on the days set apart for that purpose. If a doubt could exist as to the motives of Government, this, in his opinion, would be quite stanch:at to dispel it.
He complained that all the -censures of the opponents of the Board had been reserved for the present Government— Why had they not been imputed to those who were the original framers of this plan of education, from whose report Mr. Stanley's letter- lied been taken in many respects verbatim ? He imputed no motives—he only stated facts. The present Government was a Whig Government—the then Government was of an opposite character in its politics. There was no reform question pending in those days—there was no object then in inflaming the miuds of meu against Government.
Ile stated what be deemed the real objection to the plan—the impos- sibility of its working, in it country where men's minds were torn asunder by party fctdiiig. The more the Board schools were diffused, the greater would be the difficulty of maintaining them on the principles laid doyen by Government. Suppose ten or twelve schools in a populous parish, bow could either Protestant or Catholic clergyman give to the children of each two th:ys in the week of religious instruction ? He therefore thought, the telly and the wisest plan was to withdraw all grants from either party ; they wily added fuel to the flame. His Lordship con- cluded thu--
" I say this with regret, but not without the anxious hope, that the day may soon come, when all then differences will be at an end, awl when it slims of influence veiii t urn their minds without reference to party feeling: or prejudice, tu those poilits alone in which they may be of use and advautage to their country. I .111 aware that my opinions may he misrepresented ; but this I must again de- chat 0, that if Icould liar a mome.at imagine that Ids _Majesty's Ministers were tic tuilted by the motives which have been imputed to them, I, as a Protestant— I trust as stanch a Protestant as any gentleman on the other side of the House- :do:tad feel it me duty instantly to withdraw that humble but conscientious support wliich / lure hitherto had great pleasure in giving to them." Mr. STAyi.ey observed, that tile great object of Government was such an education as might produce in both Catholics and Protestants those feeliegs which were said to be the peculiar fruit of Christianity— love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness. After notiemg the celebrated petition of the 230,000 Protestants, and the nature of its preyer, which was not to deprive the petitioners of their Bible,---and defying any one to point out a single passage in the Government state- ment o Lich warranted the conclusion that any so absurd a design had ever been contemplated,—he referred to the fourteenth Report of the Education Committee (so innply quoted by Lord Plunkett when the question was discussed in the House of Lords), for an entire justifica- tion of the Government proceedings. With respect to the charge of mutilating the Scriptures— He asked those persons who raised that cry, whether they wonld, as fathers, place the Scriptures in the hands of their children, and leave them to their unin- structed and unaided use? (A member, " That is not the question.") He begged pardon ; it was the question. Did Ministers deny the use of religious instruction? No such thing • they merely contended that it ought not to be used as a school-book, in schools where Protestants and Catholics mixed to- gether. He again referred to the Fourteenth Report to show, that the plan of Government had been sanctioned by the Irish Primate and several of the Irish Bishops, who made part of the Commission. But it had a justification yet more in point— He would ask the House' what it thought of the nature of the opposition that had been raised to the muse of selections from the Scriptures, when, after all that had been advanced upon the subject, it appeared that selections of this very kind, for the use of schools, authorized by the Most Reverend Dr. Troy, the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin, had been published under the auspices of the Kildare Street Society. - He concluded by saying— It now remained to be seen whether the bitterness of party and political feel-
in m
g should preclude two great bodies of the Irish community from having their children educated together —from improving those children in the practice of the social charities, and from giving more elevated notions of religion in their re- spective creeds, which would be equally beneficial to all; for though he was sensible of the errors of the Catholic Church, still he concerned it better to have a good Catholic than a bad Protestant. In conclusion, he maintained that the measure of Government, if it received a fair trial, would produce the best effects for the future tranquillity and interests of Ireland. Mr. LEFROY said, the great objection to the Government plan was, not the use of extracts from the Bible, but the exclusion of the Bible entire. It was more injurious to the Catholics than to the Protestants, because it deprived them of even the chance of perusing the Bible with- out note or comment-
