Othatrl an Prouttrin0 in Vadiantrnt.

1. FINANCE. A long debate took place on Monday night on the subject of the revenue. It was introduced by Mr. Go ULEURN ; who was anxious, in the present state of the public purse, to obtain from Go- vernment such information as might calm the fears for the future which were generally entertained on that subject. Mr. Goulburn described the present year as wholly unprecedented. Amidst all the difficulties and expenses of the war, it had never happened that the revenue had fallen short of the expenditure. The result was the more extraordinary, because, only three mouths before, Lord Althorp had anticipated a sur- plus of 500,000/., instead of which, there was a deficiency of 700,0001.; so that in the brief space of one quarter of a year, the finances had changed for the worse to the amount of 1,200,000/. Mr. Goulburn ob- served, that although much difference of opinion had existed in the House respecting the amount of surplus of revenue over expenditure, no member had ever questioned the propriety of some surplus being maintained ; the present falling off became, in consequence, a more imperative object of inquiry. Mr. Goulburn alluded to the resolution of the 19th February 1819, which declared it expedient, whenever the House met before Christmas, that the Estimates should be laid on the table by the 15th January. This resolution had been invariably com- plied with during the last ten years, with the solitary exception of the present. Again on the 12th December last year, it was agreed that the Estimates should be laid on the table, and yet they were not pro- duced. He attributed these delays to a wish on the part of Go- vernment to avoid discussion on the subject of the revenue. He next alluded to the Budget brought forward by Lord Althorp ; which he congratulated the country on not being persisted in, as it must have issued in a defalcation double or treble that which at pre- sent existed. He remarked on the confident assertion of accu- racy made by Lord Althorp, in bringing forward his last statement

—that three quarters of the b

year being then expired, and only the chalices of one quarter remaining to be calculated, his anticipations re- specting the revenue were much less liable to fail than where, as in ordi- nary eases, the whole year had yet to run. He quoted the answer given by Earl Grey to the Duke of Wellington, on his Grace declaring that the surplus revenue would not, according to his calculations, exceed 10,000!.; on which the Premier stated, that after Making allowance for the coal and all other taxes removed or diminished during the year, the surplus would be 493,000/. That answer was given on the 17th Octo- ber, seven days after the quarter-day on which the accounts were made lip; and very soon after, there appeared in the Gazette a notification that no sums would be applied during the year to the reduction of the public debt, because the expenditure had exceeded the revenue by 25,537/.; and at the very moment when Earl Grey made his statement in answer to the Duke of Wellington, that there was a surplus of 493,0001., there was an actual deficiency of 20,000/. Mr. Goulburn admitted that the time of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was very much engaged, and perhaps he had not leisure to instruct Earl Grey better on the subject of the revenue— He might have been engaged in assisting the noble Paymaster to frame a new Constitution—or in assisting Lord Palmerston in those conferences in which be bore so distinguished a part—(Laughter)—or in assisting the Premier himself in the disinterested distribution of patronage to his very numerous relatives, connexions, and friends—(Loud laughter and cheers); but he could not avoid thinking that the noble Lord would have best consulted his own character as a statesman, and the interests of the country, if he had condescended to go down to the Treasury and look a little into the accounts of his own particular department ; so as to be able, when he appeared before the House, to give state- ments which were not calculated to display a delusive advantage, and terminate in the disappointment and injury of the people. ("Hear, hear! ") Lord Grey hada right to complain of his colleagues in office for not informing him of the error into which he had been betrayed. (Loud cheers.) Was it possible that in such a Cabinet there was no one capable of giving the noble Lord one mo- ment's salutary advice ? ("Hear! "and laughter.) Surely Lord Goderich, who had been bred u in a ool wherein it was understood, that if you attempt to administer the r e country, you must at least read the accounts (Great die.)0111-41tyle ho had been so long himself a Chancellor of the Exchequer, c the accounts had been laid before the Cabinet, after the same„ atrer.as preceding Administrations, he could not have good by and palikkitt,oettbe Earl to fall into that mistake. ( Cheers.) After all itiWietheltioyal Speech,—in which a great deal was liner

• said about revenue of tan was game bills, but not one word about the pt that the expenditure had been greater Goulburn concluded, by requesting from Lord Althorp some explanation of the discrepancies of which he com- plained.

Lord ALTHORP fully admitted that a-surplus of revenue over expen- diture was desirable ; although he did not admit that at present the deficiency was so great as to have produced either alarm or dissatisfac- tion. He defended himself from the charge of over confidence in his calculation of the produce of the taxes—he had merely contended, as he was entitled to do, that three quarters of the year being past, the chances of error in respect to the anticipations of the remaining quarter were proportionably diminished. In one respect, however, in framing his calculations he had been in error. In the last quarter the Beer-duties had expired, and no mention of them occurred in it ; this had produced an error of 350,000/. There was a second item in which he had been deceived by the calculations of Mr. Goulburn : that gentleman calculated on an increase in the Spirit-duties of 450,0001., whereas there had been.an actual decrease of 100,000/. In the third place, a very heavy bill had been drawn on the Treasury on account of the Rideau Canal, of which they had not the slightest anticipation. These, with the stagnation of trade which had occurred during the last quarter, were the causes of the deficiency of which Mr. Goulburn complained. His Lordship offered two statements of the revenue of the last year,—the first including only the reductions made by the pre- sent, the second including those only made by the late Government—.

1st—Taxes taken off by Lord Althorp --.;-..----.... X 1,500,000 Taxes imposed by Lord Althorp 100,000 Net sum remitted 1,400,000 . Deficiency 700,000 Increase of Revenue during the year — .-.£ 700,000 2nd—Taxes taken off by Mr. Goulburn £2,794,000 Loss by Duty on 100,000 Loss by Corn-duties ------------- 250,000 Total X 3,144,009

Which bei ng deducted from X 50,056,000,

the revenue of 1630, left X 46,912,000 Expenditure.----. 47,123,000 Deficiency X 111,000

So that, taking the calculations of Mr. Goulburn, there must have been during the past year a deficiency of 111,000/. exclusive of the and against Mr. Goulburn was 811,000/. In reply to Mr. Goulburn's taunts respecting the Budget of 1881, Lord Althorp observed, that the propositions of taxation were not all adopted by the House ; and some ciency was only 700,000/., the difference in favour of Lord Althorp 1,400,000/. remitted by the present Ministry ; and as the actual defi- of those that were, came into operation at a very late period of the sea- son. Had the Budget passed the House in the shape in which it was produced, the deficiency of the revenue would not have been so great.

His Lordship proceeded to submit a brief statement of the revenue for 1832, although he felt that in making it at so early a day he laboured under considerable disadvantage. He calculated that the loss on taxes remitted during the last year would stand thus—

X 400,000 Loss on Candles — On Coals 75,000 Other reductions 698,000 Total-------. X 1,173,000

To meet this, there were, partly of payments that would not again be made, partly of sums to be received—

Drawback on Printed Cottons -----------.--.X 200,000 Linen Bounties 155,000

Wine-duties on the stock in hand 157,000 Tams beyond what hail been laid on last year upon Malt 000,000 Total 8102000 There were besides, the Wine-duties, an increase on which might be confidently expected ; and also the Cotton-duties, which were decidedly and progressively increasing. From these two sources— He calculated on an increase of X 375,000

Add Taxes not yet in full operation 130,000 Total savings previously 812,000 X 1,037,000

Deduct remissions 1,178,000 Surplus for 1832 X 164,000

His Lordship concluded by stating, that in making his calculations he had taken the expenditure of 1832 as equal in amount to that of 1831; which he thought he was fully entitled to do, as the Estimates, which were to be that night laid on the table, were considerably lower.

Mr. ATTWOOD spoke with great severity of Lord Althorp's mistakes— The public interest demanded that either the noble Lord should abandon his office, or conduct it upon different principles. Either the country was unable to support its burdens, or the Government were unable to perform their duty. (Cheers.) It was impossible to impose new taxes ; and to talk of a new loan, after fifteen years of peace, was peifectly absurd. He was afraid that the noble Lord intended to proceed with some of those fine schemes of finance which he had already proposed, and which were altogether founded upon the fancies of Sir Henry Parnell. He contrasted the expenditure of the profligate Tories, as their opponents described them, and that of these same opponents when in office— The expense of the Army in the last year, under a Tory Ministry, assisted by a Boroughmongering Parliament, was 6,999,0001.; at present it was 7,200,000/. Again, look to Ibe Navy : under the old profligate Tory Administration last year, the expenditure had been 5,209,0001.; under the new Administration, it was 5,680,000/. With respect to the Miscellaneous Estimates : under a Tory Mi- nistry, their amount had been 1,950,0001.; while under a Whig Government, the supposed personification of all that was prudent and economical, they amounted XI 2,850,000/. He proceeded to a more general attack. Ministers might pretend that further economy with an Unreformed Parliament was impossible ; but had they attempted it ? A Reformed Parliament, on which they pretended to rely, he felt persuaded could not effect auy remarkable reduction but by committing a breach of faith with the public creditor. Ministers talked of their affection for peace, and yet in the twelve- month they had been in power, they bad alreadybeen once on the eve of plunging all Europe into war. Mr. Attwood concluded by ibegging pardon of the House " for haying troubled them so much on a subject not immediately connected with the discussion before the House ; but he did nut beg pardon of the Ministry. They required to be cautioned and advised ; for the Ministry who had com- menced such a war, and had in that manner added enornionsly to the burdens of the people, woidd have suuk to the lowest point of the degradation of the public ledred."

