23tbatesi atttr Prater/rim/it in Vadiamtnt. 1. REFORM OF THE IRISH

CORPORATIONS.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved the order of the day for the second reading of the Irish Muni cipal Bill. On the question being put, that the Speaker leave the chair,

Lord FRANCIS EGERTON rose to call the attention of the House to the following motion, of which Lord Granville Somerset had given notice on his behalf last week- " That the Committee on the bill for the regulation of the Municipal Cor- poa. in Ireland, be empowered to make provisions for the abolition of such otations, and for such arrangements as may be necessary, on their aboli- tion, for securing the efficient and impartial administration of justice, and the peace sad good government of cities and towns in Ireland." Lord Francis spoke at considerable length in support of this motion. He aYetred himAqf averse th the continuance of the existing corporate

system of Ireland, whose abuses he could not palliate. He was pre- pared to relieve the Corporations in that country from a weak and pain- ful existence, careless in what quarter their fall would be cheered.. But the question then arose, what was to be substituted in place of the abolished Corporations ? Here he was at issue with the Attorney- General for Ireland. He joined him in removing abuses ; but whets

be sat down to build among the ruins, Lord Francis paused to ex- amine the probable results of the reconstructing provisions of the bill- by which it was proposed to repair the ravages of the preamble and first clause. He looked to the end rather than to the means ; and when he reflected on the state of society in Ireland—so different from that which existed in England and Scotland—he could not bring him- self to believe that the same measures which were advantageous in this- part of the kingdom would produce similar results, or tend to the im- partial administration of justice, and the establishment of good local government, in Ireland. He denied that, in refusing to establish cor- porations in Ireland he refused to that country an element of pros- perity ; and he referred to the thriving state of Manchester and Bir- mingham as proof that corporate institutions were not essential to Aft wellbeing of the community. As to the assertion that there should be identity of institutions on both sides of the Channel, be would remind the House, that such was not the system on which Ministers now acted in governing Ireland. For instance, was there anything like the Assistant Barristers' jurisdiction in England ? Yet it was not pro- posed to abolish the Assistant Barristers' Courts for the sake of assimilating the institutions of the two countries. There were the Con- stabulary Bill, and other measures now in progress, which went to ex- tend institutions, different from any which were established in Eng. lurid. As he saw no force in the arguments which were used to de- monstrate the necessity of reconstructing the corporate system of Ire- land, he would propose that the local government of cities and towns in that country should be conducted on a more simple and efficient plan- " The real and natural objects of corporate government appear to me to be these. The administration of justice ; the control and direction of that police force, whatever it may be, to which the protection of the person and of pro- perty is confided ; the administration of corporate property ; and the regulation of those other not unimportant matters which concern the health, the comfort, and the convenience of the community—the lighting, the paving, the draining, &c. For the due regulation of these, it appears to me that the extinction of corporate authority will not create the smallest difficulty. To the attainment of some, it appears to me that in Ireland that extinction will afford a favourable opportunity and direct assistance. I propose that those towns and cities now counties should remain counties of towns and cities ; that they should, as now, have their Sheriff, but that that Sheriff should be appointed by the Crown, as the County Sheriff is at present. By that officer, so deriving his functions, the Grand and Petty Juries will continue to be summoned. The other cities and towns will be subject to the jurisdiction of magistrates appointed by the Crown, and will be under the County Sheriff and the ordinary parochial authorities. As to corporate property, it appears to my right honourable friend and myself that, for the present, it would he expedient to vest it in a commission to be ap- pointed by the Crown, to be considered as a temporary arrangement, and with a view of appropriating, under the sanction of Parliament, the corporate funds of each town possessing corporate property to its municipal purposes."

Lord Francis concluded by observing, that he had not presented this question to the House' in the religious point of view, in which it was almost exclusively regarded by many of his friends-

" That danger to Protestant institutions should be anticipated from any measure which opens new fields to political agitation, I for one cannot but anticipate or apprehend ; but I know that religious zeal may be prone to aggravate those dangers. It is not essential to the correction of every evil which I dread as contingent upon this measure, that party difference should either universally or generally take a sectarian turn. It is sufficient for my argument, if the inquisition into political, and not into religious creed, should invariably attend the candidate for municipal office."

Dr. LEFROY seconded the motion, in a speech full of details, brought forward to prove that the provisions of the bill were not in accordance with any intelligible principle. Insignificant towns were to have cor- porations, while those of considerable importance and population were not mentioned in the bill. Dr. Lefroy also argued, that the operation of the measure would be seen in the endowment by the Town- Councils of Catholic places of worship, as had been already done by the Catholic Corporation of Tuam.

Lord Mosrent replied to Lord Francis Egerton and Dr. Lefroy; and entered into a general defence of the bill. He explained, that the reason why some large towns in Ireland were not included in the bill was, that its object was the reconstruction of old Corporations, not the establishment of corporate bodies in places where none now existed ; that might be done at a future time.

Mr. Sergeant JACKSON began by soliciting attention to the few ob- servations he intended to make; but spoke for two hours. The greater part of his speech was occupied with quotations from evidence given before the Intimidation Committee, and comments upon them. He laid great stress on the address said to have been delivered from the altar by Father Kehoe, in Carlow ; and on a sermon, inciting the mili- tary to insubordination, alleged to have been preached by Mr. Burke, of Castle Pollard. He also read extracts from some of Mr. O'Con- nell's election addresses; the object of the whole being to prove, that'll a Catholic supremacy most dangerous to the Protestants, was the real aim of the Liberal Irish Members, and that its accomplishment would be greatly aided by the bill before the House. Mr. Sergeant WOULFE said, that Mr. Jackson had not acted fairly in reading the extracts which he had produced, without at the same time informing the House that the statements in them bad all been contradiCted. He would not justify the conduct of the parties alluded to, provided it was correctly stated ; but that was a question he would not stay to discuss. As a general fact, he was prepared to deny that the Catholics made Protestantism a bar of exclusion to offices which they could bestow, or that religious animosity influenced their political acts. He acknowledged that there had been recently extreme excite- ment in Ireland- " But this much (he added) I am prepared to say, and to prove, that the ex- citement was the result of the unconstitutional claim that was put forward by the holders ofproperty in Ireland to dispose of the suffrages of their ten ,nts is they thought fit. They claimed the votes of their tenants 83 services incident to their tenure—as part and parcel of their seignorial rights. Against this flagrant usurpation the freeholders of Ireland revolted. All the rights of property were put in force against them to reduce them to subjection. Hence the collision that took place. The excitement was reaction—the necessary and inevitable reaction of the landlords violently to force the people of the country to exercise their constitutional franchises in a manner repugnant to their feel- ings. How those feelings or opinions were produced, is of no moment ; but I again deny that there was any thing in those feelings or opinions inconsistent with any principle of civil or religious liberty. The very reverse was the fact." There was prima fade ground for passing the bill before the House ; and he should derogate from his self-respect as an Irishman, if he placed the claim of his country to have the bill on any other ground than this— The people of England and Scotland, considering a plan of Municipal Reform based upon popular principles to be conducive to their interests, or calculated to gratify their local pride, desired the establishment of such a plan among them; and they obtained it. The people of Ireland, considering that it u ould promote their interests also, and gratify their feelings, desire it likewise. I do not mean to say that the will of any portion of this empire is of necessity to prevail over the judgment of the united Legislature of the entire ; but I do say, that in Matters of local concern it is entitled to paramount attention. I will go further, and say, that if in any portion of the empire an institution be established which is regarded in the nature of a boon or privilege, and that the extension of it is desired by another portion of the empire, the bare will of the portion so desiring it does establish a presumptive case for its extension, which nothing short of the clearest and the strongest reason can displace. The common right must be ousted by considerations clear• and cogent. These surmises will not suffice ; these allegations of unfitness without proof—apprehensions vaguely or vainly entertained—will not suffice. The evil apprehended from acknowledging the common right must be great as well as certain. Now let me ask what is the evil alleged as likely to result from the bill of my right honourable friend, which is to justify that which, unjustified, will be both an injury and an affront ? It has been said by all the honourable Members who have spoken on the other side, that the effect of the bill will be to transfer from the hands of the Protestants into the hands of the Catholics the power incident to the Corporations. Sir, I maintain that the principle of the bill is such that it is impossible that it can take the power with which it deals out of the hands of those who ought to have it, or to place it in the hands of those who are not entitled to it. I do not care whether the hands that lose it are Protestant, or whether the hands that gain it are Catholic ; but this I know, that under the operation of this bill the persons rightfully entitled to it will ac- quire it. The principle of the bill is to distribute the power by a civil qualifi- cation. Wherever that qualification is, there the power will be. Wherever that qualification is wanting, there the power will not be. The bill takes no heed as to how many of the qualified shall be found in one church or in the other. It does not attempt to maintain the balance of power between sects, but

to break up the classification altogether, and to annex power to that to which by nature it is incident. Sir, this principle was recognized by the right

honourable baronet the Member for Tamworth on the first reading of this bill.