TotaL £21,150
In addition to these offices, there were several other lucrative places held by Lord Plunkett's family and connexions ; the whole of which taken together amounted to 27,8501. per annum. Mr. Dawson con- cluded with a character of the Chancellor himself- The present political Chancellor was Attorney-General to Lord Grenville, and retired from office in consequence of being foiled in an attempt to remove some of the disabilities under which the Catholics then laboured. He then be- came Attorney-General under Lord Liverpool, who was the bitterest enemy of the Catholics. He was then offered the office of Master of the Rolls by Mr. Canning, who was the deadliest enemy of Reform, and whose last words were "No R.eform;" and the noble and learned person concluded by becoming Lord Chancellor under the noble lord opposite, whose motto was "Reform, and nothing but Reform" There was an advantage in being a political Chancellor. Mr. CRAMPTON passed a high eulogy on Lord Plunkett, for the way in which he had fulfilled the duties of his high office- As to the charge of proselytism advanced against the friends of Billie cir- culation could there be a more bitter sarcasm on the Catholic religion than to assert that the diffusion of the Scriptures without note or comment among its adherents, must necessarily lead to proselytism? Were they to be told, in this age and country, because a certain addition to social knowledge might lead to a change of mind, therefore it was the duty of Government to place itself be- tween the people and the diffusion of this knowledge? Could there be a principle more thoroughly anti-Protestant than this?
After noticing, that not less than 40,000 or 50,000 Catholics had been educated at the Kildare Street schools, and that Catholics had preferred even being debarred of connnunion to abandoning the schools, Mr. Lefroy proceeded to read and quote from Mr. Stanley's letter; according to which, he contended, the Bible would be interdicted under the new system-
That letter alleged, that, according to the tenets of the Roman Catholic Church, children could not be permitted to read the Scriptures without note or comment ; and in this way they were not to be intrusted even to adults.
Mr. STANLEY requested Mr. Lefroy to read the passage of his let- ter ; which, he said, had been quite misrepresented by the honourable member.
Mr. LEFROY said, he aid not anticipate such a charge from Mr. Stanley's habits in the House. ' (Cries f " Read ! ") Mr. STANLEY tidmitted that he bad used a harsh expression, but in- sisted that the words of his letter had been misrepresented, although unintentionally.
Mr. LEFROY cited a passage, stating that the principles of the Ro- man Catholic Church were totally at variance with the indiscriminate reading of the Scriptures, and that it denied even to adults the right of private interpretation with respect to articles of religious faith. He concluded- He had no objection to the introduction of a book composed of selections from the Scriptures ; but he had strong objections to any rule, of which the ten- dency was to excludethe Scriptures without noteor euiriment. The iittempt to make selections from the Scriptures so as to please men of all religions, had been made on a former occasion, and had signally failed. He was sure that the attempt would be unsuccessful on the present occasion, as the system now re- commended by the Government was at once anti-national, anti-Protestant, and anti-Christian.
Mr. CRAMPTON spoke of the meeting at Exeter Hall- He had been induced to attend that meeting himself, and was prepared to have defended the Government to which he had the honour to be attached, from the imputations by which they were assailed ; but on looking to the ticket of admission, he had found an endorsement on the back, containing a direction that no one would be allowed to take part in the proceedings of the meeting but such as were opposed to the proposeil plan and favourable- to the resolutions
• to be adopted by the meeting ; and yet the member for Dundalk could triumph in what he was pleased to designate " the unanimity which pervaded that meeting."
Several members afterwards spoke briefly for and against the Govern- ment plan ; and among others Colonel CONOLT.Y, who said the Irish " were so sunk in degradation tlet they did not know what moral prin- ciples were." The conversation terminated with an order for the printing of the petition.