Mr. P. THOMPSON accused iIi. Attwood of misquoting the figures on \ %ilia he relied for proof of his statements. He fin got, in de- scrihiag the ,Iliseellaneous Estimates, to state, that half a million, for- merly included in the ( ;ivil List, had been added to these estimates. In regard to the Army Estimates, if he disapproved of them, why was he not in his place to object to them ? The increase of the Army was obviously called for by the ctindition in which the former Mini try had left the country ; the 1iea7 expenditure was in part the result of the planes and canals which they had left unfinished. Blr. Goulburn spoke with horror of the alarming fact of the expenditure exceeding the revenue : was this, then, the first time that it had been the case ? lie eneered at the places held by the relatives of Lord Grey : had he for- gotten tile attempt, just before they quitted office, to quarter Mr. Bathurst and Mr. Dundas, the sons of two Cabinet Alinisters, on the Pension List? Mr. Thomson proceeded to compare the deficiency of revenue during the present year with the deficiency of former years--

He would not go farther back than 1823 ; because it was to be recollected, that the Parliament had then pledged itself, by a distinct resolution, that there should he an efficient sinking-fund of 5,000,0001., which aught be considered

as a portion of the public expenditure. ("Hear, hear !"from Gentib,Ird.) He should not take it as a portion of the public expenditure, and yet there wiedil be foetid to be a deficiency. The deficiency in the account of 1823, in- clud ine the advance fur naval purposes, was 2,994,000/. ; in fe24, the deficiency was 1,007,000/. ; in 1825, it was 2,125,000/. ; in 1826, 6,747,0001. ; iii1827, it was 6,003,0001. ; in 1828, it had fallen to 959,000/. ; in 1829, it had fidien to N17,0001. ; and in 18:30, he would do the right honourable gentleman the justice to say that there was a balance of 978,000/. the other way.

What was the real difference between the statements in those years and in the present ?-

The accounts were now stated plainly and fitirly. They were plainly and fairly put before the public; and the desire of the present Government was, that the people should be acquainted with the real state of the public finances. The present Ministers did not borrow money, that they might use it in appearing to pay off a part of the National Debt ; they did not take money, borrowed from the Bank, and secured, at a heavy interest, upon what were called Long Annui- ties, and then put it down in their accounts as part of the income received, and applieabie to the discharge of debts and expenses ; they did not attempt any mystification ; they desired that every thing should be plain and intelligible.

Mr. Thomson alluded to the charge of miscalculation— In the middle of the year 1880, did not the right honourable gentleman conic down to that House and say, that he expected 400,000/. from an increase in the consumption of spirits ? ("Hear, hear !") Had not the right honourable gen- tleman made some miscalculation on that point ? There had been a deficiency of no less than 100,000/. instead of there being a gain of 400,000/. But if there was a deficiency now, where, he would ask, was that deficiency ? Did it con- sist of money taken from the pockets of the people, and lavished upon undue expenditure or airworthy enterprise ? or did it not remain in the pockets of the people, to be drawn thence if the necessities of the state should require it ? ( Cheers front the Opposition.) He understood that cheer; and perhaps it would have been more gratifying to the right honourable gentleman had there been a surplus, even though that surplus had been wrung; from the people by a larger and heavier taxation. ( Cheers from the Ministerial Benches.) He was happy to say that it remained in the pockets of the people, there to fructify by use, and to stimulate the efforts of their industry. ("Hear !" and laughter.) He next noticed the attack on the Budget, and the charge of blun- dering preferred against Ministers— What ! had the right houourable gentleman made no blunders? Had the right honourable gentleman forgotten the year 1830—had he not then changed the duties on spirits no less than three times ? Had he not, in like manner, changed the duties on rum and on sugar? Had he forgotten that bill which was universally, and not inaptly, designated by the appellation of" the unintel- ligible Sugar Bill?" ( Cheers. )

He adverted to the departure from consistency and principle dis- played by the present Opposition. While the colleagues of Mr. Hus- kisson, they were eager to participate in the triumph of his plans; but now, when the present Ministers were engaged in defending those plans, they slipped out of the House, or remained in it to vote against them. He particularly adverted to the conduct of the Opposition on the Timber-duties, where they sought to back out by a distinction with- out a difference ; and to the still more marked cases of the Glove ques- tion and the Sugar Bill.

Mr. G. R. Dawsos spoke of the surpassing eloquence of Mr. Goul- buries speech; of the poor figure that Lord Althorp cut in attempting to answer it ; and of his Lordship's total incapacity for business. He attributed Mr. Thomson's zeal in defending the Budget, to the fact that he had been its father ; and ridiculed the argument of inconsist- ency, considering that many of those on whom it was sought to fix it— namely, the members of the late and preceding Ministries—were now colleagues of Mr. Thomson. He compared the attempt to give pen- 9ons to Messrs. Bathurst and Dundas, with the attempt to give a pen- sion of 2,000/. to Baron Abercromby for eighteen months' duty, instead of placing him at the head of the Bankrupt Court, where both his pre- sent and proposed salary might have been saved. He spoke of the Bankruptcy Court itself as exhibiting many specimens of gross par.. tiality. Mr. Dawson objected to Mr. Thomson's figures in his calcu- lations of the revenue, as not being before the House. He read, in Opposition to those calculations, a paper which had been laid on the table, in which very different results were given— In 1828, the income was 57,485,0001. and the expenditure 54,836,000!.— making a surplus of 2,648,000/. In 1829, the income was 55,824,000/. and the expenditure 54,348,0004—making a surplus of 1,475,0001. In 1830, the income was 54,840,000/. and the expenditure 53,011,0001.—giving a surplus of 1,828,000/.

Mr. Dawson stated what he called the contrast between the system of Mr. Goulburn and Lord Althorp— •

" Between the years 1828 and 1800 inclusive, a reduction was effected in the estimates of 2,096,000/. ; at the same time a reduction of the interest of the debt was also effected-725,000/. on the funded debt, 12et II e!/. on the unfunded ; in addition to this, there was a reduction of taxes to tin. amount of 3,500.000/. in . eluding the taxes on beer, leather, and other smaller burdens ; and w■I \rifle:, aid- ing these reductions in the estimates, the national debt, and the taxes, my right honourable friend was lucky enough mid skilful enr■tigh to lea ur,rrrt,iding to the paper which I have just quoted, a surplus of 1,80(1,0110/. A lel tam. what is the condition of the year 1831 ? The eetiniates have been increased by three or finir millions. Of the taxes, some certainly have been reduced, but (heti others have been increased ; and so unskilfully have the two been blended together, that it is impossible to state whether they are productive or unproductive."

Mr. Dawson, after tracing the various items of the defalcation which formed the subject of the debate, concluded by dvelming,. that, in his opinion, the 14,rhig Ministers were the most unconstitutional set of men that ever beld power.

Mr. Senean Rice defended the expenditure, on the principle that- the increase WILS called for by the state of the country, and had been approved and even called for by the Opposition theineelves. Ile ad- verted to items of expenditure which had been left to the present Ministry by their predecessors : there was the Ii ideau ( 'anal 336,000/. and Buckingham House 102,00; )1. ; and there was th e Coronation, esti- mated at 50,000/. but which bad in reality cost only -13,000/. ; had been paid for bygone law expenses, izid 10.(t0 if taw the compensa- tion due to ildlessrs. Lecesne and Escoffery. These and other item of extraordinary expenditure, which vere charged as Whig, but whiell iii reality arose out of Tory extnivag,ance, amounted to 1,1)30,000/. Mr. Rice spoke of the reductions made by the present Government— They hail abolished the office of Vice-Treasurer of Ireland—of Lieutenant- General of the Ordnance—of Clerk of the Deliveries of the Ordnance—and of the Postmaster-General of Ireland. ("Hear, law !'') They hail reifficed 'the Auditorship of the Civil List, the Treasurership of the M ita ry i:ollege, the Trea- surership of the Military Asylum, the Resident of the Post-office, and sixty smaller offices in the Post-office in England and Ireland ; the King's Stationer in Ireland, two Commissiortere (of the Navy Board, two of the Victualling Board, the Superintendent of 'Transports, the Paymaster of the Marines, and seventy- one persons connected with the Dockyards, receiving salaries from 600/. down to 60/. a year ; one Inspector of Stamps in Cumberland, and oue in Lancashire, one Receiver-General in Scotland, and forty-six persons connected with the col- lection of the revenue in England, besides two hundred and ten other plaits ; and all this was done before the end ofJanuary, they coming into office iu the month of November. ("Bear, hear !")