He acknowledged that it was neither just nor expedient, nor in modern times practicable, to distribute power on any other principle. In making this ac-

knowledgment, he merely recognized the great principle of the bill of 1829, which disposed of and scattered among the people all the functions of the state, by annexing them to civil qualifications without reference to creed. This is not only the principle of that great law, but the principle of a law still higher— the law of nature. Nature has annexed power to the elements which constitute civil qualification. You may do violence to nature, and separate legal power from those elements, but nature will avenge the wrong, and restore the balance. She will more than compensate for the legal power you withhold, by the morbid energy of passion."

Sir HENRY HARDINGE strongly opposed the bill ; and argued from the evidence given before the Intimidation Committee, that the Roman Catholic priests made the election of candidates a religious question. He repudiated any participation whatever in the "No Popery" cry, and sala that Mr. O'Connell had raised the "Popery" cry. He con- sidered that the wisest course would be to defer the bill altogether ; but as that would not be agreed to, he should vote for Lord Francis Egerton's motion.

Lord HOWICK maintained that there was nothing in the state of Ire- land which rendered it unsafe to pass the present measure : he could not conceive what rational ground could be assigned for refusing to intrust the inhabitants of Cork, Limerick, and Dublin, with the manage- ment of their local concerns. He was glad to hear Sir Henry Har- dinge disclaim being a party to getting up the "No Popery" cry, but could all who sat on his side of the House say the same ?

On the motion of Mr. BROTHERTON, the debate was adjourned, at the conclusion of Lord Howick's speech, to the next day; and the House rose rose at one o'clock.

The debate on Tuesday was opened by Mr. O'BRIEN, in support of the bill. Mr. VILLIERS STUART, Mr. W. H. ORD, Mr. MORGAN JOHN O'CONNELL, Mr. BARRON, and Mr. CLAY, !woke on the same side. Mr. RANDALL PLUNKET, Mr. EMERSON TENNENT, and Mr. GALLY KNIGHT, opposed the bill. Most of these gentlemen spoke respecting the operation of the bill in certain places in Ireland, and in correction of sundry statements, and quotations from evidence, adduced in the course of the previous night's debate. Mr. CLAY, indeed, addressed himself more to the discussion of the principles of the measure ; but we find a very meagre report of his speech. He remarked upon an observation of Lord Francis Egerton, that though there was a great necessity for Parliamentary Reform, there was little Joccasion for Municipal Reform— Ile disagreed with the noble lord entirely. He thought, if it was important to give great privileges to the people, it was of at least equal importance to teach them to use those privileges wisely. The people of Ireland must be ad- mitted to a full participation in the rights enjoyed by the people of England and there was no better security ag-inst their not abusing the power conceded to them, than was derived from educating them in their moral and social duties, by intrusting to them h cal self-government. They talked of party, and of the heat and acrimony which it occasioned, as evils : but even that state of things was useful; it teaded to the education of the people, by the ad- ditional interest which it impair red to public affairs. It astonished him, that any one pretending to the et aracter of an English statesman, should have dared to propose a scheme fir one-third of the subjects of this great empire, in which the elementary truth—the utility of the habits of self-government— was not fully admitted.

Sir JAMES GRAHAM spoke at great length in opposition to the bill. He pointed out the many discrepancies in the laws and institutions of England aad Ireland; and laid especial weight upon the fact that the system of annually registering voters, which was established in Eng- land, had not been extended to Ireland ! There was nothing in Eng- land like the anomalous power of the Assistant Barrister to award SOL damages to a landlord for a breach of covenant. ( Here Sir James was told that the Assistant Barrister had no such power in Ireland ; and be corrected himself by saying, that the Barrister could try actions to the amount of 501.) Then it was not pretended that the English sys- tem of Poor-laws could be extended to Ireland. These were some instances of the discrepancy between English and Irish institutions, which set aside the argument that because England had a reformed corporate system Ireland should have one also. Sir James read ex- tracts from Mr. O'Connell's evidence given in 1825 before the House of Lords, to prove how little dependence could be placed on his assur- ances as to what would or would not pacify Ireland; and he referred to Lord Grey's speeches on the Coercion Bill, and Lord Wellesley's des- patches, to prove that agrarian outrage originated from political agita- tion. To show how different was the state of society in Ireland from that which existed in England, he instanced the attacks upon process-servers and clergymen, the refusal to pay tithes, and the neces- sity of military interference to prevent riots at elections. He adverted to Mr. O'Connell's remark that the English Corporations would be- come " normal schools of peaceful agitation,"—and to his promise to his Dublin constituents that they should have a " roaring Mayoralty," and that he would condescend to be the first Mayor,—with the view to prove how certain it was that the Irish Corporations would be hotbeds of agitation. Mr. Sheil bad reminded the House, not for the first time, that the Irish Catholics were seven millions; but Sir James trusted that the people, who had rescued Protestant strangers from Don John of Austria, who had protected the French Huguenots, and had given the House of Nassau a victory over Catholic intolerance in this country, would not quail before Catholic intimidation, nor deliver up the Protestants of Ireland an easy prey to " the fury of a demagogue, the vengeance of a priest, or the madness of a misguided people." Mr. O'CONNELL and Mr. GISBOUNE rose together ; but the SPEAKER retired fora few minutes ; and when he returned, named Mr. O'Connell. Mr. O'CONNELL began as follows- " I am glad, Sir, you have enabled me to recover for a few seconds from the blaze of religious eloquence with which the right honourable baronet has just thought proper to overwhelm us. I shall not, on the present occasion, follow the right honourable baronet through the matter of his speech ; a great deal, perhaps, I shall have occasion to make use of at another opportunity. If the House shall refuse to do justice to Ireland, I can assure the right honourable baronet, that he has this night furnished me with an additional number of powerful arguments for the Repeal of the Union."

He spent some little time in controverting the correctness of several statements, extracted from the Intimidation Evidence, which had been used by Members on the Opposition side of the House ; especially re- marking, that Father Kehoe had published a denial, in the Carlow Sen- tinel, that he had ever delivered the famous sermon ; and that Mr. Maher had, on his behalf, denied the authenticity of the report of the sermon before the Committee,—both of which facts were suppressed by Sergeant Jackson and Sir Henry Hardinge. He read extracts from the evidence of Mr. Carter Hall, who pretended to have been present and to have taken down the words of Father Kehoe, which, according to Mr. O'Connell, rendered it very doubtful whether he had been present at all, inasmuch as the description he gave of the priest's dress was such as priest never wore. He apologized for detaining the House with these miserable and unimportant calumnies on himself and the Catholic clergy ; and, dismissing all notice of these minor matters, would call the attention of the House to the great national question really before it,—the principle involved in the Irish Corporation Bill, and what the result of that measure would be.

" Now, then, this is a question which I will reply to first negatively. The ques- tion is not whether we shall preserve or put an end to the Irish Corporations : that is a point upon which every one is agreed ; everybody has given them up en- tirely ; and declared them to be corrupt and profligate to the last degree, influenc- ing and at the same time polluting the sources of public justice. Of all the Mem- bers who have addressed the House upon the subject, they are all so honourable, there is not one to defend these Corporations—not one to stand up for them! There is the noble lord the Member for North Lancashire, and the noble lord the Member for South Lancashire, two noble lords North and South; then there is the honourable and gallant officer, and the honourable and learned Sergeant the Member for Bandon, and the honourable and learned Recorder—whose face is just brightened up by a smile, but who wore a countenance not two minutes ago very fit for an undertaker ; even the honourable and learned Recorder had not a word to say fur the poor corporators. T hey all agreed to throw them quietly overboard. Amongst so many speeches, one hardly knows how to select one above another ; but upon the whole, I think 1 must give the preference to the speech of the noble lord for North Lancashire ; there is a cordiality about all he said which is quite de- lightful. (Laughter.) But what I want to know is, when did all these noble lords and honourable and learned gentlemen first find out that these Corpora- tions were so very bad ? (Mitch cheering.) When did this new light shine upon this galaxy of talented rulers of Irish affairs ? I think it very cruel of the hr aourable gentlemen to find it out at the precise time they do, and consent to abolish all at once these venerable Corporations— "Abandoned in their utmost need.

By those their former bounty fed."

(Loud laughter.) Here is a specimen of the wisdom of our ancestors—a do- cument of the year 1816. Resolved unanimously, that Robert Peel, Esq. deserves our warmest thanks, and those of all loyal subjects, for his true Pro- testant principles, and particularly for his heroic opposition to that public nuisance who designated our constitutional body a beggarly corporation; and that the Orange Peel with the Orange lily shall henceforward be the combined emblem of true loyalty.' (Much laughter.) Oh! little did the poor Dublin corporators think how blighting would the contact eventually prove of what they considered substances of a congenial nature."

Sir ROBERT PEEL—" When was that resolution passed ?"