4. LORD PLUNKETT. On Tuesday, Mr. DAWSON, in moving for certain returns respecting the office of Secretary to the Irish Chancel- lor, took occasion, in consequence of a passing allusion made by Lord Plunkett on Friday last week to Mr. Dawson's motion, to 'enter on a statement of the various sums received by the members of Lord Plun- kett's family ; which he followed up by a severe invective on the poli- tical inconsistency of the Irish Chancellor himself. Mr. Dawson no- ticed the appointment of Mr. Long as joint secretary along with Mr. M'Causland ; and contended, that by the act 4th George I V. cap. 61, the Irish Chancellor was not entitled to more than one Secretary. If it were said that Mr. Long were only assistant to Mr. M' Causland, Mr. Dawson observed, that would be equally irregular, as there had been no instance of an assistant secretary since 1770. He commented on the impropriety of appointing Mr. M'Causland to an office for
which, from his youth (Mr. Dawson said he was only ' nineteen) he was wholly unfit ; and holding out to the world, by assigning to Mr. Long .500/. for performing the duties of it, that 5001. and not 2,500/. was a proper and adequate remuneration. He then proceeded to read the following list of the offices held by Lord Plunkett and his family.
Lord Plunkett, as Lord Chancellor £8,000 per annum.
P. Plunkett, son, Purse-bearer
Ditto, Secretary to Bankrupts Ditto, Counsel to Chief Remembrancer
D. Plunkett, eon, Prothonotary C. P
Ditto, Examiner C. P.
J. Plunkett, son, Assistant Barrister Co. Meath 700
Ditto, Crown Counsel Munster Circuit 1,200 Ditto, Police Counsel 800 — 2,700
Reverend F. Plunkett, son, Dean of Down 2,500
Reverend W. Plunkett, son, Vicar of Bray 800 W. M'Causland junior, nephew, Secretary 2,000 W. M'Causland senior, brother-in-law 1,500
£800 900 , 350 1,500 100 2,050 1,600
He-hrtd •beetr a-practitionerirrthe- gottrt-of Gitineeprdering-the-geeoeetart of his life, and he would without hesitation declare, without disparagement tor any of the noble lord's predecessors, that never within his memory had the duties of the business of the court been discharged with so much diligence, despatch and satisfaction to the suitors as during the period Lord Plunkett had presidei. there.
Mr. Dawson had described Lord Plunkett as absent during Hilary term : Mr. Crampton said this 'Was incorrect-Lord Plunkett had not been absent a day during Hilary term ; he did not leave the court until the term was over, and until every cause but one, in which he was himself a party, and which was heard by the 'Master of the Rolls, had been finished. Mr. Dawson was equally misinformed respecting Mr.. M'Causlamd's age, Nvhirli was twenty-three, not nineteen ; neither was he at all unfit for the office to which he had been appointed. Mr. Long had been appointed joint-secretary at his .own special request, backed by that of Sir Anthony Hart ; and he received the title of joint-secre- tary, that he might not appear to lose rank by being designated assistant secretary.
Some conversation ensued on Mr. Crampton's statement. Sir EDWARD SUDDEN thought, where the facts were so differently stated,: it was impossible to come to any just conclusion.
Mr. Seam RICE expressed sonic surprise at the new light which had of a sudden broken in upon Mr. Dawson and his friends on the sub- ject of Political Chancellors, and more especially of offices held by: the members of a Chancellor's finnily- He could refer to an instance of the kind, which it was singular had escaped the research of honourable members, but to which he would direct their atten- tion, as being fully as deserving of remark as the one that had been submitted ti the House to-night. The example to which he was about to advert was not based upon newspaper reports, but upon a report of a Committee of the House of Commons. This Committee had Leen appointed in 1.802, for the purpose of inquiring into what offices were filled by members of the House. It appeared: from the return, that no less than six profitable legal offices were filled by the Honourable William Henry John Scott. Here, then, was the only son of a. Chancellor holding no less than six offices ; while the case brought tbrward by the right honourable gentleman showed merely that some provision had been made during different Administrations for the numerous finuily of the Chancellor for Ireland. No doubt, had there in the instance which he cited been six sons,. thirty-six offices would have been distributed among them.
Mr. G. BANKES spoke of the pain which Mr. Rice's allusion might produce, and Sir CHARLES WETHERELL complained that Lord Eldon. WITS attacked in his absence.
Mr. Dawson's motion, with an amendment moved by Mr. H. GRAT- TAN, extending it to the cases of Mr. Lockwood, Lord Manners's.- Secretary, and Mr. Long, Sir Anthony Hart's Secretary, Ivas agreed to..