From their own salaries, out of 143,000/. Ministers had taken 21,00tl/.

They had reduced the expenses of the Embassy to France and Russia 1,1001. each, that to Portugal 600/, Turkey 5001., the Netherlands 0001., the United States 600/., making in all 7,200/, besides 5,000/. saved from thewx- peuditure on Consuls. (" Hear!") Acting on the suggestions of the Cenimittee on Civil Charges, they had struck off the payments made to law officers of the Crown, to the King's Sergeants, the Attorney and Solicitor General, and the King's Counsel. Sir C. NVETHERELL--" Yes, fifteen pounds a year each." (" Hear !" and &mph/cr.) Mr. Rier—It was done in compliance with the recommendation of the Com- mittee. They had taken 2,000/. a year from the salary of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland. They had abolished seven offices connected with the Lord Lieute- nant and Dublin Castle ; six others, connected with the Castle, had been mate- rially reduced. They had abolished two Commissionerships of Excise in Ireland, two'Commis.eioners of Stamps in Scotland ; and, in addition to this, 2001. had been struck off the salaries of all commissioners of public boards ; while the ex- pense of the Hackney-coach-office, amounting to 5,524/. had been got rid of, and 6,600/. had been saved in the departments connected with the Colonies."

(" Hear, hear, hear I") Mr. Rice said there were other reductions in contemplation. By an arrangement of the fees in the Long Room of the Customhouse, 13,000/. out of 46,000/. would be saved; large savings were also contemplated in Ireland, which would be found detailed in the Estimates.

Mr. BARING said it was unnecessary to enter into a comparison of the two Governments in point of economy. Giving the present all the praise they sought, it ought to be recollected that there were above 4,000 offices abolished or reduced by the Duke of Wellington while he was in power. No doubt gleanings were left for the present Government, extensive as were the Duke of Wellington's reductions. He expressed, at the same time, some surprise that a Government which spoke so highly of economy, should pay away 5,000,000/. for a Russian loan with scarce a shadow of consideration. Mr. Baring complained greatly of Mr. P. Thomson's having left imperfect the defence of Government, which he was bound to make, for the purpose of cutting jokes upon his opponents. Mr. Baring discussed Lord Althorp's calculation of in- creased revenue for 1832. The whole revenue on imported wool, sheep's wool, and cotton, was only 482,000!.; he was therefore wholly at a loss to discover on what principles an increase of 375,000/. on cot- ton wool alone was calculated on. To the tax itself he was extremely adverse, as he was to all taxes on raw material; and unless it were ac- companied by a drawback on exported goods, the Americans would soon be found underselling, as they were already competing with us. Mr. Baring went on to state, that the principal object of his rising was to point out for reprobation the plans of finance pursued by the different Administrations ever since the peace— He trusted thatsome time or other the country would have a Government bold and honest enough to take a manlytone on the subject of the National Debt, with a view of providing some means for the peaceable and effectual redemption of the people from its weight. He hoped to see a Government which would adopt that honest and straightforward course, in preference to the skulking, cowardly, and disgraceful plan, followed by all dovernments since the peace, of establish- ingtheir reputation on petty reductions and miserable expedients, instead of trying to .master the Debt. If the Sinking-fund, so judiciously created for the liquidation of the public debt, had only been preserved till the present -moment, they might have looked forward at no distant time to see a considerable portion of the debt reduced, instead of being, as they were, in utter despair of any approxi- mation to such a state of things. He concluded by saying that he had seldom supported the repeal of anytax-

There was scarcely any instance inwhich lie thought the circumstances of the

country could at all justify such measures ; as, in his judgment, the first duty of the House and of the Government was, at all hazards, to support the credit of the country, and, as the most effectual means of doing so, to continue the existence of an efficient sinking-fund.

Mr. T. DUNCOMBE replied to some remarks of Mr. Daringrespecting the vote on the Russian Loan, which the reporters have slipped over in a sentence, but V11Rli, from Mr. Ihnicombe's comment, could neither have been very brief nor s'ery general. Mr. Dammam said— lie never ‘vituessed a greater violence dune to common sense and reason, than had been done by the hatture which the lionse had just heard. ("//e«;-/".front several rt., of the House, but from °he honourable member in a eery marked manner.) Ile was not accusing that honourable mentber of any tiring like

sense or rc . Gie(1t blityhkr.)

Mr. ihna.oiebe designated the attempt of Mr. Herres a deep-laid plan to trip up Alinisters•

It w:ei ohvious to a majority of that House, and he believed now to a very large majority out of that house, that those honourable and right honourable gentleneta came forward with economy on their lips at a new when no- thing, v.-as further front their hearts: they stool before the House Avith a pro- pitsititut on the Russiao-llutch Loan in their hands, but \vitt/ the dread of Schedule A before their eyes. They had tallied murh of the necessity of sup- porting hi it- credit ; but, in his Inttoble judgment, the truest iiAI. i t -ii 311g ;noon! credit vtanthl be to maintain its honour abroad as vell as at home, and not tt!ittte it to recede front the position it had hitherto maintained in the scale t,f European maim 's. On those grounds, he WaS prepared to justify and vindica Ile vete he had given, " there or elsewhere." (.4 tanyh.) Af r few words from Mr. RontNsoN and Mr. Il user, condemna- tory of Ministers, Sir CitAnt.Es WETHERELL rose to ask Lord Althorp, whether he meant, in reference to the future payments on the Russian Loan, to introduce one bill to the House, or two. A bill of indemnity would,. Sir Charles thought, be necessary.

Lord A t.ntotte said he should introduce no bill at all. The ratified separation of Belgium and Holland had so altered the relative situation of all parties, that a new convention was necessary, which in duo course would be submitted to Parliament.

Sir ROBERT PEEL expressed his fears lest the public should be dis- satisfied ‘vith the line of crimination, instead of explanation, adopted by Mr. Poulett Thomson and Mr. Spring Rice. He denied that the glove question had any thing to do with the principles of free trade. Leav- ing this recriminatory ground, Sir Robert proceeded to comment on Lord A Ithorp's statement. He complained that the mistake of the Beer-duties bad not been sooner explained to Parliament. He looked forward to the anticipated surplus of 162,0001., even supposing nothing occurred to diminish it, with melancholy feelings, when he contem-

plated the present state of the country and its prospects. Sir Robert commented on the doctrine of Mr. Thomson, on the effect of the taxes remaining in the pockets of the people—

The right honourable gentleman rejoiced at the deficiency of 700,01)1)1.; " for," said he, " it is not lost; it is in the pockets of the people, fructifying

there, ready to be extracted upon a future occasion." (Laughter and cheers

front the Opposition.) To that principle the right honourable gentleman should have the credit of giving a name. It should be called the fructifying principle. (Luny/ti.) If the right honourable gentleman succeeded in establishing that principle, he would be a most popular man amongst all the debtors in the country. (Laughter.) A debtor might say to his creditor, 4, I do not intend to pay you ; I go on the fructifying doctrine; I decline pay- ing you, but you are better off than if you were paid, for the money is fructify- ing in illy pocket, ready to be extracted ma future occasion." (Loud laughter.) What a doctrine was this for Columbia ! Chilian hoods and Columbian bonds were no longer losing concerns ; the money was fructifying in the pockets of the Chilians and Colombians, ready to be extracted upon some future occasion. (Continnd laughter.)

Lord ALTHORP, in reply, noticed the facts on which he built his ex- pectation of increase in the cotton-wool dirty. The amount imported in 1829, was 204 millions of pounds ; in 1830, 269 millions ; and in 1831, 283 millions. On these facts, of gradual and regular increase, his cal- culation, which was a moderate one, was founded. Lord Althorp con- cluded by observing, that the Estimates would be laid on the table that evening ; and he added, that his Majesty's Government meant that in future the financial year should commence on the 1st of April. The Estimates were in consequence framed in two divisions,—the first, up to the 1st April, were then ready ; the second would be laid on the table as soon as possible.

Mr. HUME thought the arrangement proposed would be a good one if the Estimates were laid before the House early in January; if put off until February or March, the House would be in a worse condition than it was at present.

To a question of Mr. BARING, respecting the Bank Charter, Lord ALTHORP said, he would as soon as he possibly could move the ap- pointment of a Committee.

The House having at length resumed, the resolutions for granting a supply to his Majesty, on which the debate had arisen, were brought up and agreed to, and a bill founded on them ordered to be brought in.