Mr. O'CON NELL It was in the year 1816 ; shortly before the picture w a s voted to the right honourable baronet, which he of leave to pay for himse f . (Shouts of laughter.) But what can you think of the situation of those pe i • eons who are subject to the government of such a body as this corrupt corpo ra- tion, by which Justice is poisoned to the source, by which partisanslii practised by Sheriffs and Sub-Sheriffs, by Grand Juries and Petty Juries?—a 11 admitted abuses now, but all existing when the right honourable gentlemen and the noble lords who at various times filled the office of Secretary to Ireland were in power. ( Cheers. ) I hurl these abuses, which they never even attempted to remove when they were, from the nature of their office, called upon to do mu —in the name of my country Ilhurl_these abuses at them now. ( Continued *hens.) How can they account for having suffered these nuisances—not to re- main undisturbed—but to become still more offensive? What reason can they jive for allowing the pure waters ofjustice to be made a mephitic pool, which, instead of diffusing gladness, and health, and vigour, spreads pestilence and death around them ? Why, Sir, these are the bodies that the independent and pure gentlemen in the opposite side of the House felt proud in countenancing and encouraging. Did the right honourable gentlemen and the noble lords, to whom I have before alluded, and who filled the office of Secretary of Ireland, remain during the tenure of their office in ignorance of the evils of this corrupt and abominable system ? There was one of them, the noble lord the Member for North Lancashire, to whom I will do the justice of expressing my belief that he was not blind to the grievances which they imposed on those whom they go- verned. But with that exception, was there one of these noble and right honourable Secretaries, during the time they remained in office, who did not Flory in being the subjects of the toasts and speeches of these very corrupt jurors, these partisan sheriffs, and these infamous corporate bodies ?—nay, were not their own addresses, made to assemblies composed of such individuals, re- ceived with the long-continued and oft repeated hurras of these corruptionists, whom, with the strangest gratitude, it must be admitted, they now with one voice unite in condemning ?"

All these corporators, however, were to go — Sheriffs and Sub- Sheriffs, Town-Clerks and Recorders, at one fell swoop must be cut off. Well, then, we next come to inquire, who are to be put in their places ?

41 1 ask—I demand, Sir, in the name of my constituency, the substitution of a bode identical, not in details, but identical in its principle, with that which has been given to Scotland and England. That is my demand—nothing short of that will satisfy me. The right honourable baronet the Member for Tam- woreh says my plan is to make all the inhabitants of Ireland equal ; and that is what the Catholics themselves desired. Sir, it is true that all the Catholics ever asked, though it was insinuated they desired more, was equality ; and equality they shall have. How ? By destroying institutions whose natural foundations are the principles of freedom ? and, because Protestants can no longer monopolize privileges and rights intended for the whole of the people, by suffering no civil rights to appertain to any portion of the inhabitants of that country?—I deny, Sir, that that is an equality which can be beneficial to any people having the least pretence to the enjoyment of freedom. It is an

be

equality which may boasted of by the most despotic monarch and enslaved people on the earth ; but it is an equality which the people of Ireland have no desire to share in common with them. Sir, I have always said that my prin• ciple of equality, as applied to Ireland, was not to pull down the Protestants to any level, but to raise the Catholic to the level of the Protestant. (Much cheering.) It is no base compromise in order to subvert the institutions fsom which Catholics are excluded, and to make all equally slaves. I will never consent to that. (Loud cheers, with some ironical cites of "Hear, hear !" from the Offosition, amidst which that of Mr. Emerson Tennent might be distinguished.) I bear the voice calling itself the representative of Belfast.

Now, why should that honourable Member (in a speech which might, perhaps,

have been written before it was spoken) attempt to place the question, with reference to that city at least, on religious grounds ? It was notorious in

Belfast that there were but 2'2,000 Roman Catholies,—belonging, too, to the poorer classes,—while 58,000 of the richer classes were Protestants? Now on what religious ground could he rest the question, or upon what principle could it be refused to the 22,000 that they should be suffired to share the privileges of the 58,000 Protestants? This is a fact which shows the disposition of those

opposed to giving the Irish people a just participation in equal rights : it is a family feature, which enables one to discover the true principles of his party, that the honourable and learned Member for Belfast should come down here, and, in a well-arranged speech, rest upon this difference in religious opinion in favour of Protestantism, not as a reason for making Belfast free, but for the purpose of preventing that town from enjoying the benefits of municipal reform. Having alluded to the Corporation of Belfast, I may as well state that the cor- porators there belonged to the genuine sort. There were thirteen of them. They had control over charitable funds to the amount of 5000/. There are 13000!. now forthcoming ; the other 2000/. have disappeared. It was charity money; and the Belfast corporators, in order to demonstrate how anxious they were to comply with the adage ' charity ought to begin at home,' retained amongst five or six of themselves 2000/. of the money left to them in trust fur the benefit of others." (Loud laughter and cheers.)

Lord Francis Egerton had, in his moderate speech, disclaimed the idea of arguing this question on religious grounds ; but Lord Stanley, and his fellow rider in the Dilly, proved their zeal in the cause of piety by sanetionirg religious persecution-

" They have placed this question on religious grounds, and are terrified at the idea of reform in Irish Corporations, lest the Protestants should be converted to Catholicity. , these bodies have been preaching and practising piety and Protestantiem these three hundred years, and how is it that they never could manage to convert even a solitary Catholic during that period ? (" Hear, hear !" and laoild:r.) The consciences of the noble lord and right honour- able baronet are rumbled with the most harassing apprehensions of the growth of Popery, as the inevitable consequence of the proposed change. But these Corpora:Ions, which must be considered such admirable instruments for con- verting a nation that they ought to be adopted by the Missionary Societies, have been eneagell for centuries in the holy office of preaching Protestantism and pun, • Ainiquity, and nut one Papist has as yet been brought over to their way of thinking. I fancy I can see the honourable Member for Sligo (Colonel Perceval) falling on his knees, uplifting his eyes, and giving way to a burst of solemn supplication against the horrors of Popery, at the contemplation of those bodies, as soon as they are converted into a propaganda for the promotion of the Catholic religion (Much laughter.) But Sligo Corporation is gone ; all this, I am afraid, is the real ground of this pretence—not argument—for persevering in a system of injustice."

The system of governing Ireland adopted by Lord Stanley and the galaxy of five St•eretriries on the other side of the House, was the same as that which had been described by Sir John Davies, two hundred and twenty years ago. Sir John Davies had been in his grave two hundred years, but he should raise him to-night, and make him speak to the House on this question- " In the year 1614, Sir John Davies says—' This, then, I note as a great de- fect in the civil policy of this kingdom, in that for a space of three hundred and fifty years after the conquest of Ireland has been attempted, English laws have not been communicated to the Irish for their benefit and protection, though they have earnestly desired and sought the same.' ( Cheers. ) Is not that ap- plicable to our present condition Here am I now desiring the protection and benefit of the English laws. Sir John proceeds ' In a word, if the English could not govern Ireland by the sword, or root the population out of the soil, they must remain as brambles in their eye, and thorns in their side, and see their conquest never come. If the laws of England had been established, and impartially administered ; if in the reigns of Henry, John, and Richard, the eouutry had been divided into counties, justices sent half-yearly to punish male- factors; if their fairs and markets had been assimilated to the English, and corporate towns originated ; assuredly Ireland would have been reduced by the salutary effects of equal laws and good government. There would have been a perfect union between the nations, and consequently a perfect conquest of Ire- land ; fur the conquest never could be perfected, nor the two countries enter into concord, until they are subjected to one King, one allegiance, and one law.' ( Tremendous cheering followed the reading of this extract.) That was two hundred and twenty years ago ; and here am I now, a descendant of that peo- ple thus described, debating the same question which this historian dwelt upon, and telling you not to dare to insult us any longer, by admitting that Scotland and England have obtained municipal franchises, and yet, under a paltry pre- text, calling upon us to bow down in obedience to your will, while we are de- nied the privilege which you have gained. I tell you that, as we are subjected to one King and one allegiance,' there must and there shall be but ' one law.' " ( Loud cheers.)

In reference to his often-quoted expression respecting " peaceful i political agitation,"—which he said was reported correctly in the Post (a paper that gave the most accurate reports —except the Chronicle) and the Herald, but not in the Times, or in the Mirror of Parliament,— Mr. O'Connell said, that one great value of the new Corporations would be, that they would afford vents for peaceful agitation—•the price which wise men paid for liberty. He called upon the House to give to Ireland these normal schools of agitation, whick would prevent the revival of Orange and Green Associations, the sure consequence of the visits of that arbitrary Commission which was proposed, forsooth— as if the Irish people would submit tamely to its mandates—as a means for putting down agitation. In conclusion, he said he was there to offer them terms of peace— •

"I now stand here before you the authorized representative of three provinces of Ireland ; and in that capacity I tell you, that I fling aside for ever the ques- tion of Repeal, and that I will join with you, if heart and hand you will join with me in pacifying Ireland in the only way you will—you can—you ought to attempt her pacification. These are my terms : will you or not assent to them ? Perpetual union—perpetual combination, and the perpetual bond of equal ori- vileges and equal right. Deny us these terms, and let me tell you your union with Ireland will with one effort be rent asunder for ever." (Loud atid pro- longed cheers.)

Lord STANLEY admitted the extensive influence of Mr. O'Connell ; but he hesitated, on his simple assurance, to enter into a compact with him as the Irish plenipotentiary, before be had security for the due fulfilment of the conditions of the treaty.