5. PLURALITIES BIT.T.. The second reading of this bill was moved. on Monday, by the Archbishop of CANTEnuiltv, its originator.
Lord KING observed, that it did not go far enough : thirty years ago, such a bill might have been useful, but now it would neither be useful nor acceptable- Tle. great almso in the Church was, that two rich benefices mi.oht be held by one person ; and be asked, did iltc bill attack that abuse? There might be some grounds fix allowim.; small benefices to lie held tegether, tini it might be- said, that if held separately, they would not atford a Minpetent and decent main- tenance to the minister ; Litt coupling two large benefices looked too much like making a gain of godliness. This was an ;those pecilliiir to the Church of Eng-- land ; the Catholie Church did not allnw the parochial clergy any thing like the lhience the prtient bill wool,' grant with ivspect to.pluralities. Every sincere fricnil of the Cimmirchm inivi object to tbe hill for not going fin. enough.. The Established Church was no hoiger the religion of the mitioiiity of the people ;. and it mild not afford to lose its character by a continuance 'of abuses.
6. SUGAR DUTIES. A lengthened discussion took place on Wed- nesday on the propriety of lowering the duties on Brown Muscovado 7 and Cloyed Sugars, from 24s. to 20s. per hundredweight. The reduc- tion was moved by Lord CHANDOS, as an amendment to a motion of Lord ALTHORP for continuing the present duties for six months longer.
Lord ALTHORP accompanied his motion with an announcement that Government contemplated certain fiscal regulations, by which the sugar colonies would be considerably benefited, though not perhaps to such an extent as by a reduction of ditty; which he said he would. gladly have proposed, had not the state of the finances rendered it im- practicable. He stated also the conditions on which the fiscal measure contemplated by Government was to be extended to the different islands- In bringing forward that fiscal measure, he felt himself bound to recollect the pledge which lie had given in the last session of Parliament, to the House inv genera and to the honourable member for Weymouth in particular,-namely, that it was the intention of the Government, in any relief which they might propose to extend to the West Indies, to make a distinction between those colonies which had accepted and those colonies which had refused to accept our regulations. By that pledge he intended to abide; and that was an additional reason why he found it impossible to bring forward any specific plan of prospec- tive relief.
Mr. K. DOUGLAS supported the motion for reducing the duties ; int. which he was joined by Lord SANDON, Mr. HOME, Mr. C. FERGUSSON, Sir CHARLES WETHERELL, and Mr. WARBURTON. The argument relied on by these members was the old one, that a reduction of duty would be accompanied by an augmented demand, and in this way the. revenue would gain as much from the low as from the high tax. Mr. POULETT THOMSON denied the correctness of the inference fir the case of sugar. It had been reduced in bond from 54s. to 24s. which was precisely the same as the entire removal of the duty; and yet no increased consumption had ensued. The amendment would take from the revenue 750,0001. or 800,000/4 and in the present state of the finances, such an abstraction of revenue, unless other means were fallei. on to make it good, might seriously endanger the faith of the nation to the public creditor-
It was of the utmost importance for those who supported Lord Chandos's pro- posal, to consider whether, by passing the resolution, they would not entirely an- nihilate all hope of redeeming the pledge to which Lord Althorp had alluded, and of enforcing those conditions that were meant to accompany those fi!cal..- regulations, and which were of great interest to the rights of suffering humanity..
Lord SANDON complained of the introduction into the debate of allu- sions to the question of the slave-trade, and deprecated accompanying relief to the West Indies with any restrictions. Lord Howica said, the 1-tuuse was pledged not to give relief to the planter without demanding relief for the slave—
By continuing the duties for six months, as was proposed by Lord Althorp, the subject must be again considered in the present session ; and time would be thus afforded to the Legislature, and to the Local Assemblies in the Colonies, to consider of the best means of affording relief to the planters.
The House at length divided on the amendment : for it, 134; against it, 148; majority for Lord Althorp's proposal, 14. The report was brought up last night.