2. RELATIONS wan PORTUGAL. In moving for certain papers, on Thursday, Mr. PEREGRINE COURTENAY entered at large On the history of our relations with Portugal ; and contended, that in the permission which we had given to the inlistment of troops and the purchase of arms by Don Pedro's agents, we had committed a breach of the law of nations, which forbade interference in the domestic management of foreign states. The narrative of Mr. Courtenay's speech commenced with the well-known facts of our armed interference in 1827, during the administration of Mr. Canning, and the various debates to which the Aolus speech (as it was called) of that Minister gave rise. From our own expedition to Portugal, Mr. Courtenay passed to that of the French Government, which was very fully discussed on several occa- sions last year. Mr. Courtenay vindicated the prosecution of Bon- homme by the Portuguese Government, by what he called the analogous case of Dr. Bowring's prosecution by the French Government. In both instances, a foreigner had been proceeded against according to the laws of the place where he was resident, and his own Government had of course no ground for complaint or claim to interference. Mr. Cour- tenay came, at the close of a long speech, to what constituted in strict- ness its only object— On the 6th of December last, his Majesty, on openin. g the present Parliament, said—" The conduct of the Portuguese Government, and the repeated injuries to which my subjects have been exposed, have prevented a renewal of my diplo- matic relations with that kingdom. The state of a country so long united with this by ties of the most intimate alliance must necessarily be to me an object of

the deepest interest." Now it was important to know what these injuries were which prevented this matter of the " deepest interest" being attained; and

he was sure the noble Lord would see the justice of his present motion, as it would enable him to explain to Parliament the character of these injuries, and the meaLs adopted to redress them. In the King's Speech he had just quoted, the return to Europe of Don Pedro is thus stated—" The return to Europe of the elder branch of the house of Braganza, and the dangers of a disputed succes- sion, will require my most vigilant attention to events, by which not only the safety of Portugal, but the general interests of Europe, may be effected." Now this return was attributable to Don Pedro's being totally unable to maintain a gawernment in Brazil. It WitS notorious that a dispute at present existed be- tween the different branches of the house of Braganza with respect to the suc- cession to the crown, and that Don Pedro was preparing an expedition to attack tile dominions of Portugal in support of the claims of his daughter Donna Maria. De was fully persuaded that it must be the conviction of Earl Grey and Lord Brougham, that it was our duty and true policy, under these circum.tances, to pwserve the strictest and the most guarded neutrality. ( Ch (u rs fiom the Op- position.) lie did not know whether Don api.ficd to our Govern- ment for itanie in this emergency, but sure he wits, that if he had so tipplied, he would have re:Tilted an answer similar to that which Lord Aberd,en bad given to Don Pedro three years befitre. All equipments of men and urn:, from this c nintry in sloth a m011teSt \very moreover directly contrary to a law passed by flat Legislature a century ago, the priuciple of which had been recognized within the recollection of them all. These enterprises vere prejudicial to the interests of the coma and it was the duty of Government to enforce the act which thr- bade their being undertaken; but liefeared that they had been hitherto both slack and remiss in doing so. The late Mr. Canning, during his tvhole life- time, hall uniformly refused to take measures either for the establishment or for the slippy, -stint of constitutional freedom in foreign countries ; and the present Nini-ters, he trusted, would follow his example. If they prevented Portugal from into the hands of Spain, they would derive no consolation from see- ing her reduced into subjection to the rival power of France. IIe thought it onnecutsary to add any thing more, but would conclude bv moving, " That an humble address be presented to his Majesty, requesting that he would cause to be laid before the House copies or extracts of such information as Government might have received relative to the iulistment of men in the pending expedition against the Portuguese territory ; also copieS'of aim application which had been inalle to Government on the subject, together witfh an account of the proceed- ings of Government thereon."

Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH said, he had never heard a speech so barren both of fact and argument as that of Mr. Courtenay. For his own part, he had opposed the Foreign Inlistment Act, and be still thought it a most odious measure. True, it was the law of the land ; but he denied that Government were to be forward to enforce it above all other laws, much less ought they to stretch it beyond its legitimate objects.

In all cases to which it legitimately applied, there ought either to be a com- plaint from some foreign court, or a specific interference by a private prosecutor, to call it forth. They were now told, it appeared, that they ought to step fn.- ward eagerly to enforce it in favour of any belligerent, however odious, and against any belligerent, however deserving ; that they should equally put it into operation against such a people as the Poles, or in favour of such a prince as the Emperor of Morocco.

Sir James denied that there was the slightest case made out by Mr. Courtenay; all that he had to found upon was mere babbling gossip. Sir James said he would not interfere with the rights even of the usurper Miguel, but were we to support him in waging an unjust war on that account? He stated the instances of cruelty and oppression

which called forth the French demand for redress— • One unfortunate Frenchman, on a charge of indecency in a church, had been severely whipped as a malefactor through the public streets. (Cheers from the Opposition.) He understood the feeling which prompted this claidorous ap- plause; and he congratulated those who could so exult in the infliction of a bar-

barous and inhuman torture, as he could gratify them with more intelligence of

a similar kind, for this same individual was also banished for ten years to An- gola. Those who were acquainted with the nature of the climate of that part of the coast of Africa, would easily comprehend what a volume of human misery was comprised in such a sentence. The other case was that of a poor old man, who was cast into prison, Sir James Mackintosh knew not for what offence, but

chiefly, it would appear, because he was a Frenchman for to be a Frenchman

or an Englishman was, at that period, considered to be the most heinous of all offences by the courts of Portugal. This poor man, upwards of seventy years of age, was afterwards removed from the ordinary prison, and immured in a damper dungeon, in order that, though he was not sent to the pestilential cli- mate of Africa, death in as lingering a form might be inflicted in the prisons of Portugal.

Sir James ridiculed an argument made use of against Don Pedro by the Opposition, that he did not intend to restore the charter—that charter which, on its promulgation, the same parties had treated with so much

contempt, and about whose reestablishment they now pretended to be most anxious. He concluded by contending, that Portugal had no claim to the assistance or countenance of England under the attack to which its delinquencies had exposed it, in the case of the French expe- dition; and that the present case was one in which its claim, if possi- ble, was less.

Lord ELIOT spoke of the offence of Bonhomme as a gross, indecent, and blasphemous sacrilege,"proved by the evidence of sixteen witnesses. Sauvinet,' his Lordship said, was a naturalized Portuguese, and as such amenable to Portuguese law; he had been made out a Frenchman by a subterfuge. The French Consul pleaded, that as all the acts of the Constitutional Government, which naturalized Sauvinet, had been de- clared by Miguel invalid, the act of naturalization was invalid also. Lord Eliot produced the old argument founded on a decree of the

Cortes of Lamego in 1143, to prove that no foreigner could sit on the throne of Portugal; and contended, that Don Pedro having held the sceptre of Brazil, was by consequence a foreigner. He thought, as the Pope and the United States had acknowledged Miguel as King de facto, England might properly have done the same.

Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH admitted that Sausinet had been naturalized, but the present Government of Portugal had denied the validity of his naturalization.

Colonel DAVIES read the oath of allegiance that Miguel had sworn to his niece, and contended that he was a perjured traitorfor committing a breach of it. He hoped sincerely that liberal principles would pre- vail, and that the tyrant would be hurled from his blood-stained seat. Lord MORPETII toMpared the conduct of the late andepresent Admi- nistration, as displayed in the negotiations carried on by their several Consuls with the Portuguese Government— Marcos Ascoli, a British subject, was illegally thrown into prison by Don Miguel. Mr. Matthews informed Lord Aberdeen of the circumstance. His Lordship instructed Mr. Matthews to apply for his liberation, as well as: for full compensation for the wrongs which he had endured, and concluded his despatch in these words---" should these representations remain fur thirty days uncomplied with, report to me." The thirty days having expired without Mi- guel having taken anv notice of Mr. Matthews's -application, that glaoleman re- ported to Lord Aberdeen accordingly. ilis Lordship then sent Me Matthews another despatch, in which he declares, " that as his lla;esty's (le-eta-now:it have selected a particular case, respecting which von vere hist' item,' to iiethe a spe-

cific demand, it is absolutely necessary that this ,kmand I Ile c, a a p:ied with. The cruel and illegal imprisonment of Alarcos Ascoli renders his immedhute libe- ration indispensable,- even if he shuuld be found guilty of tI t t r ofidnee which is laid to his charge." What was the result of Lord Aber,L,-,i's remon- strances? Marcos Ascoli s banishment was confirmed, and he was condemned to additional costs.

Such was the result of Lord Aberdeen's orders and his consul's re- presentations. He would now show the Rouge vhat had been the conduct of the present Administration. Mr. Hopper having conveyed to Lord Palmersten the com- plaints of the British merchants, his Lordship directed Mr. Hoppner to prefer to the Portuguese Government the demand of the British merchants. These demands were stated under seven heads, to each of which a categm icel answer ‘vas required 'within ten days, with a threat of reprisal.: if net cem,lied

The 621110.111IS 11:1V ing been made, were promptly acreded to, :LW! the !!'1;i:-11 Go- vernment received the grateful acknowledgments of the British residents at Lisbon.

3Ir. D. WRANGHAM said, if the remonstrances made by the late Ministry had been unsuccessful, they would doubtless have been en- forced by stronger means ; but every man must rejoice that such means were found unnecessary.

Mr. GALLEY KNIGHT said, the vigour of the remonstrances of the late Government might be estimated by a perusal of the dates of the petters on the table, from which it appeared. that four years elapsed before they were attended to.