" Authorized by the people of Ireland, I come here," exclaimed the honour- able and learned gentleman in his most grandiloquent, but certainly not very argumentative speech, " I come here, authorized by the people of Ireland, to tell you, the British House of Commons, that we are willing to forget past injuries, and to concert with you the conditions of future unity ; but if our conditions are not acceded to, I am then instructed to tell you that again the banner of Repeal shall float upon the breeze, until victory shall crown it with the laurels of triumph." Such in terms had been the threat of Ireland's autho. rized plenipotentiary ; such in terms was the alternative which in his capacity of authorized representative of Irish agitation, the honourable and learned Mem- ber proposed. And where, he begged to ask, was this boasted authorization given. At a dinner in Tuam—at a supper in the King's County—at a meeting held in a room in Dublin ! ( Cheers and laughter.) And was the House of Commons to be gravely told, that on these specific occasions the people of Ireland had given their plenipotentiary such an authority to act fur them as they could with either dignity or propriety entertain? Why, even if the honourable and learned gentleman needed an authority to act for a large portion of the people of Ireland, no authority could be communicated to hint in such a manner. He doubted not that the honourable and learned Member was a high authority with reference to the sentiments of a large portion of the Irish people: he doubted not that be had great influence with them—that he could " wield the fierce democracy " at will, and that it was most probable whatever course he might recommend to their adoption upon any question connected with their interests, they would be likely to follow up ; but notwith- standing this, before he came to terms with him, he must know diatinetly- what those terms were likely to be, and what was the nature of the security he was prepared to offer for due performance. This information the honourable and learned gentleman had not, in his opinion, as yet communicated to the House.

Equal justice was demanded for Ireland : well, Lord Stanley was ready to yield to this demand—he would accept no less for Ireland himself : but it did not follow, that, in the existing state of that country, to transplant English municipal institutions to Ireland would be to bestow that boon. In point of fact, there was a material dif- ference in the principle of the bill which Ministers had themselves introduced for Ireland, from that of the English and Scotch bills. The principle was said to be that of " vigilant popular control ;" but what was intended by "popular control ?"—

Popular control might be the control of fifty-pound householders; or of twenty-pound householders, or of ten-pound householders, or of five-pound householders—in short, the control of any set of individuals in the kingdom. The control of any of those classes would, strictly speaking, be popular control ; and yet upon their difference depended not merely a detail, but the very principle of the measure to be adopted. ( Cries of " Oh, oh !") Why, could it be con- tended that the ten-pound franchise was a mere detail of the Reform Bill ? Wu+ it not the very base and essence of the measure? Well then, it being admitted that the diffelences of the qualification over which the term popular control might be made to extend were several, was it not necessary, in order to bring England and Ireland under a similarity circumstances, that they should adopt an identify of qualification. (" Hear !" and cries of " No, no !" from the Ministerial beaches.) Ile almost despaired of making his argument intelli- gible to the honourable gentlemen who cried " No ;" but nevertheless, he would try. When the English Municipal Reform Bill was under consideration, would it nut have been considered to make a material alteration in the whole character of the measure, if, instead of fixing the amount of qualification at ten pounds a year, it bad been fixed at fifty pounds or twenty pounds ? Certainly, it would have been so considered. When, therefore, they were told that they were to apply. the same principle to the Irish as they had adopted in the English Bill, was it not evident they failed in doing so, unless they named the qualifica- tion of ten-pound householders? Lord Stanley went on to discuss several of the details of the measure ; but he was listened to very impatiently. He warned Ministers not to rely upon the assurance of Mr. O'Connell that his power. would be diminisbid by this bill ; for they might rely upon it, that be was march- ing straightforward towards the accomplishment of his own purposes, and that they were assisting him on his way. He concluded by repeating the invective of Hotspur against the "canker Bolingbroke;' which, he said was applicable to their policy with regard to O'Con•

ner— Shall it. for shame, be spoken in these days, Gr fill up chronicles in tames to come,

That men of your nobility and power. Did 'gage them both in an unjust behalf, As both of you.God pardon it I have done, To put down Richard, that sweet lovely rose, And plant this thorn. this canker, Bolingbroke? And shall it, in more shame, be further spoken, That you are fool'd, discarded, and shook off By him, for whom these shames ye underwent ? No; yet time serves, wherein you may redeem Your banisled honours, and restore yourselves Into the good thoughts of the world again : Revenge the jeering, and disdai.ed contempt Of this proud king, who studies. day and night, To answer all the debt he owes .o you, Even with the bloody payment of your deaths."

Lord Joilm RUSSELL recommended the House to adopt the Minis- terial bill, in preference to the " rash and rapid measure " proposed by Lord Francis Egerton. He entered into a defence of the principle of the Ministerial measure ; and exposed the gross inconsistency of those who, having supported Catholic emancipation on i the principle of ad- mitting Catholics to all offices, even the highest n the state, yet now refused to allow them the privilege of managing their own local and comparatively insignificant concerns. He really thought that Hot- spur's fiery phrases had very little application to the question of Mu- nicipal Reform, or to the present state of affiiirs. Were good mea- sures to be rejected because they had the powerful advocacy of Mr. O'Connell?— lie would be but a bad politician if he allowed himself to be turned from a good course by the imputation of having received powerful assist- ance by the way. He cared little for obloquy as lung as he believed the mea- sures he adopted were good ; and he would be ready to bear all the abuse and vituperation that could be heaped on him if lie could effectively do away with the evils and anomalies that embarrassed the condition of the municipalities of Ireland. Ile believed much that was uttered by the honourable Member for Dublin was perfectly true; and especially, that if just and equal laws were in- stituted for the people of Ireland there never would be any occasion to dread a separation between the two countries, but that both would remain firmly united in the cause of liberty, and might hope to enjoy a degree of prosperity limn- tempted by rankling feelings of jealousy or a sectarian spirit of discord. In con- clusion, he would conjure them to trust to the principles of liberality and justice in their dealings with their Catholic fellow subjects, and not to distrust the ability of their own professors to maintain the principles they taught, without the aid of social injustice. If, on the contrary, they neglected these counsels, and sought to perpetuate an ungenerous mastery by force and violence, he warned them, that they would only arrive, through a long and painful course of enmity and strife, at a separation—a calamity of the greatest magnitude to both countries; which, by the adoption of a course of wise and generous policy in the present seasonable opportunity, they might for ever avert. (Much cheer ing.) Sir ROBERT PEEL said that he had never been annoyed by any of Mr. O'Connell's attacks upon him, and would not be tempted to re- tort his offensive vituperation. As to the quotation about "normal schools of agitation,',' he had taken it from the Mirror of Parliament ; though Mr. O'Connell had denied that be had done so, and charged him with extracting it from a hostile newspaper, and Sir Robert read the ipsissinia rerba from the Mirror. [In this quotation, however, the word " peaceful," which Mr. O'Connell certainly used in our hearing, on the occasion in question, was omitted.] Sir Robert pro- ceeded to dwell upon the ambitious projects of Mr. O'Connell and his inconsistent treatment of various Administrations that had pre- ceded the present. Amidst considerable interruption and cries of " Question !" he adverted to many of the details of the bill, and argued against the necessity of having corporations for the government of such places as Belturbet, while Manchester flourished without one. He ridiculed the idea of the peace of the country being promoted by the new system, and expressed his conviction that, as was now the case in Bridgenorth, all the corporations would be managed by clubs. These clubs would reproduce all the worst evils of the old system. The bill was conformable with the principle of the Relief measure in 1829, as far as the Catholics were concerned ; but as regarded the Pro- testants it would operate as a bill of exclusion from all corporations. The most wealthy and intelligent Protestants would have no chance of admission. In redemption, therefore, of the pledge he gave in 1829, that he would resist every attempt of the Catholics to tyrannize over the Protestants, he came forward strenuously to oppose this bill. The House divided; when there appeared—

For Lord Francis Egerton's motion 243 Against it 307 Majority 64

These numbers were announced amidst loud cheering. The bill was committed pro forma. And, at four o'clock on Wednesday morning, the House adjourned to Thursday.