7. Sr. LUCIE. To a question put by the Marquis of CHANDOS, last night, Lord HOWICK answered, that when the last accounts left Jamaica, the island was tranquil, although great damage had resulted from the insurrection, and, it was feared, considerable loss of life.
The Marquis of CHANDOS alluded to the disturbances at St. Lucie ; there was a report that the Government had ordered the people to open their shops on pain of military interference. Lord Howie': stated, in reply, the facts of the case as they had come to the knowledge of Government, to the same effect as we have de- scribed them in another column from the ordinary sources of intelli- gence. Lord Howick was proceeding to read one of the intercepted letters, when Mr. CHOKER interposed, on the plea that the case of the inculpated parties might be compromised by so doing. Lord Howick desisted in consequence. He added, that when the 'Admiral came from Martinique to the assistance of Governor Bozon, he found the island quiet, and business proceeding as usual, and consequently did not land.
8. EXPEDITION TO ANCONA. On Wednesday, Sir RIC.HARD VT- VYAN put some questions to Lord Palmerston, on the subject of this expedition. Sir Richard took the same view of the subject as was taken by Lord Aberdeen in the House of Lords. He thought the Austrians perfectly justified in interfering, because they were in the neighbourhood of the insurrection, but that the French had no call nor
cause to interfere. He attributed the whole of the disturbances in Italy to the French Revolution of IMO, and accused the French of first seducing the subjects of the Duke of Modena to revolt, and then abandoning them. What he wished to learn was, whether the French expedition to Italy had been undertaken with the acquiescence of his Majesty's Government ; and whether it had met with the concurrence of the Great Continental Powers.
Lord PALMERSTON.declined answering, for the same reason that had been assigned by Earl Grey in declining to answer Lord Aberdeen— He did not consider it consistent with his public duty to give an answer to the questions of the honourable baronet ; but he did not hesitate to inform the House, that, so far as his Majesty's Government were informed, there was no reason to apprehend that the affairs of Italy would not be adjusted without a breach of the general peace.
Sir ROBERT PEEL asked members to look at the present in con- nexion with other events,—the march of the French troops into Bel- gium, the colonization of Algiers, and the expedition to Greece. Sir Robert expressed his fears that these acts might at some future period' tend seriously to disturb the balance of Europe.
Sir RICHARD VYVYAN eXpialia`d, that when he spoke of encouraging the Modenese to revolt, he did not mean to blame the Government of France, but a faction of that country.
Lord PALMERSTON defended the sending of troops into Belgium, as in strict accordance with the principles on which the Allies had all along acted respecting that country. Of the explanations demanded and received on the subject of Algiers by the late Government, Sir Robert Peel must be aware.
Sir Ronenr PEEL said the assurances given might have been satis- factory, but the question was, were these assurances fulfilled.
9. BELGIAN DIPLOMACY. On Monday, the Marquis of LONDON- DERRY, pursuant to notice, put several questions to Lord Ponsonby, respecting a letter signed by a Count named Vander Smissen, which appeared in the newspapers about a fortnight ago. Lord Londonderry wished to know whether the allegations contained in Vander Smissen's letter were true,—namely, that Lord Ponsonby had taken part in a plot for the purpose of restoring the flunily of Orange to the throne of Bel- gium; and that certain petitions from the Orange party had been in- trusted to Lord Ponsonby, which he had neglected to forward to the Conference ? Lord Londonderry said, if no answer were given to these questions, he would consider it his duty to bring forward a motion on the subject.
Earl GREY and Lord PONSONBY both rose at the same moment, but the former immediately gave way.
Lord PONSONBY spoke nearly as follows— I give to the statements made by the noble marquis the most distinct, direct, and positive contradiction. I will not enter into any explanation of my conduct before him.- I do not recognize him as my judge, and I do not know what right he has to demand any explanation from me. I stand upon my character before the world, and upon that I depend for the justification of the conduct which I pursued in Belgium. I scorn the accusation. Let the noble marquis bring forward proofs of the truth of his statements; let hint go to the unworthy sources front which he has received those scandalous and calumnious libels; let him call me before my Peers in this House, and submit a distinct motion on the subject. I repeat my denial of those libels. I will give no explanation. I .stand upon my character."