Sir J. M. DOYLE described Ascoli's case. He went to Lisbon, with proper passports, in a British vessel • and his first step there was to a dungeon forty feet under ground. He was kept there thirty -six days ; and \Oren at length released and permitted to return to Englend, the compensation which he received for the wrong and the injtotice he had suffered was 56/. Sir John said, as the gentlemen opposite were anxi. ous for information, be would advise them to more for a committee—

If it were appointed, he pledged himself to prove, that the I riti Govern- ment had pursued one columned system of interference in the f Portugal,

from the month of January 1823, to the period when Miguel a.-.ended the throne. Up to that period, the British Ambassador at Lisbon ae,, d there as Minister for the I ionic Department, as Minister of Police, and 1!, ir.d.dit add, as

Secretary of the Treasury, Ibr nothing was paid except that ed ts paid by

him. (-Checis awl la avh ter.) lie would adduce a ceehe, 11 !at occurred

at the time of sending out our remonstrances. The same beat tu-1 brought

the remonstrances, publicly conveyed letters to a diffis'ent effect to e etain par- ties, not from a clerk, but from a high individual connected inch:lad-1v with his Majesty's Government. These letters had been handed about. I had seen Collies of them, which a noble lord had stated to he the very 11,-! .!-,:eries he had ever inspected hi his life. There was another fact of a il. hit el, that

might be worth relating. At the time the ilcut was goiiig to a 'I., Madeira, the Major-Genet al of the fleet assembled the captains in and told them that however matters might seem outwardly, England was them, and

that letters from a high inflividied assured him that wnatever might be said, the British Government wished well to Don Miguel. ("Hear, hem,! ") Sir GEORGE MURRAY alluded to his connexion by service with the people of Portugal— For that noble people he entertained a high respect, for they had vindicated the independence of their soil even before they had been assisted by liritish arms —before they had the hope of succour, and while thy were trampled (al in the most cruel manner by the invader. He was a witness of the co:all-lir; ef the re- ception they bad extended to their allies, which more closely resemhle:: tIumi. greet- ing of brothers than of strangers; and Ile could also bear testimony to the ala- crity with which they ranged themselves under the command of Briti,lt officers, and under the control of that man who was entitled to the highest reccotrd that gratitude could offer, not only from Portugal, hut from the whole oi* :he Penin- sula. ( Cheers from the Opposition.) It was impossible for him mdt to feel a -warm interest in every question affecting the Portuguese, not merely ..•:1 account of the first burst of enthusiasm which he had witnessed, but for the d ishit crest- minces with which they abandoned all the property they posses,ed, ;oal re; ired with the English troops within the lines cif Lisbon, rather than ielil to an insolent conqueror. When he reflected on these event, it was not with- out a sentiment of the deepest regret that he saw a line of police eursaed which tended to estrange us from Portugal. (Cheers from the Oppos;ti:1.) He could not, without experiencing the deepest regret, see the Portagutee I:- plcaban- doned to the insults and oppression of French domination. (RCM- e,:eering.) Sir George remarked on the departure that had been mede from the question before them. It was treated as if it turned upon the character of Don Miguel, while it merely concerned an infringement of the Fo- reign Inlistment Act. And how was the charge of infringement met? By a tirade on the act itself !— He was not ping to defend the policy of that act professionallyspeaking, he should rather wish for a free trade in arms. ( Cheers and laughter.) That, however, was not the question. The question was, had the provisions of that act been violated or had they not ? ( Cheers from the Opposition.) It had

been said by gentlemen on the other side of the House, that we were bound to observe, and that we had observed, it strict neutrality. Now, if we had per-

mitted the provisions of this law to be violated for the benefit of one of the parties now contending for the throne of Portugal, it was, in his humble opinion, a clear departure from a strict neutrality. Sir ROBERT INGLIS spoke with great severity of Bonhomme's of- fence ; and Lord EBRINGTON eulogized the conduct pursued by Go- vernment.

Lord PALMERSTON took a general view of the various objections preferred against the conduct of Government. He defended Ministers for insisting on the public and ignominious dismissal of the Captain of the Diana for the illegal detention of British vessels. In so doing, they merely followed up the line of conduct pursued by their predeces- sors. The only difference was, that the latter threatened, and the for- mer executed the threat— He was convinced that no man who read the papsrs that had been printed on this subject, could doubt that there never was a time in the history of Europe when one government gave to another so touch provocation as this Government had received from the Portuguese since the year 189.S. In the ease of au ho- nourable and gallant member of that Iliumse—in the ease of Mr. Young, of Norton, O'Brien, -Noble, Ascoli, and of Mrs. Storer—as also in the ease of the Midtese sailors, who were British subjects—of the capture of the Ninus and of the Helena—what were the principal features? Violation of the laws of Portugal, and infraction of the treaties le-tween Englawl and that country —arrests without suspiciou—imprisonment without a charge—vomiting:I with- out trial—release and reparation refused—threats unattended by any thing but insult, aud in his opinion, not duly enforced until the prc,-,:r.t Administration came into office. Ile thot4at that TIWre never was an instane,t of greater 1;n-- bearanco on the part of (me government to another; and if there wcs any fault, it was not of harshness or precipitancy in enforcing the dents nil of re- paration, but in too long ibstaining from that enforcement.

I-Ie noticed 13onhomme's ease and others, and the justification they offered for French inte.tferenee-

Bonham-lie had been represented as a French tutor. But, in fact, the per- son described by gentlemen opposite as a tutor, was only a student at C'cindura irt the first year of his course of law. It must be granted that tlo- offilice of which that pc-rerun was accused, u-as, if committed, of a voey heinous no- I are. But there were the greatest doubts timm t it \yes ever cm,s 1167ml. It Was, 11ti tO have been committed a 'year and a lialf le-fide I:‘, le.N. pm upon

iiistriA for it, and there were at the time several Poi tiettie his

compacy. None of these were brought to trial er imprisoned, hut tde French student was singled out to be made an example of. But even if Ibmiennitie was justly eendenined, still the deitiends of Fetnee were jtist snd well founded. Fur—to take anether case—all old man, a Ft.,,ch

seized upon a charge of having rockets dischaigtsl from his hou--e. 11-• w:us

tried by a military court, and not by a tribunal of law. Ile was ; all11 ii time record of his sentence, it WaS stated. Ily the Judges, flee -elm! of tile Constitutionalist soldiers were at the time upon his promises—L.1r it was not proved that Ile had consented to harbour them, or that lie knew of their being there ; but that his lawyer had some time previously been heard to ad- vise him to keep himself out of the way, which (said the record) was a proof that lie had committed some crime. It was fu ether proved upon t he trial, that he had professed to held liberal opinions; but there was no proof that Ile had committed the crime of which he was accused; ihr ;It the t:iume whea the rockets were let off from his garden, he was residing at tuna her hotne at a e.,esideralde distance. Bat on tleee grounds lie was sentenced to a 'barbarous imprisonment, in which he was treated more like a brute animal tlani a human bciog-. Ile was subjected to Ithovs and stripes, and various kinds it moral mu: II physical torture ; and ell this without any plausible grounds for :opposing Lim to be guilty of the offence of which he was accused.

It had been complained that the French Admiral proceeded to make reprisals in the fitce of a demand for fresh neg-otiti tions-

The fact WaS, til■It the Portoguese Goveromcnt itself had reftnol to re- ceive any communicatien from the French Cense], and our diplonlatde lelations between the two (overuments had ceased, when the sym•Iren I I I : :dee in I e Tagus, the Admiral having orders to make reprisals imime!hm • II: the

reparatien &melded to-tre not given witHet delay. !bit then the -es- to Have Illy Si) W:1:1- AA1111,. : lm m • ima rids ii lispmai between us aml yder Gdv, reedeo t, cror A h: dd-

ferent parts of Europe, mrel if yell will ep ydim ‘-rd :I!,

11E!‘", 11:tVe, 111 C011tSe of time, t he rep mate imIxult li-ould au English Admiral do in such a cao.-1—tet niat his nuruuuxi ii iestructions?

ofily, butt els° in Frenee- IL. remarked on the conduet of the Opposition, not in .„ It seemed to him rather remarkable, that those who were in

Government at this moment, in England and in France, took re m•:: • d-• uity to goad and incite their opponents into quarrels and war. Bet Ile re- metnered, that some time ago he was finding fault with the Admi. ration at that time in office, for its conduct towards Portugal ; and he met, at every sentence, with the cry that he was for driving h.to a war. Now, he might make that reply to those Who -seer c-me(iovernment at present, and say that they were taunting- the/du- n:el-ft fer the purpose of driving 141, e nation into a war with Frzznee; i,of he would assure them that their taunts would have no influence on the celose

the Government would pursue. They were desirous to netiatitio the relations of the two countm ies on the same friereltv feoting on seldeli it had soOsisted for some time. These two great countries had too many interests ie common, and too many feelings in common, to allew themselves to Inc parted by such taunts.