2. ORANGE LODGES.

In the House of Lords, on Monday, the Marquis of LONDONDERRY moved for a copy of the Report of the House of Commons Committee on Orange Lodges ; and said he should take the opportunity of de- fending himself againt the accusation of being implicated in any way with Orange Societies. He was quite surprised to hear Lord Mel- bourne say, a few nights ago, that there were no charges against him. That must have been one of the noble viscount's off- hand replies. Lord Melbourne was engaged in the multifarious business of his office, and had no time to attend to the concerns of a humble individual like Lord Londonderry. But charges against him had been made in the House of Cornmbins ; and, "by the greatest good lack," he had a son who "nailed down" the person who attacked him to the charge he had made ; and the attempt at an answer by that individual was disin- genuous, and little consonant with the feelings of an Englishman. To be sure there were those who said, " What do you care for Mr. Hume or Mr. O'Connell? who cares for what they say?" But it was in vain to deny that those individuals directed the Government, and had poi- soned with their misrepresentations the mind of one half of the people of England. Moreover, the most able and "most classical" journal of the day bad said, that innocent men purchased private peace by sacrificing the public good, when they shrank from replying to slan- derers; and the reading of this passage had determined him to defend lus character from the assaults of his defamers. Lord Londonderry proceeded to point out sundry discrepancies between the original letters he had received from, and the one he had written to, Fairman, and the copies which had been published in the papers. He dwelt for some time on these discrepancies; which were twenty-two in number, he said ; but they were chiefly verbal, and did not affect the spirit or mean- ing of the letters. He read Fairman's letter (commenting on it as he went along) wherein the Orange Secretary alluded to the advantage of establishing lodges among the pitmen, of having men of distinction for Deputy Grand Masters, and to the necessity of opposing a rupiah Cabinet and a democratical Ministry. He then read his reply to Fair- man, in which he expressed his readiness to " espouse the cause and establish the institutions " Fairtnan alluded to ; but this, he declared, had no reference to Orange Lodges, but to Conservative Associations for the purpose of opposing the Radicals. In another letter, Fairman had said that the Duke of Cumberland told him he had written to Lord Londonderry on the subject ; but in this ease Fairman was " positively erroneous ;" as Lord Londonderry declared that he had never had any communication whatever with the Duke of Cumberland on the subject of Orangeism. The name of Mr. Wright, a solicitor of great respec- tability in Sunderland, had been mixed up in this business ; and he had written to Mr. Wright to state exactly what had passed between them respecting Orange Lodges. The reply of Mr. Wright was to this effect,—that in August 1832, he had conversed with Lord Londonderry at Wynyard Park on the subject of establishing Orange Lodges in the county of Durham ; but that his Lordship, who mentioned the receipt of the two letters from Fairman, had declared that he had no idea of undertaking any thing of the kind. Lord Londonderry said that the letters of Fairman, as well as his own, showed that there was not the least ground for supposing that he had the remotest notion of changing the succession to the throne. But how had these letters been obtained? and what was the use to which they had been put? lie did not say that Fairman had delivered up letters written to him on the supposition that he was an honourable man,—because there was a great deal of mystery and confusion thrown over the ease ; but a political enemy, the Mem- ber for Middlesex, had got hold of them ; and therefore he would put the case as follows as regarded Fairman, whose conduct might place other lords in the same situation as he was in respect to the letters which had passed between them— He would put the case to Lord Melbourne; who, he believed, was not a Grand Master of an Orange Lodge, but he was Deputy Grand Master of the Government, having a Grand Master who drove him rather too hard sometimes. Now, suppose he had a secretary—he knew the noble lord had one, and he might be a very clever fellow, an admirable writer; he might write in the noble lord's name letters of various kinds, and keep the noble lord's lettere; very likely he might, now and then, to please the noble lord, write philippics in newspapers. All this might be the case ; and the secretary might at last de- ceive the noble viscount very much, and having deserted him, he might be in- duced to give up those letters and docinneuts, atter the lapse of four years, to the noble viscount's political enemy. Suppose, for instance, he ( Lord Londonderry) had surreptitiously, or by purchase, or otherwise, got hold of those private letters of the noble viscount ; what would their lordships think of him if he came into that House and brought forward and read those private letters and the answers to them, without giving the noble viscount notice that he intended to use them as accusations against him ? Ile thought he would be treated with that contempt and ignominy which such a proceeding deserved. Indeed, he was sure he would nut be allowed to bring private letters forward insuch a man- ner in that assembly. Now, could tine noble viscount nlefend this conduct? Was he prepared to defend this proceeding on the part of persons who supported him, and to whom he owed his political existence? It appeared that there was a combination between the Member for Middlesex and the Member for Dublin on the occasion alluded to, when charges were brought forward against several of their Lordships under that sort of mystification which was resorted to. Ile must say, that the noble viscount was bound to tell the llouse in his place, as a Minister of the Crown, whether lie approved of this mode of attack of which he had complained, and whether he thought it honourable, or that it did the Government any credit ?

Now, although the Member for Middlesex had not met with much ap- probation from the House in general in the development of his charges, he bad been vociferously cheered from the Alinisterial bench : " his Majesty's Ministers did nothing but cheer :" the Member for Middle- sex was backed by them ; and he called upon Lord Melbourne to say, in that House, whether he approved of that mode of attack ? He concluded his speech by expressing his admiration of the conduct of the Orangemen, who had yielded to the wishes of their Sovereign, and retired from the Institution.

Lord MELBOURNE said, that Lord Londonderry had been disorderly throughout his speech ; and he hail only allowed him to proceed with his quotations from speeches delivered in the House of Commons, and his remarks upon them, from unwillingness to stop an accused person in his defence: but he protested against this indulgence being drawn into a precedent. He had certainly thought, before Lord Londonderry had delivered his speech, that there was no charge worth notice against him ; but he could not say as much now that he had heard his Lord- ship's defence—

He thought the noble lord had made out a much stronger case than any one else had brought :against him, by his mode of defence : but he was very un- willing to enter into any discussion on this subject. He made the greatest al-

lowance for the excitement of l832 ; but he thought very great allowance must be made before the letters of Colonel Fairman could be excused. They were

very strong and extraordinary letters, especially when it was considered that they were addressed to an officer in his 3Iajesty's service. And yet, in his reply, Lord Londonderry had taken no notice of those strong passages, which pointed distinctly to resistance of his Majesty's Government. Ile merely stated his anxiety to cooperate with those who were engaged in the support of Pro- testant interests; and that although the noble marquis had stated that he knew one of the alleged facts in the letter to be filse,—namely, that he had received any communication from an Illustrious Duke on the subject. He could not therefore wholly exonerate the noble marquis on the subject.

The conduct of Government bad been censured in regard to the proceedings against the Orangemen—

There was only one part of that course for which his Majesty's Government was responsible,—namely, the address to his Majesty from the House of Com- mons, or rather the King's answer to that oddness. He, however, was most

anxious to dismiss the whole subject. He was averse to all societies of a secret character. Whether they were Corresponding Societies or Political Unions,— whether they were presided over by Princes of the Blood or only by operative mechanics,—he had always considered (although he was aware that they might comprehend many men of the highest honour and sincerity) that they were dangerous. The members of such societies did not know what 'hey had dons, The Duke of CUMBERLAND thanked God that lie had never done or said any thing respecting the Orange Institution of which he was ashamed. He had accepted the office of Grand Master with the ap- probation of George the Fourth, who said he should then feel secure that the office was in good hands—

It would be idle to tell their Lordships, that for the last six months be had been abused, accused, and treated in the most cruel manner that any individual ever perhaps experienced. Nay, he had been charged with that which, could it be substantiated, instead of having the honour, as at present, of ad- dressing their Lordships, lie should be at their Lordships' bar on his trial for

high treason. Surrounded as he was in that House by such men as those who then surrounded him, it would be extraordinary indeed if he were influenced by such motives as those which had been attributed to him. It was, indeed, un- necessary for him to remind their Lordships, that from the moment at which he had had the honour of a seat inning them, he bad been one of the strongest and most decided supporters of all legitimate authority. God forbid that such an event should ever occur ; but if any madman should ever hazard such a pro- position as that to which he alluded, there was not one noble lord sitting on the benches around him who would not start forward in defence of the innocent person whose rights would be attacked. It was not to men alone, but to mea- sures, that he was attached ; and if the party to which he at present belonged were to deviate from his principles, he would be the first luau to leave them and to join their opponents.

He did think that there was the greatest necessity for the closest union between the Protestants of England and Ireland—

He did declare that he looked upon the Protestant cause in Ireland to be in the greatest danger, and he confessed he was equally afraid of the Protestant cause iu England. In saying that, however, he begged distinctly to be under- stood as meaning nothing personal ; but when they came to consider what hail taken place within the last three weeks, be was sure there was not a Protestant in the country who must not feel the same degree of alarm. True to what he had stated, he would delay the House no longer than by declaring that his prin- ciples were in favour of supporting the Prutestant interest, and from such prin- ciples he never would shrink or fly.

what they were doing, or what they might do. And when the whole conduct of the society was presented to their view, they were surprised at the proceed- ings of which they, without being aware of it, had been partakers. Honour- able men, in such societies, unavoidably got into the hands of men, of agent., who were seldom persons of the greatest discretion, of the purest motives, or of the best conduct. But, although he had always disapproved of such associ- ations, be had always felt the great difficulty of putting them down. He trusted, however, that on the present occasion, the feeling which had been manifested on all sides, and the course which had been pursued by the leaders of the society in question, would produce results touch more sure and satisfac- tory than could have been obtained by any positive law. Being accomplished in that manner, it would be much more advantageous to the cuuutry, and would effect more certain and permanent good.

Lord WYNYORD defended the principles of Orangeism; which, he said, were those of loyalty and attachment to the Protestant religion.