Lord Ponsonby was very loudly cheered in the course and at the close of this brief address.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY expressed his gratification at elicit- ing from Lord Ponsonby a direct denial of Count Vander Smissen's charges.
Earl GREY observed, that no one who knew Lord Ponsonby could imagine for a moment that there was any truth in them. Lord London- derry might have discovered their falsehood, if he had been at the trouble of merely perusing the papers that contained them. Lord Pon- sonby had been instructed, and had invariably obeyed his instructions, not to interfere in any respect with the factions that divided Belgium. With respect to the petitions mentioned by Lord Londonderry, he knew nothing of them. Every document which it imported the Con- ference to possess, Lord Ponsonby had uniformly transmitted to them.
10. GLOVE TRADE. In the -House of Lords last night, Lord STRANGFORD moved for a Select Committee, to inquire into the pre- sent state of the Glove trade. The chief argument for an inquiry was, that a Committee had been granted on a similar demand in the case of the Wool trade and the Silk trade. His statement did not materially differ from that of Colonel Davies in the Commons ; where the Com- mittee, it will be recollected, was refused.
The Bishop of BATH and WELLS spoke to the distress of Yeovil; and said, the people there had earned a comfortable subsistence for themselves and families, until the French gloves drove them out of the market.
Lord AUCKLAND opposed the Committee, solely on the ground that it would raise expectation and be acccompanied by no beneficial results. He showed the impossibility of the distress at Yeovil being occasioned • by the importation of French gloves. The annual manufacture of English gloves amounted to fifteen millions of pairs ; of French gloves, only one description was imported, and of that only one mil- lion of pairs. There could be no positive decline in English glove- making, whatever decline there might be at Yeovil, for the number of skins imported had doubled within the last two years. No complaint was made of the manner in which the duty was imposed ; and if it were raised (it is now 22 per cent.), the effect would be, not to diminish importation, but to increase smuggling. That there was no smuggling under the present system, Lord Auckland said he would prove by high authority— It was that of the undertaker and insurer of smuggling at Calais. That per- son stated the prices at which smuggling might be carried on. After mention- ing the prices as to figured silks and other articles of a similar kind, he said to his correspondent, "But I should advise you to try nothing in gloves—they do not pay." (A laugh.) With respect to the prohibitory system, Lord Auckland requested the House to look to France for an example of its working— No country had been gifted by nature with more advantages. She had tried i the prohibitory system n every respect in which it could possibly be applied, and yet it was notorious that in that country there was scarcely one manufac- turer that was in a prosperous condition. Be referred for proof of this to th,:- silk trade, their cotton trade, their iron, which, by the way, on account of . prohibitory system of that country, cost the inhabitants double what they might otherwise get it for ; and he might even refer to their vineyards, in which, as in others, the restrictive system led to nothing but to poverty.
The Duke of WELLINGTON supported the motion for a Committee, on the ground of the difference of opinion with respect to the duty and its effects. Some said it was too high, and led to smuggling; others, that it was too low, and led to niinous competition. An inquiry would settle these points. The Duke took occasion to state, that he had al- ways been opposed to free trade ; no such thing could exist in this country.
The discussion was prolonged for some time ; and Lords CLAN- RICARDE, ELLENBOROUGH, and GREY took part in it. The House at length divided: for the motion, 33; against it, 41; majority against the Committee, S.
11. SILK MaxrracTenr COMMITTEE. The following are the names of the Committee appointed on Monday : Earl Grosvenor, Mr. L. Bul- wer, Mr. P. Thomson, Sir R. Peel, Alderman Venables, 'Mr. Cour- tenay, Mr. G. 13ankes; Mr. Hume, Mr. Baring, Sir H. Parnell, Mr. F. Lewis, Mr. F. Buxton, Sir M. Stewart, Mr. Strutt, Mr. Hey- wood, Mr. S. Mackenzie, Mr. Stewart (of Wigton), Mr. Sheil, Lord Dudley Stuart, Mr. A. Sandford, and Mr. Morison—five to be a quorum.