Lord Palinerston concluded by stating the real import of the ques- tion before. tile House—

The motion was an appeal to the House as to the foreign policy of the pre- sent Administration is compared with that of the late Government. If the House agreed to the motion, they condemned the Government. If, iii the

contrary, they approved of the conduct of the Government—if they esesidered the Government had succeeded in preserving the peace of the country, without any sacrifice of the national honour—if they thought the rights of 1i liti ub- j had been asserted with as much vigour as was necessary, brit without ‘;-oing beyond the peint which the ease required—then they would treat the motion not as one for half-a-dozen afl-idavits, hut as one, the decision MI which would justify or condemn the manner in which the Government had conducted the foreign affairs of the country.

Sir IlOBERT PEEL remarked on the answer which Government made to the various motions that were brought forward in the House—

On one occasion they turn round, and say, Remember the Reform Bill ;

usless you vote for us the Reform Bill is lost. (" Hear, hear !" " !Or, no !") On the question of the Russian Dutch Loan, did not the right honourable gen- tleman expressly state, If you suffer us to be beaten on this question, we are lust; and there is an end of Reform, unless you certify the Attorney-General's hew tube goal law. (Laughter.) In time same way, on this occasion, when there is a strong suspicion of the Government's alleged neutrality, the uoble Lord said that all they wanted was a comparison between the foreign policy of this Government and the last.

Sir Robert, after noticing and answering a remark of Lord Morpeth, that the present Ministers, when in opposition, had shown forbearance towards their opponents,—which he denied to be the case, inasmuch as five of the present Cabinet had joined in a motion of censure against the late Ministry,—went on to consider the more general arguments made use of by those who opposed the motion. Wheat the gentlemen on the opposite side took credit for their great promptness in enforcing British claims, and at the same time admitted that this proceeding upon their part justified the like upon the part of France, he thought that they should at the same time consider the consequences of the precedent they had set, and then they could scarcely fail to acknowledge, that it would have been wise and well to have employed every other means, before they had recourse to abso- lute force.

He nutieed Lord Palmerston's remark, that even were Bonhomme's condemnation just, the French Government were warranted in demand- ing redress for it ; and asked, if it were just, with what justice could the French demand that the Judges who pronounced it should be dis- missed ? Sir Robert commented on Mr. Hoppner's letters, and on Lord Palmerston's speech on the address in 1830, on the propriety of acknowledging Don Miguel. He deprecated all such elaptraps as that the Opposition were anxious to involve the country in war, equally with those which depended on the supposed contrast of character be- tween Don Miguel and his brother ; a contrast which had no bearing on the question. By international law, and, in the ease of Portugal, by express convention, we were precluded from interference ; yet what was our conduct ?-

it was notorious that there were in this metropolis stations for inlisting pri- vate soldiers fur Don Pedro's service, and that British soldiers were preferred. It was well known also, that four ships had been seized upon information by the Board of Customs. They were afterwards released in violation of the act. The observation of the noble Lord, that individuals might hedetained and prosecuted by a foreigner, was idle ; bow would this stop the progress of the expedition, or of what possible use could it be? By the act, it was stated, the seizure of the vessels could only take place by the Board of Customs. They were seized and detained for three weeks, but at length the authority of the Board of Customs was superseded by the Government. These four vessels, armed and loaded with stores, after they had been detained three weeks, were released on the express iuterveution of Miuisters.

Sir fiobert concluded by earnestly pressing compliance with Mr. Courtenuy's motion ; which, he said, was a simple motion for papers, and inferred no censure—if the terms of the motion were disagreeable, they might be made as supplicatory as could be desired. "If Minis- ters were desirous of maintaining tranquillity, they ought, above all, to be desirous of maintaining neutrality, and the Foreign II-distil-lent Act gave the means of Maintaining it."

Mr. STANLEY noticed the concluding remark of Sir Robert Peel. Mr. Baring, when. the Ministry took office, said if they maintained the peace of Europe for six months, they would evince the possession of consummate prudence. Three six months had passed away, and the peace of Europe was on a firmer basis than it was then.

They were next told that the French troops were in Belgium; and what security was there, it was asked, that they would return ? Our confidence in the Freud' Government was the answer. ( Cheers front the Opposition.) Why thet chem ? Had that confidence been violated ? He would call on the members who seeined by that cheer to sneer at the character of a great nation, to come fi.rward and say whether it had violated the confidence which wits placed in it. ( Generid cheers.) Then it had been said, we had allowed Is French fleet to enter the Tagus; and when, it was asked, would it quit it? Did it not quit it the same day on which it was pledged to quit it?

With respect to Bonhomme. they had been told that the punishment was legal : was the attempted transportetion to Angola—was the flog- ging in the dungeon—legal ? Did Sir Robert Peel know of the second flog-eine:, when he spoke of the legality of the case?

Sir It. Pe c, said he was aware of it.

Mr. SeAm.ex--" Then I inn surprised that he did not state so." Eut what came of the inviolability so much talked of when it appeared from Mr. Alattliews that the Judges vere compelled to pronounce any sentence the Government pleased to call for? Mr. Stenley defended the releaee of the four eliips, on the ground that there was no hope, had

an action been brought against the owner, that it could have betel

sustained. Such at least was the opinion, of the legal advisers of the Crown. Mr. Stanley concluded by expressing a hope that Mr. Cour- tettay veould not withdraw his motion : he was aware he did not expect to carry it—his object was merely an attack on the Government—still he hoped he would not shrink front a division.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL Said, a statement of the facts respecting the four ships bad been submitted to him, and he was clearly- of opinion that they had committed sum infringement of the Inlistment Act.

Sir THOMAS DI:NMAN maintained a different opinion— Under the provisions of the Foreign Inlistment Act, the Government could only act upon depositions formally laid before it. The remarkable property of the Foreign lidistment Act was, that u heti a seizure was made in cases of this kind, it was to be referred, like any common seizure, to the Court of Exche-

quer ; but no seizure had been made here, and therefore there had been no re- . terence.

Ile thought Sir Charles Wetherell bad taken an entirely erroneous view of the act. Sir Thomas well remembered the arguments of Lord Brougham against it, and he did not less concur in their force at that time than he did now— It was an act which should never be enforced unless when circumstances fully warranted its application. They were not, under the mask of impartiality,

to seek to interpose wherever they could with this act of Parliament, to prevent Englishmen from giving that aid which they were always ready to afford to the

Cause of freedomsi throughout the world; and they were not to restrict and bind them down, by an overstrained interpretation of such a law, from interfering in such cases, because they knew that their interference would be on the good side.

Mr. O'CONNELL expressed surprise that the monks of Coimbra, who in December 1830 condemned Bonhomme for a crime alleged to have been committed in April 1828, should find an advocate in the Protes- tant member for Oxford.

Lord SANDON observed, that, considering the difficulties under which Government laboured in respect of Belgium and Portugal, large allow- ance should be made for them.

The House at length divided on the motion: for it, 139; against it, 274; majority for Ministers, 135.

3. BELGIUM. On Monday, Sir RICHARD VYVYAN postponed, sine die; his intended motion respecting the affairs of Belgium. He at the same time noticed a distinction between the case of the treaty of 1315, to which Spain was a party, although not for a considerable time afterwards a ratifying party, and the Belgian treaty. The treaty of Vienna was not signed by the plenipotentiary of Spam, while that of . the twenty-four articles was signed by the plenipotentiaries of all the powers, ratifying and non-ratifying.

Lord PALMERSTON, in reply, stated that the fact noticed by Sir Richard Vyvyan only made the case of the treaty of Vienna stronger. He must at the same time repeat, that in the case of the Belgian treaty, if they had not found a precedent, Ministers were fully prepared to snake one.

There was a conversation to the same effect in the House of Lords on Tuesday, in which the Earl of Aberdeen and Earl Grey partici- pated. Earl Grey took occasion to correct a former misstatement of Lord Aberdeen, about treaties being always framed in both languages : there was a host of precedents to the contrary.

4. RUSSIAN LOAN. On Monday, previous to going into the ques- tion of Filianee generally, Mr. RoeiNsost, after remarking that the vote of the House on the loan question left the warninty of the pay- ments where it stood before, asked Lord Althorp if he meant to con- tinue them without the sanction of Parliament?

Lord Ai:Intone observed, that the separation of Belgium from Hol- • land having been now agreed on, by a treaty to which England was a ratifying party, the question was evidently put on new grounds, and an- other convention would be necessary for its settlement.

[The case, it will be seen, was also referred to incidentally during, the discussion of the Finance question, and the same answer giVen.] .

5. THE REFORM BILL. The House of Commons was unable to go into Committee on Monday, in consequence of the lengthened debate on the Finance question. On Tuesday, it was considerably. delayed by the long conversation on the fees payable by Irish Magi- strates. On the House going into Committee, Lord ALTHORP pro.. posed introducing into the 28th clause, certain words rendering it ne- cessary that the poor-rates should have been paid for twelve months. The clause, thus amended, was agreed to—the latter part being in the first place separated from the former, and each made a distinct clause.