He had been wickedly, infamously, amid without finuiliation, charged with having combined with his noble fiiend who sat behind him (Lord Kenyon) to change the succession to the crown. Their Lordships must suppose that such a charge as that would nut be made without at least some evidence to support it. Now, he had caused the Report which had been moved for to be examined; and no such letter was to be found in it upon which any such charge could be for a moment sustained, or even brought forward with any degree of consist- ency. lie should like to know, then, how the individual who had the boldness to accuse several individuals of treason against the Government of the country, without a particle of foundation, would clear himself (rum such an act. He even added to the shameful proceeding the production of a paper, of which be dared not say his he got imssesiolt. Were he, however, to conic to (Lord Wynford), he could tell him sonic other secrets, which lie might already be informed of, but of which the world was ignorant. As to the letter written by him to Colonel Fairman, iu which lie desired him to be cautious in what society he proposed the health of the Duke of Cumberland, his reason for so doing was, that as Colonel "'airman bad informed him by letter that he had proposed the illustrious duke's health on various occasions with great success, be was apprehensive, from the manly spirit which that illustrious duke had manifested, that Colonel Fairman in pursuing the practice of introducing the health of the Duke of Cumberland, if he happened to do so in a miscel- laneous company, might meet with some opposition,—a circumstance which would be highly objectionable. There were other letters, and he hoped they would be published ; indeed he hoped they would all be published. He might hive written an absurd letter, but certainly not an injurious or criminal one, unless it were to be made so by the misinterpretation of wicked individuals.

Lord RODEN repudiated the charge of wishing or combining to alter the succession, as one of superlative absurdity. He repelled that and the other vile accusations against the Orange body, with contempt and indignation. Who were their slanderers ?—they were the agitators, who bad found the Orange Institution an insuperable barrier to their pro- Pets for the dismemberment of the empire.

He was ready to admit that the Orange Institution, or any such institution, using secret signs, or consisting of any affiliated members, was not desirable to be maintained in any country which could be considered in a wholesome state, or in which life and property could be said to meet with a just protection, and in which the Executive was found to deal out with an impartial hand the fa- vours that belonged to the Government. In such a country, he readily ad- mitted, an institution of the nature of the Orange Society in Ireland might not have a beneficial tendency. But could that be said of Ireland ? Was the law vindicated there ? No such thing. It lay a dead letter upon the statute- book. Were, then, the lives or the property of his Majesty's loyal Protestant subjects in Ireland safe, or were they protected by the Government of the country ? In answer, he would refer their Lordships to the murders which were daily occurring, as appeared by the newspapers, and to the state of the Protestant clergy.

He concluded a very vehement speech, by stating, that the Orange Lodges could not be dissolved by any individual ; but that there would be a meeting on the 14th of April, which he should attend, and state the course he thought it advisable to pursue.

Lord PLUNKETT was sorry that the tone of Lord Roden's speech was likely to prevent his advice to his brother Orangemen being as efficacious as it was desirable it should be. For his part, though be had always been opposed to Orangeism, he did not think that its dis- solution could be considered a party triumph ; but he wished it to be effectual for the pacification of the country and the allaying of party feeling.

The noble earl, amongst those observations which might perhaps be better omitted in his address, had assumed that Protestantism in Ireland was com- mensurate with Orangeism. He begged their Lordships to look around them

before they adopted such a conclusion; when, if they did so, they. would see that there were Protestants, some of the most respectable persons in Ireland. men who stool the highest iu rank amongst the inhabitants of the country, and the most established, in the opinion of Protestants, for their religious sincerity and zeal, who were decided enemies to these Orange associations. Nothing, therefore could he further from the fact, that the Roman Catholic party alone was arrayed in hostility to these proceedings. Now, as to the origin of this asso- ciation : it took its rise in an opposition to the necessity which had become imperative, of governing Ireland, not fur the puposes of upholding the ascend- ancy of any class, but for the good of the whole people. From the first mo- ment of the agitation of the question, the body opposed itself to the measure of Catholic Emancipation. They might have been perfectly right. The Duke of CI' BEILLA ND—" Hear, hear l" Lord Pau NISETT— The illustrious duke might be perfectly right in his opi- nion of the impolicy of that measure. He was happy to have the good fortune of entirely going along with the illustrious duke in his statement of the view taken by the illustrious duke of that question. So far from misrepresenting, he was glad to perceive that he had stated fairly, and he hoped respectfully— and certainly without meaning to disparage the illustrious duke's motives, for he believed he was perfectly conscientious in the opinions which he entertained —the sentiments which the illustrious duke felt and expressed on that measure. But the illustrious duke could not deny that the origin of the society was, that Roman Catholics should not be admitted to equal rights with their Protestant

fellow subjects. The association was formed on that principle; it had been continued on that principle; and at this moment, if the assent of the illustrious duke were the only thing necessary to bring about such a consummation,—if such an event depended upon him, and could be effected by his wish.—Lord Plunkett could easily believe that he would most readily and cheerfully abolish all that has been attained, and overturn the whole fabric of which Catholic Emancipation formed the foundation. (Much cheering.) Now on the principles of Orangeism, it would be found impracti- cable to govern Ireland.- " My Lords, what I mean to say is this, that if you hold out to the People of Ireland, Protestant and Catholic, that equal privileges are not honestly and per- fectly to be communicated to both, you hold out a principle on which it is ima possible the country can be governed."

The Duke of Cum HEAL* I don't deny that."

Lord Pim NXETT—" Oh, then, I see the illustrious duke and I are, after all, about to arrive at the same conclusion. The illustrious duke is about to give in his adhesion to the principle which I have laid down, and depart from the representation which I gave of his opinions (and which he so heartily cheered) on the question of Catholic Emancipation. (Much cheering.) Now, does the illustrious duke admit that the principle on which the Government of Ireland should be conducted, and the law applied, is the principle of equal right to the whole of the People." The Duke of Cu MBEILLAND..-P I agree to that. Let the Government do so." Lord PI. ISNK F.TT—" Well, then, as we are now at length agreed as to what should be the object of government, we have next to consider by what means it is to be obtained. At all events, the illustrious duke admits,—and after hie announcement of his concurrence in it, I am inclined to think that no one will now be found ready to dispute the guiding principle one which the Irish Govern- ment should be conducted,—namely, that it should fairly carry the intentions of the Legislature into effect, and give, in fact and truth, equal laws and rights to all the People of Ireland, without any religious distinction. That, my Lords, is a fair principle: I claim no more, I desire no more. i believe that no re- spectable portion of the Roman Catholics desire mere."

Lord Plunkett went on to defend the practice of the Government in Ireland ; which lie maintained was in accordance with this principle. Instead of vague abuse; he called for specific charges of misconduct.-

" I have not heard any distinct act of omission or commission on the part of the Irish Government. Anil I now challenge any one to bringany distinct accusa- tion against that Government ; and if 1 am not grossly misinformed, there can, and there shall lie, given to it the most distinct, explicit, and satisfactory answer. My Lords, I will not condescend to enter into an inquiry into the conduct of particular individuals who are represented as the general masters of the Government of Ireland. The only question which can be raised with reference to the supposed subserviency of the Government, is not whether they have availed themselves of the services of those whose support they have the honour to receive, but whether they have in any instance sacrificed their own principles in order to procure that support. I boldly say—and I challenge in- vestigation—that no proofs can be adduced of their having so yielded in any one instance. The ludicrous charges brought against the Government are really the greatest triumph which it can have over its opponents; for, after all the anxiety to detect their errors and to show that they have violated every principle of the constitution, the cnly specific charge alleged against it is Lord Mul- grave having invited Mr. O'Connell to dinner. (" Hear! hear !" and laughter.) It is really a thing to occupy a page in history, and after ages are to read it with astonishment, that on such a day in January 1836 Lord Mulgrave sent to his Aide-de. camp to wait on Mr. O'Connell to ask him to dinner in Dublin Castle! This charge was one too frivolous to notice, and from which the noble lord alluded to has already been exculpated, even in the opinion of the honourable and learned gentleman who had upon a former occasion brought the accusation against him. I again repel the charge made on the Irish Govern- ment. I give a direct and positive denial to all charges which are general and vague. ' Mr. O'Connell, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. O'Connell!'—no other name is mentioned at present by those opposed to the Government. Why, my Lords, Mr. O'Connell possesses more influence than, as he himself has feelingly stated, he ought to possess, or than any man ought to enjoy. But how has he become possessed of it? Why, my Lords, every grievance that you leave unredressed- every unjust attack on the privileges of the People (no matter what may be their religious belief)—every declaration that you make that the same laws shall not be administered in spirit and effect to all classes—is but adding strength to the influence of that individual. (Loud cheers.) I am not disposed to deny that the extent of influence is most condemnatory of the state of society in which it can be obtained ; but, my Lords, Mr. O'Connell is rendering services to Ire- land which are beyond all calculation. I have never known Ireland in such state of tranquillity as she is at this moment. ( Cheers.) Would any Govern- ment, in their senses, reject the support of such an influential individual, when he offers them his services? Have former Governments acted on the principle which is now so dogmatically laid down ? Has the noble duke, who was one time at the head of the Government of the country, and who has since been the leader of the Conservative Association—has he refused to take the assistance of individuals unless they exactly coincided with him in political opinions?" He utterly denied that there had been an unfair proportion of offices conferred upon Roman Catholics by the Irish Government, and re- iterated his challenge to the Opposition to bring forward one instance in which Government have neglected or refused to enforce the law. Lord WINCHILSEA and Lord HATHERTON briefly addressed the House. Lord LONDONDERRY replied; and said he adhered to his con- viction that, to be a stanch Protestant, was now a disqualification for office in Ireland.