12. DEBTOR AND CREDITOR. Lord BROUGHAM, on Tuesday, moved an address to his Majesty, praying that the last report of the Common Law Commissioners might be laid before the House.
The Commissioners had come to the conclusion, that imprisonment for debt, whether on menu: process or execution, ought if possible to be henceforth abo- lished. All who should read the report, he doubted not, would be satisfied with the sound reasoning and sensible arguments which were there embodied in sup- port of this recommendation. At the same time, it was proposed to amplify con- siderably the creditor's means of recovering his legal demands, and to deprive the fraudulent debtor of every means of withdrawing his property from the reach of thcsa who had a just and equitable claim upon it. HisLordship observed, that the defects and inconsistencies of the present law were not originally attributable to it— The principle of law had been, that the property of the debtor was the pro- perty of his creditors; but law could never have contemplated an absurdity so gross as that of bringing under the control of the creditor the personal goods and chattels of the debtor, while much more valuable property could be collusively withdrawn out of his reach. Stock in the Funds was now free from the cre- ditor; so likewise was the debtor's gold and silver lying on his table, which he might have borrowed from that very creditor himself. But there were no funds in existence when these laws were originally enacted. These changes of circum- stances had been produced by new events, which occurred in the gradual progress of time. They would not, therefore, by the: proposed refiirm, introduce any modern innovation, but simply bring; back the law to the principle on which it had been originally founded. He explained, that it was not meant to dispense with imprisonment entirely— It would still exist in the way of process to compel a party to do what justice and honesty required him to do, as well as a punishment of the fraudulent debtor.
13. GENERAL POLICE. On Wednesday, Sir ROBERT PEEL put a question respecting the General Police Bill, a prospect of which was held out in the King's Speech.
Lord ALTHORP answered, that the subject had been under serious consideration for some time.
Sir CHARLES WETHERELL said, he did not believe a single step had been taken in it up to that hour— Though he was not very often in Downing Street, still he knew what passed there as well as some who made more frequent visits. The Magistrates of Bristol were happy that a prosecution would give them an opportunity of de- fending themselves ; a prosecution granted by a Government who had degraded and subjugated themselves to popular clamour and a base press. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL complained of this attack on Govern- ment—
He could assure the House that it was not in obedience to any clamour korai
any quarter, but upon a full, and anxious, and patient consideration of all the circumstances, that Government had ordered, and that he, as law-officer of the Crown, had filed an information against the Magistrates of Bristol. He could likewise assure the House, that it was only because he had filed an information against them, that he abstained from saying a word as to their conduct. It Was due both to those who had directed the prosecution, and to those who might possibly suffer from it, that the case should not undergo premature discussion.
The conversation dropped, on the House going into a Committee of Ways and Means.
14. THE LINCOLN MILITIA. Sir WILLIAM ING1Lav made a motion, on Thursday, for papers connected with the dismissal of the Lincoln Militia after twenty days' service instead of twenty-eight. Sir William seemed to consider the cutting short of their accustomed period of exercise as a slur on the corps ; which however Mr. G. LAMB peremp- torily denied. The papers moved for—the correspondence between the Lord Lieutenant of the County and Government—were not granted, on the ground that such communications were confidential. Sir WILLIAM INGILBY, in the course of his speech, compared Colonel Sibthorp to Mount Etna—he made a great noise, but gave forth nothing but smoke and rubbish ; and Colonel SIBTHORp retorted by telling Sir William that he was not capable of speaking on any subject but tobaeco.
35. MERCHANT SEAMEN. On Wednesday Sir M. W. RIDLEI moved for leave to bring in a bill to relieve Merchant Seamen from the 6d. per month which they now contribute to Greenwich Hospital ; but On the assurance of Sir JAMES GRAHAM, that the poverty of the Hos- pital was the sole ground for the tax, and that extensive experiments were in progress with a view to render its property more productive, be consented to withdraw the motion.
16. FACTORIES BILL. A number of petitions for and against this Bill have been presented in the course of the week. Mr. SADLER has postponed the second reading until Friday next.
Previous page