The 29th and 80th clauses were agreed to without comment.

Mr. STUART WORTLEY asked if Lord John Russell meant to bring in the bill of which he had spoken last session, to prevent bribery and corruption ?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, he did ; but he thought the bill they were discussing would resider it much less necessary than before.

On the 31st clause, Mr. LENNARD offered an amendment, continuing the rights of freemen's daughters. The House divided on this amend- ment: for it 25, against it 75.

On Wednesday, Clauses 32, 33, and 34, were carried, with a few words of comment from Mr. GOULEURN and Mr. S. WORTLEY.

Mr. WASON offered his amendment, respecting policemen, on Clause 35th being read ; but withdrew it, on the suggestion of Lord JOHN RUSSF' that it would form a snore, proper subject for a separate bill.

Sir Dwane CLIVE moved to add to the clause the words "or other charitable relief." He afterwards withdrew this motion, to make way tbr the addition of the words—" or other relief which at present by the law of Parliament disqualifies any one from voting at elections." The clams,e, with this aineedment, was passed.

Sir Eon.-.:w SUGurN strongly objected to Clause 36, as expensive, and, now tiutt poor-rates formed part of the qualification, unnecessary. e list: chaise would constitute the overseer almost absolute judge of the votel.s, although the overseer was in most instances a very igno-

isSlst

Mr. C. 1-lucx..:sos thought the clause as now framed greatly im- proved.

Colonel Woon spoke of the Registration Act of 1788, to prove that the present attempt would be nugatory.

Sir CHARLES WETHERELL objected to the clause, as giving too great power to the Lord Chancellor.

During the discussion of this clause, which was continued for some time, many of the members of the Ministerial side were absent : imme- diately when these gentlemen had again entered the House, a division took place, and the amendment was negatived by 168 to 65.

Sir EDWARD SuoDEN complained, when the numbers were reported, that members had called for the division who had not heard one word of the arguments for or against that which they divided on.

Lord MILTON said, the charge was one of most unparliaraentary con- duct, and ought to be substantiated.

Sir E. SUGDEN said the call came from the Ministerial side ; but Captain BERKELEY declared that it was made by Sir.Robert Inglis; and Sir Romer admitted that it was.

The clause was at length agreed to, and the House resumed.

On Thursday, the discussion on the Portuguese question occupied the House during the entire night, and the Bill in consequence re- mained untouched.

Last night, on the usual motion for going into Committee on the Bill, Mr. T. Duncombe took occasion to advert to a petition from the county of Hertford, relative to the means used to obtain signatures to an Anti-Reform address which was lately presented to the King at Brigh- ton. . The time for presenting that petition to-night was now passed; but he wished to be allowed to make known to the House the grievances complained of by the petitioners. The petitioners complained of the insulting address which had been carried to the King at Brighton, a few days ago, by two noble individuals. They spoke of the threats, bribes, and.douceurs, which had been given to induce persons to sign it. One Andrews, an attorney, had represented it as an address against the assessed taxes, and for the passing of the Reform Bill. Yet this address, into which the addressers had been entrapped, called the Bill, in the usual Opposition jargon, a "revolutionary measure," denounced Political Unions, and specially thanked the King for not creating new Peers,-which creation it represented as one that would annihilate "that happy balance under which the country bad long flomished." Mr. Duncombe asked, in return to the cheers of the Opposition which ,accompanied the reading of these words, if Peers were to be created only for the benefit of the Anti-Reformers? Blackstone and Locke bad stated the creation of Peers to be a constitutional exercise of the King's prerogativa; and they were as good authority as Lord Salisbury. and Lord Verulam. The Hertford address said the King "had mag- nanimously withstood all solicitations to create Peers." Mr. Duncombe emphatically denied this. ( Cries of "0/i!" and " Hear I") "My assertion is at least as good as that of the address," observed Mr. Dun- combe; "and those who cry ' Oh ! ' will find it in the sequel some- what more correct than they are willing to anticipate." He repeated, his Majesty had not withstood the responsible advice to create Peers; for he had armed his Ministers with power to carry, into full efficiency the national measure of Reform. And he would tell those Ministers, if they did not exercise that power with prompt energy, they would justly incur the indignation of the country, and deserve impeachment. (Loud cries of " Hear ! ")

Mr. Mackinnon read a letter from one Andrews, an attorney at Barnet, in which he noticed the charge against him, that he had, on false representations of the address, got six persons to sign the address to the King. He denied having made any misrepresentation to five out of the six; but admitted, that to one of the persons—an excellent client of his own—he had stated, in joke, that the address was against the assessed taxes. Mr. Mackinnon said, he had testimonials, signed by from twenty-five to thirty individuals, of the respectability of Andrews. He also mentioned that there was a letter from Sears, the person who was represented as deceived, in which he admitted that the mention of the assessed taxes by Andrews was made jocosely.

Lord Stormont described Andrews as a most respectable person ; and said the petition presented by Mr. Duncombe had been got up by one Dell, who was neither more nor less than a runaway horse-dealer. A more despicable petition, or one originating in worse motives, or signed by less respectable persons, had never been offered to Parliament.

Mr. Byng repeated the statement that Sears had been deceived by Andrews— Sears was in his shop on a Saturday, busy attending to his customers; when Andrews came in, and exclaimed, "Pray, Sears, do you wish to see the assessed taxes repealed?" "Oh, certainly," answered Scars, "by all means." "Then you have only to put your name to this petition; which, however, you had bet- ter read first." To this Sears replied, "I am now, as you see, very busy, and cannot spare time to read the paper; but I am sure you would not deceive me as to its import, and therefore 1'11 sign it at once."

Sir Charles Wetherell alluded to Mr. Duncombe's remarks respect- ing the creation of Peers ; and said, on the discussion of the motion which he had on the books for an account of the Peers created at dif- ferent periods since the Revolution, he would endeavour to show that such a creation as that contemplated by Mr. Duncombe was illegal, un- constitutional, and would be destructive of the independence of the Upper House.

The Marquis of Chandos bore testimony to the good .character of _Andrews.

A Member, whose name is not given, observed that it was high time for Ministers to advise the creation of Peers.

This gentleman was severely rebuked for his forwardness by Mr. Croker ; who said, considering the relation in which he stood towards Government, and his recent introduction into the House, he should not be so ready to offer his gratuitous advice to Ministers.

The nameless Member denied that he stood in any peculiar relation to Government, that precluded him from offering them advice; and was again recommended by Mr. Croker to be less dictatorial and dog- matic.

Lord Ebrington perfectly concurred with Mr. Duncombe. A large creation of Peers was an evil, but the defeat of the Reform Bill was a greater evil. If Ministers had not been fully prepared to make such a creation, they would have been wholly unjustified in bringing forward the Bill a second time.

Sir Richard Vyvyan spoke against the delay produced by the discus- sion. In respect to a creation of Peers, he called on the country to look to the state of France, where the hereditary Peerage had been annihilated.

Mr. O'Connell. asked if the nomination of members of Parliament was among the constitutional privileges of the Peers ? It was that nomination which the majority of them had resolved on retaining. He wished sincerely he could see a Gazette with even twenty Peers in it; only one good Gazette was wanting, and every thing would go right. It was said there were 61 Peers against the Bill; in that case, let Ministers create 122, to make sure.

Sir Robert Peel said, if a creation of Peers took place, he thought the six petitioners had as good a right to be included in the batch as any others. He hoped among the ill to see the name of Baron Thimbleby of Barnet.

Mr. Hunt said, the people were sick of the Bill. He thought the creation of Peers a bad precedent.

Sir Andrew Agnew declared, that the moment a batch of Peers was announced, he would cease to support the Bill.

Mr. James gave an instance of the people's sickness of the Bill. He had lately been called seriously to task by his constituents for being on one solitary occasion absent from a division on it. As to Sir Andrew Agnew's support of Reform, it amounted to this—he supported it as long as there was no prospect of its being carried; and the moment such a prospect was presented, he would abandon it.

This long and interesting conversation was terminated by the Speaker leaving the chair.

The House being in Committee, the 38th and 39th Clauses were read.. On the latter, Mr., Goulburn moved to omit that part which re- quired the sanction of the Lord Chancellor to the appointment of the barristers. Lord Althorp acceded to this amendment. An amend- ment was also inserted, to prevent a member of Parliament from acting as barrister.

The ensuing. clauses, as far down as the 47th, were agreed to without AIRentiment._ An amendment in. the 47th Clause was agreed to, on the motion of Alderman Venables, directing the London barristers to be selected from among the common pleaders of the City.

The 48th and49th Clauses were agreed to.

The 50th was postponed, in order to revision as to the mode of sum- moning witnesses and remunerating them. This was done on the sug- gestion of the Opposition ; Sir Robert Peel observed, that the readi- ness with which their suggestions were listened to ought to encoimige them to make more.