The motion was then agreed tc. 3. THE CARLOW INQUIR'.

Last night, Mr. RIDLEY COLBORNE brought up the report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the circumstances of the " alleged traffic and agreement" between Mr. O'Connell and Mr. Raphael. It was read by the Clerk, as follows. " It appears to your Committee, that the subject may be arranged under two heads,—the first as relating to any traffic or agreement between Mr. Ra- phael and Mr. O'Connell, for a seat in Parliament ; and the second as to the application of the sum said to have been given. " It does not appear to your Committee to be necessary for them to enter upon any detailed summary of the evidence ; but they feel it their duty to draw the attention of the Mouse very briefly to the main points, as they bear upon the question. " It appears that Mr. O'Connell addressed a letter, bearing date 1st June 1835, in which an agreement for Mr. Raphael's return for the County of Carlow for 2000/. was concluded. Your Committee cannot help observing that the whole tone and tenor of this letter were calculated to excite much suspicion investiga-

tion, great animadversion; but they must add, that upon a very careful it appeared, that previous conferences and communications had taken

place between Mr. Raphael and Mr. Vigors, and other persons connected with the county of Carlow, and that Mr. O'Connell was acting on this occasion at the express desire of Mr. Raphael, and was only the medium between Mr. Raphael and Mr. Vigors and the Political Club at Carlow. " It appears that the money was placed to Mr. O'Connell's general account, at his bankers' in London : it was, however, advanced the moment it was called for to Mr. Vigors ; and, though some of it was paid in bills, the discount was allowed ; the amount, therefore, was available whenever wanted; and no charge of pecuniary interest can be attached to Mr. O'Connell. " It appears also, that this money has been expended under the immediate direction of Mr. Vigors and others connected with the county of Carlow, in what may be called legal expenses, or so unavoidable that your Committee see no reason to question their legality ; and that the balance was absorbed in defending the return of' Mr. Raphael and Mr. Vigors before the Committee, appointed to investigate it, on the 28th of July 1835."

Mr. COI.BORNE then rose and said- " In moving now, Sir, that this Report sad the Evidence be printed, I beg leave to make one short observation,—namely, that this is the unanimous opi- nion of the Committee ; and let me add, Sir, that this unanimity is not attended with any sacrifice of principle, or any compromise of opinion, but that it is the result of a full and fair deliberation upon the subject. (Loud cheers.) I was very desirous to state the fact of this unanimity existing, be- cause I think it cannot fail to have its weight with this House and the country; and also because I believe it may tend to prove, that eleven gentlemen may meet together on a subjeet somewhat difficult and delicate, and yet—their delibe- rations being of a judicial nature—have no hesitation or difficulty in laying aside all their party feelings (Loud cheers.) I will conclude these few ob- servations by expressing my firm belief and satisfaction, that if this House and the country at large will read that evidence with the same proper feeling as we have done, they cannot fail to arrive at the same conclusion. I beg to move, Sir, that this Report, and the Evidence taken before the Committee, be printed."

The motion was carried, nein. con.

ENGLISH CHURCH REFORM.

Lord MELEOURNE laid the Second Report of the Ecclesiastical Conunissioners on the table of the House of Peers, on Thursday. lie explained the substance of the document ; stating that it had been unanimously agreed to by the Commissioners. Ile reminded their Lordships, that the First Report bad emanated from Commissioners appointed by Sir Robert Peel's Administration ; and that it had re- reference to Territory, Revenue, and Patronage. The Second Report did not meddle with the subject of Patronage, which was re- served for a distinct report. With one exception, the present Com- missioners had adopted the recommendations of their predecessors as regarded Territory ; that exception having reference to the union of the dioceses of Bristol and Llandaff. The present Report recom- mended that the city and suburbs of Bristol should be added to the bishopric of Bath and Wells ; the remaining portion of the diocese of Bristol to be united to the diocese of Gloucester. It was also'pro- posed that Sodor and Man should be united to the diocese of Carlisle. He next came to the subject of Revenue. The object was not to re- duce all the bishoprics to an absolute equality of income, but to re- move the gross inequalities now prevalent— The present estimated annual value of the archiepiscopal see of Canterbury was 17,0001., which it was proposed should be reduced to 15,0001. The re- venue of the Bishop of Loudon was estimated at 12,2001. which was proposed to be reduced to 10,0001. The revenue of the Bishop of Durham was 17,8001., which the Commissioners proposed to set at 8,000/. The revenue of the Bishop of Winchester was 10,700/., which was proposed to be reduced to 7,200. The revenue of the Bishop of Ely was 11,5001., which it was proposed should here- after be set at 5,5001. The revenue of the Bishop of Worcester was 6,500/.. ; to be reduced to 5,000/. The Bishop of St. Asaph was 5,2001., and the revenue of the Bishop of Bangor 3,800/. ; each of which were to be set at 5,200/. This would give a fund of 28,500/. a year. Add to this the revenue of the see of Bristol, amounting to 2,8001.—which, as he had said, was to be merged in the adjoining bishoprics—the total sum thus saved would be 30,8001. ; which being divided among the thirteen bishoprics that require additions to their pre- seat revenue, and the two new sees that were recommended by the former ..Report to be instituted, would provide an income varying from 4,000/., to 0,0001. per annum, to be appropriated according to the circumstances of the of the different dioceses. This apportionment had not yet been determined. With respect to the sees of York, Bath and Wells, Norwich, and Salisbury, it was not proposed to make any alteration. Their Lordships would see that a greater defalcation of revenue was made from the bishopric of Durham than from any other ; and the reason of that was the recommendation of the Com- missioners--a recommendation from which he thought their Lordships could not dissent—that the temporal and secular jurisdiction hitherto vested in the the Bishop of Durham should be hereafter separated from his ecclesiastical functions. With those civil and secular functions would necessarily go a great portion of the expense hitherto attending that bishopric,—such, for instance, as the receptiou of the Judges, and others of a similar nature. It was also the recommendation of the Commissioners that the Bishop of Durham should here- after be relieved from the necessity of maintaining the Castle of Durham ; that he should only have a residence at Bishop Aukland, and the Castle of Durham should be appropriated to the use of the University that had lately been este- blishedin that part of the country. The same arrangement with respect to the separation of the civil offices from the ecclesiastical functions, as had been recommended with regard to the bishopric of Durham, had also been recom- mended with respect to the archbishopric of York and the bishopric of Ely, when an opportunity should arise for carrying those arrangements into effect.

It was next proposed to deal with the property of Collegiate and

Cathedral Churches so as to put an end to sinecures and augment small livings. Minor Canonries, not residentiary, would be abolished; of course, not till after the decease of present incumbents.

The Commissioners recommended, that for the future, the Chapters of the Cathedrals and Collegiate Churches should consist of a Dean and four Canons, as at present actually existing in the Cathedrals of York, Chichester, and Car- lisle; that one, at least, of these Canoinies, where they might be in the pa- tronage of the Bishop, should be made available towards a better provision for the office of Archdeacon, for the purpose of rewarding an officer whose duties were most useful, necessary, and extensive, and who had hitherto been left with a very inadequate remuneration. Until the existing Chapter should be reduced to the proposed number, no new election or appointment would take place. It was also recommendol, " that the term of residence of each Dean hereafter to be appointed should be nine months, and of each Canon three mouths." Some of the better endowed canouries would be connected with the parochial charge of populous districts. It was intended to annex the Prebendal stall lately become vacant in Westminster to the parish of St. John. Iu order to afford better security for the effectual perform- ance of their duties by some of the higher dignitaries in the Church, it was recommended that no person should be appointed Dean, Arch- deacon, or Canon, who bad not been six years in priest's orders.

With respect to the Minor Canons, Vicars Choral, and other offices of Chap- ters, it was proposed that only so many should be retained as were sufficient for the service of the cathedrals ; and that they should have such salaries as might preclude the necesssity of their being paid by patronage, many often holding benefices, together with their offices in the cathedral. It was also re- commended that all sinecure rectories in the patronage of ecclesiastic corpora- tions should be suppressed, and that the resources arising from them should be applied towards augmenting the existing provision for the cure of souls; due regard being had, in the first instance, to the wants of those dioceses in which the sinecure rectories were situate.

From these 'sources it was estimated that a sum of 130,0001. per annum would be derived. With regard to pluralities and non-resit dence, the Commissioners say- " In determining the principles upon which the bolding of benefices in plu- rality should in future be regulated, we have had respect partly to distance, and partly to value. With respect to distance, we are of opinion that if an incum- bent be permitted to hold two benefices, distant from each other not more than ten miles, he will be able, without inconvenience, to exercise an occasional superintendence and control over the benefice upon which he does not reside; the regular duties of which will be performed by his curate. With respect to value, we recommend that no benefice of greater annual value than 500/. should be held in plurality with any other benefice, except in cases where the small value or large population of some neighbouring benefice may render it advisable that it should be held by the iocumbent of a better-endowed living. In such cases, we recommend, that upon a statement made by the Bishop of the dio- cese to the Archbishop, and transmitted with the sanction of his approval to the Privy Council, it shall be lawful far your Majesty in Council to allow such plurality. We recommend that no more than two preferments of any descrip- tion be held by the same person, except in time case of au Archdeacon, who may be permitted to hold one benefice with cure of soul:, and one canonry. We are of opinion that the operation of a law embodying these. provisions will, at no very distant period, Inure so far reduced the number of pluralities, as to leave no just ground of complaint on that score." The number of exemptions mail grounds for nonresidence, which the law now allowed, would be reduced, and additional powers would be given to the Bishops to enforce the repairs and erections of glebe- houses. Lord AIelbourne concluded by stating, that a bill bad been prepared to carry into effect the recommendations of the Commis- sioners, which would be speedily submitted to their Lordships.