The 55th and 56th Clauses were then agreed to ; and the 57th, after some conversation, being postponed, the House resumed, after a greater progress than usual,—the number of clauses passed. being no fewer than seventeen, although the sitting was by no means lengthened.

The House sits to-day at twelve o'clock.

6. IRISH TITHES. On Tuesday, in presenting a petition on the- subject of tithes in Ireland, praying that they might be devoted to the maintenance of the poor, Earl GREY, after expressing his entire dis- sent from the prayer of the petition, proceeded to state, that although, under the urgent circumstances of the ease, he had brought forward a proposition for a committee of inquiry into the means of putting an end to the difficulties that had arisen in regard to the collection of tithes, he had never contemplated any measures but such as would se- cure to the clergy their just rights.

He admitted that he had looked with no satisfaction at the misrepresentatiou which had got abroad ; and he thought it necessary to state, that while in Ire- land a combination to resist the payment of tithes was continued, and while it continued to spread, he felt it was absolutely necessary, before any thing else, that the leoislative authority and the law should be vindicated, anti that measures should be adopted to secure the successful exertion of the power placed in the hands of the Government. That power certainly should be and had been ex- erted to secure the rights of the clergy; and if it were found insufficient, he had no hesitation in saying, that he would propose to their Lordships to give further powers to the Government, if that were rendered necessary, to suppress the resistance.

Earl 'WICKLOW expressed his satisfaction at this declaration ; and regretted it had not been sooner made, as he thought the appointment of the Committee without such a declaration had produced a degree of evil that no committee could remedy.

Earl GREY said, from the opinions he had always held on the subject, and had always expressed, he could have had no suspicion that any of the evils alluded to would be attributed to him.

Lord ELLENBOROUGH suggested that some strong measure should be resorted to for the punishment of persons arraying themselves against the payment of tithes. It was illegal to resist tithes, but it ought to be made illegal even to advise such a resistance, for it was such advice that struck at the root of the system.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE remarked, that in no instance had the power of Government been invoked for the purpose of giving effect tom the law on the subject of Irish tithes, that it had not been promptly yielded. It was at the same time trite, that persons in Ireland bad coun- tenanced the belief that Government looked with indifference on the infraction of the tithe-law.

Lord CLONCURRY said, as long as the people imagined that the Legis- lature was inclined to redress the evils of the system, so long would they constrain themselves to obey it. To tell them that justice was to be denied to them, would confirm and extend their opposition, not put it down.

Lord Wissonn attributed all the mischief to the Catholic priests, and more particularly to Bishop Doyle.

Lord PLUNKETT expressed his regret that the false inference frora the appointment of the Tithe Committee, that Government was indif- ferent to time rights of the Irish Church, 1=1 been countenanced by persons of high rank and reputation— Nothing more unwarrantable was ever inferred, than the conclusion drawn front the appointment of the Committee. Nothing more dangerous, nothing more mischievous, was ever propagated; and it had -not one fact to support it It was not only the interest of this Government, but it was the interest of every Government, to support and protect the rights of the Church. Persons who said that the Government was not favourable to the Protestants, propagated slander.

The question, and this discussion on it, were alluded to in the House of Commons on Wednesday, on the presentation of a petition. Mr.. O'CONNELL said, the attempt to uphold tithes by all the power of Government, was equally feeble and foolish ; it must fail, for Pro- testants as well as Catholics were against them. Mr. WEYLAND ob- served, that those who resisted the payment of tithes, were in one sense robbers, for they had recourse to violence to keep money in their pockets that belonged to other men. Mr. O'CONNELL said, there was no resistance to the law.--(Cries of "0/u !")---he repeated the observation : the law was allowed to take its course; but when the distress was put up to auction, there was no bid- der. When members talked of retaining money that belonged to others; they ought to ask to whom the money originally belonged,--one third originally went to the poor, who now got none of it—one third to re- pair the churches, which the tithe-payers were now called on to do.-- and one third to the clergy.

Mr. LEFROY denied the accuracy of Mr. O'Connell's statement of a threefold division. He also denied that Blackstone, whom Mr. Sheil quoted as authority, had spoken of a fourfold division. [Mr. SHEIL, went to the library, brought in the book, and read the passage.] Mr. SHAW said, the resistance to tithe was maintained by force, and must be put down by force.

Sir ROBERT PEEL and Sir CHARLES WETHERELL expressed their cordial concurrence in the intention of Government to maintain the lava as it stood.

Lord EBRINGTON said he would support no coercive measure that was not preceded by conciliation.

7. MANCHESTER MAGISTRATES OF 1819. Last night, Lord Altborpc presented a petition praying for inquiry into the conduct of these gentlemen on the famous 16th of August. Though he presentedthe petition, his own opinion was, that as the case had so long gone by it would be now the wisest plan to allow it to, remain undisturbed, Mr. J. Wood and Mr. Eunt expressed their regret at this declara- tion. Mr. Hume thought no lapse of time nor limit of inquiry should be made in the case of murder. Though the transaction was twelve years old, he had as lively a recollection of it as if it had occurred yesterday.

Lord Milton regretted the introduction of the subject to Parliament, hut admitted it to be one of gravest consideration. He had by no means made up his mind on the propriety of not prosecuting an inquiry into .it even now. If ever an affair had occurred directly tending to alienate the minds of the lower classes from the higher, that of Man- chester was such.

8. POLITICAL UNIONS. Lord STORMONT, the Duke of Marlborough's nominee for Woodstock, objected on Monday evening to the reception of a petition from the Council of the National Political Union, pray- ing that the elective franchise might not depend on the payment of any rate or tax. He said it came from a Society proclaimed by the King.

Mr. WARBURTON said, the proclamation did not apply to such so- . cieties ; and Mr. O'CONNELL observed, that if it did, the illegality of the Society would as much remain to be proved as if it did not. " Out - of Ireland, the British constitution had not willed that proclamations should have the force of laws."

Mr. HUME said, he thought the Union a most useful institution, and sincerely wished there was one in every parish.

The petition was received and ordered to be printed.

• 9. Tim Loan CuAscia.r.ort's SALARY. In the House of Lords on Thursday, Lord ELLENBOROUGH expressed his surprise that no pro- vision had been made for the proper support of the office of Lord Chancellor. It was well known, by the law which established the new Bankruptcy Court, a very large reduction had been made in the emolu- ments of that high office. Compensation had been offered to all the other officers who suffered by the change ; but for the Chancellor, who suffered most, no compensation was made. Lord Ellenborough said, he had noticed this subject without communicating either with Lord Brougham or the Ministers, because he had thought it would be more lit and agreeable that any observations respecting it should proceed from the Opposition than the Ministerial side of the House.

Lord BROUGHAM said, he had never spoken on the subject to his , colleagues, nor his colleagues to him. He merely knew that nothing had been done ; and that so far as he was concerned, he would fake no part in any discussions on the subject.

10. FEES. A long conversation on the subject of fees demanded from Irish Magistrates, took place on Tuesday, when Colonel PERCIVAL moved for a copy of 'the general warrant made by the Chancellor's Se- ' cretary, for the county of Sligo, and also the number of &limes issued in the same county.

Mr. STANLEY remarked on the unfounded charges brought against the Irish Chancellor. First it Ivas said, he had written a letter to the Lords Lieutenant, desiring that no clergyman should be put on the roll of the peace : he had never done any thing of the kind. Then it was said, he pocketed all the tees paid on these dcdiniaR : he did not receive a shilling of it. Mr. Stanley commented severely on the conduct of those persons of high rank who refused to comply with the law, and did all they could to bring it into contempt, while they clamoured against the ignorant peasantry for similar conduct.

Colonel CoNot.tv complained that the Magistrates did not receive the same support from the Police force as formerly. To which Mr. STANLEY replied, that the orders given to the Police force by the pre- sent Ministers were word for word the same as those given by the late Government.

Mr. SHAW, Mr. CRAMPTON, and Sir EDWARD SUGDEN, entered into a long argument on the legality of the fees demanded.

The motion was agreed to ; as was a more general one of Mr. HUME, for a return of all fees payable on acceptance of offices of every kind and in every part of the kingdom.

11. ANATOMY Bir.L. On the presentation of some petitions in favour of this bill, on Monday, Mr. HUNT recommended wax models, which, he said, had been recently invented in Paris, and were used there and in Dublin. Mr. CRAMPTON put the member for Preston right in re- spect to the use of wax models at Dublin. Whatever school or college might study by these means, Dublin did not. Mr. SHEIL corrected him in respect of their recent invention; they had been invented and used in Florence some centuries ago.

On Tuesday, in presenting a petition to the Lords, in fiwour of the bill, the Duke of SessEx mentioned two cases of persons in humble life who had desired their bodies to be dissected after death : one was the female, Mary Gray, on whose face so interesting an operation was lately performed.

The Parliamentary Committee on the affairs of the East India Com- pany have at last adopted the plan so often suggested to commit- tees when the inquiries are extensive : they have branched them- selves out into six sub-committees,—namely, on finance, political and foreign, revenue, judicial, military (at the India Board), and public or miscellaneous.