The Archbishop of CANTERBURY spoke at length in approbation of the Report ; adding, however, that he thought it necessary that steps should be taken to improve the education of the clergy— It would be desirable that candidates for holy orders should be well grounded in divinity before they entered the Church; that they should have a stock of theological knowledge to draw upon on entering upon the ministry, and not to have to acquire it afterwards. He also thought that some more efficient means should exist for correcting the scandals that arose from the improper conduct of

It could not excite surprise, that in sonic unworthy members in the ministry.

a body consisting of 18,000 persons, many of them young men, there should bs found some whose conduct was a scandal to the ministry. There were unfor- tunately some such; and it was to be regretted that, in the present state of the law, the heads of the Church had not sufficient power to remove those who were guilty of scandalous conduct.

The Report was then ordered to be printed.

In the House of Commons on the same evening, Lord JOHN Rus- SELL presented another copy of the Report ; and entered into the same explanations as those given by Lord Melbourne in the House of Peers. • Sir ROBERT INGLIS addressed the House ; but in consequence of the noise occasioned by Members going out, none of his observations were audible in the Reporters' Gallery.

Mr. HUME approved of much of the Report, but wished to get rid of pluralities and non-residence altogether. Mr. GOULBURN could not help saying, that the recommendations of the Commissioners would be of essential benefit to the Church. Dr. LUSHINGTON strongly approved of the Report.

Mr. G. VERNON spoke to the same effect; and added, that a rela- tive of his (the Archbishop of York) some years back, had offered to Government to give up several thousand pounds a year of his in- come for the purpose of promoting one of the objects now proposed, the formation of a new bishopric; but Government then said it would be impossible. He was glad to find the present Government were disposed to adopt such a plan.

.5. ARMY ESTIMATES.

Last night, the House having resolved into a Committee of Supply, Lord HOWICK brought forward the Army Estimates. He stated, that they were almost exactly the same as those of last year : their amount remained the same ; and, with a very trifling addition, the number of men was the same. He went on to mention the reductions which had been made in the expense of the War-Office. In 1815, there were 215 persons employed, at an expense of 71,2451. per annum : in Febru- ary, the number of persons was 51, and the expense 27,6031. He con- cluded a short speech by moving, that 81,390 men should constitute the Land Force of the United Kingdom and Colonies.

Mr. HUME contended, that this number of men was larger than ne- estuary. In 182-2, the Army consisted of 68,800 men : since then it bad been gradually increased ; but no good reason was assigned for the increase. He moved a reduction of the force by 5000 men.

A brief debate ensued. Lord HOWICK opposed the amendment ; but hoped that the time was not far distant when it would be safe to »duce the number of troops stationed in the Colonies.

The Committee divided, and rejected the amendment, by 136 to 43. The next vote was that 3,776,413/. be granted for the pay of the Lend Forces.

Sir WILLIAM MOLESWORTII moved an amendment, " that the Foot Guards be put on the same footing as the Troops of the Line." He said that if this motion were carried, be should move an addition to the Estimates, to compensate the officers of the Guards, whose pay would be reduced. He contended that the Guards had done notbitig to merit the numerous and valuable privileges they enjoyed. In con- sequence of their being so seldom employed in severe or dangerous services, an annuity on the life of an officer in the Guards was worth an annuity on the longest of three lives of officers in the Line, and eight in India. He denied that the Guards were necessary appendages to Royalty. Neither the King of France nor the Emperor of Austria had Guards.

Mr. Hume seconded the amendment ; which was also supported by Major BEAUCLERK and Mr. LEADER. It was opposed by Lord Howlett, Sir H. VERNEY, Lord A. LENNOX, Captain Dom, and Mr. T. DUNCOMBE. Mr. KEARSLEY spoke RS follows- " The honourable baronet has brought forward this motion almost in a manner equal to that of a Sergeant of the Line, backed by his Corporal Junius, the honourable Member for Bridgewater-( Shoutsof laughter); but owing to his experiment of tos-night, I fear lie will have orders to march to the right- about ; and if he dues, the Corporal will find no service for him but that of the honourable Member for Middlesex, " the Old Fogies." ( Protracted laughter.) Mr. ROEBUCK said, there was an old proverb-in vino veritas : he wished that there was decency as well as truth.

Sir HENRY HARDINGE remarked upon Sir William Molesworth's having made use of the London Review in his speech.

Sir WILLIAM MOIESWORTH said, that if any person bad a right to use the London Review, he had, for the Review was his property.

The Committee rejected the amendment, by 217 to 40.

Several other sums were voted. In the course of the d2sultory dis. cussion which arose, Mr. Hume complained of the aristocratic in- fluence which prevailed at the Horse Guards. This led several Members, including Lord JOHN RUSSELL., Colonel THOMPSON, Sir JOHN ELLEY, and Mr. C. FERGUSSON, to laud the impartiality of Lord Hill. The practice of wearing side-arms was also reprobiced by Mr. HUME, Mr. WAK LEY, Mr. EWART, and Mr. ROEBUCK; and defended by Lord Howie': and Sir H. HARDINGE.

MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN THE WEST INDIES. In the House of Lords, last night, a bill to improve the system of administering justice in the Crown Colonies in the West Indies was read a second time, on the motion of Lord GLENELG. Tic object of the bill ‘VilS to remedy the evils which arose principally from the ignorance of law, common to the judges and jurors in foreign colonies.

TIMBER DUTIES : Air. WARBURTON. A long discussion arose in time House of Commons on Thursday, on a motion of Mr. G. I'. YotNn, that the evidence of Mr. Warburton given before time 'limber-duties Committee of last session, should be printed from the short-hand- writer's notes, and placed in parallel columns with that gentleman's evidence as it appeared in the Report of the I 'ominittee. Mr. Young's object was to show, that Mr. Warburton, under pretence of correcting his evidence, had mode most material and extensive alterations in it : he had calculated, that in the first sixty-one pages of the evidence, which occupied 129 pages, 7000 new words had been introduced. Mr. Watiarieron contended that he was authorized by the Committee to act as he had done : he had been requested to fill up the details of his evidence. For instance, he told the Committee, that he bad docu- ments in his possession relating to the timber-trade for the last eighty ears ; and he was asked to insert these facts and tables in his evidence. e had worked for three months and a half, twelve hours a-day, in order to comply with these and similar directions of the Committee ; and thought it rather hard that Mr. Young should now attempt, as he had attempted in the Committee, to strangle his evidence. lie had also sometimes altered a question : for instance, when asked if" timber, like wine and other things, did not improve by keeping," he had struck out "other things," as being unnecessary. Mr. ROBINSON and Alder- man THOMPSON professed to think Mr. Warburton's explanation un- satisfactory. Sir M. W. RIDLEY refused to vote for a censure on Mr. Warburton. Sir JAMES GRAHAM, Mr. POULF.TT THOMSON, and Mr. HUME, defended Mr. Warburton ; and the two former maintained that he had done nothing which the Committee did not authorize him to do so. Mr. SPRING RICE said, that Mr. Warburton ought to be obliged to Mr. Young for giving him an opportunity of stating the amount of his labours in the public service. Mr. YOUNG said, that being of no party, be could not expect support from any; and he withdrew his motion.

LONDON RAILWAYS. Petitions were presented last night by Mr. CLAY, and strongly supported by Mr. GROTE and Mr. Heats, against the projected Railways through the East end of the Metropolis. It was stated, that whole districts would be depopulated if these railways were allowed to be made, and that the greatest alarm prevailed on the subject.

DUBLIN STEAM NAVIGATION BILL. This bill was read a second time last night, by a vote of 163 to 59. It was supported by Mr. O'CONNELL. Lord MORPETU, and Colonel PERCEVAI.i and opposed by Mr. P. THOMSON, Sir HENRY PARNELL, Mr. G. Y. YOUNG, and several others.

IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. Last night, Sir JOHN CAMPBELL stated, in reply to Mr. Hume, that on Monday next he should be able to state positively when the Bill for abolishing Imprisonment for Debt would be introduced, and whether in the House of Lords or the House of Commons.

Smarr LICENCES. On Thursday, Mr. DIVETT moved to repeal the additional duty laid on spirit licences of retailers by the Act of 4th and 5th William IV. chapter 75. Mr. SPRING Rica opposed the motion ; on the close of the financial year he would make his state- merit, and do his utmost to reconcile the conflicting claims of parties for reduction of taxation. Dr. ROWRING moved to postpone the cen- sideration of the subject to the 14th of April. This was carried, on a division, by 165 to 155.