ligebstrt mitt Vrocceltingli in Vatliament.

PLURALISM AND NON-RESIDENCE.

The House of Commons, on Monday, went into Committee on the Benefices Pluralities Bill.

Clause 21st was agreed to. On clause 22d, which relates to trading

clergymen, Mr. COURTENAY moved an amendment, the effect of which would be a permission to clergymen to hold shares in concerns with more than six partners ; also to hold property bequeathed to them, or acquired by marriage, though consisting of shares in concerns having six or fewer partners. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL admitted that Mr. Cour- tenay's motion involved a question of importance ; and, after a brief discussion, the 221 clause was postponed. Clauses downesto the 46th inclusive were passed, after several ineffectual attempts to amend them ; several Members on the Ministerial side of the House wishing to make the enactments of the bill against pluralists and non-residents more stringent, whilst those on the Opposition side were for multiplying the exemptions from its operation. The Ministers, who resisted the alterations from both sides, were alternately supported by one and the other.

FIRST FRUITS AND TENTHS.

On Tuesday, Mr. BAINES moved that the House should resolve it- self into a Committee of the whole House, to consider " the pro- priety of abolishing the First Fruits of the Clergy in England and Wales, and the more effectual rating and the better collection of the Tenths applicable to the maintenance of the Poor Clergy." The Act of Queen Anne, by which the First Fruits and Tenths were to be de- voted to the increase of poor livings, Mr. Baines maintained, had been a miserable failure. The Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty had not done their duty ; they had not construed the Act favourably to- wards the inferior clergy. Mr. Baines read from a report of the Ec- clesiastical Commissioners, a list of the smaller livings ; from which it appeared, that there are 1,912 under 1001. a year, 1,602 between 1001. and 1501., 1,352 between 1501. and 2001. a year. To remedy the ne- glect of the Governors, Mr. Baines said he should propose a measure, the chief provisions of which he stated to the House—

He proposed that the First Fruits should be entirely abolished, as oppressive

to the clergy. Ile proposed that all livings under 3001. a year in value should be exempt hum Tenths as well us First Fruits utter the next avoidance ; but that all spiritual dignities and benefices in England and Wales of the clear value of 3001. a year and upwards, according to the report of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, should be liable to the payment of one.tenth part of the clear annual income derivable therefrom, after the next avoidance of such spit itual dignity or benefice. He likewise proposed that no clergyman at present in pus- aession of a living should be subject to any alteration of the terms on which he held it. The first application of the increased fund ought to be to, the better maintenance of the poorer clergy. In a short time, there would be no clergy- man holding a benefice whose income would be under 2001. If there were any

curates whose income did not amount to 1501., those incomes ought to be in- creased to that sum.

The annual value of the revenues liable to First Fruits and Tenths was in rotund numbers 3,000,000/. The tenths were 300,000/., and the First Fruits might be taken at 200,0001., making together 500,0001- I but at present the actual receipts from both sources were only 13,5001. a year. According to his plan, the Tenths would yield 250,0001. a year; for the annual produce of the livings which would come under the operation of his bill he culculatedat 2,500,000/. a year. That the inferior clergy earnestly desired the assistance he wished to afford them, he could prove by masses of letters he had received from them : and Mr. Baines read two as specimens. One contained a tabular statement of the real value of the livings, and of the Tenths, contrasted with the payments, amounting to a paltry fraction of the amount which the clergy ought to pay.

Mr. Tnom AS DUNCOMBE seconded the motion.

Sir ROBERT ROLFE, the Solicitor-General, o; posed it, on grounds. By a statute pasaed in the reign of Henry the Eighth. Figr' Fruits and Tenths became payable by the clergy. He would =Mk, for t the sake of argument, that the Crown possessed the right under that aeu of issuing fresh commissions from time to time to ascertain the value° f the livings and other Church property, and apportioning the amount payable by the clergy to the alterations in the value. But the C nt

ul had never exercised that right— rout

When Queen Anne came to the Throne, she had the right, subject, of ,

to the approbation of Parliament, to deal with these First Fruits and Teuth7: and, being so entitled, she exercised her right, and placed them in the hoo,oj a certain corporation which she then established for the purpose of augmentiv the income of small benefices. It was part of the Act of Parliament wheribi Queen Anne gave up this fund, that the value should be taken at the old tai not at the increased rate ; that was one of the provisions of the Act. Tim,. fore, if his honourable friend were to succeed in showing that there ought, by the statute of Henry the Eighth, to be a new valuation from time to time, the result would be, that the surplus would belong to the Crown, and not to the poor clergy. The Act of Queen Anne said that a bond should be required f, the payment of the First Fruits and Tenths, and which said First Fruit toff Tenths should he paid according to such rates and proportions only asherm. fore they had been paid. But if there were any doubts as to the =Woof this Act, subsequent Acts had entirely and in the most distinct manner rem* all such doubts. It appeared to him perfectly clear, therefore, that upon the law of the case, the First Fruits and Tenths now receivable by the Cotonou of Queen Anne's Bounty were exactly the sante which they alwayshad reeei,td; and as lie had stated on a former occasion, in answer to a similar mot= to thu present, the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty at the present day had no me power than his honourable friend had to alter by one farthing the mound the sum so received.

Mr. GALt.v KNIGHT supported the motion. [While Mr. Knight was speaking, a Member moved that the House be counted; abet more than forty Members were ascertained to be present.] Mr. HUME hoped that Mr. Baines would not divide the House,ts it was perfectly clear from Sir Robert Rolfe's speech that there was so power of proceeding in the way suggested.

Mr. JAMES STEWART was of opinion, that under the Act of Mw a commission of inquiry might now be issued— If so, then, the Act of Queen Anne gave every thing that was reserve/to the Crown by the statute of Henry the Eighth; and so tar from the latter An being repealed by Queen Anne's Act, it was by the second section am* confirmed ; and he contended that every right that was, possessed uudertbe statute of Henry the Eighth existed at the present day under the leaned Queen Anne.

Mr. GOCIAWRN expressed his entire acquiescence with the Solicitor- General, and opposed the motion.

The House divided—

For going into Committee 48 Against the motion 27 Majority 21 The House went into Committee ; Mr. Gaily Knight in the chair. Mr. Ilatsais handed in his resolutions ; the first of which was

"'flint it is expedient that a better provision for the maintenance of the Pose Clergy of the Established Church of England and Wales should be afforded than that which at present exists, to be derived from the revenues of the said Church."

Mr. SPRING RICE advised Mr. Baines not to press his resolution, ma it was evident from the thin attendance that the House had been taken by surprise. Mr. Antimony denied that there had been any surprise. Mr. Baines's motion had been some weeks on the Notice-book. However, not to prejudice the question, he concurred in the advice given to Mr. Baines. 'filet gentleman acceded to the request ; and the Committee rose.

BONDED CORN.

Colonel Seats, on Wednesday, moved the second reading of the bill Mr allowing corn to be manufactured in bond for exportation. The Marquis of CIIANDOS called upon the agricultural party—and it was a pretty strong party in that House—to unite with him in resi-t• big a tneasure " highly injurious to the agricultural interest." He moved an amendment, that the bill be read a second time that day sir months. Mr. WaaneltiON said, that Lord Chandos ought to have plot out in what way the bill would injure the agriculturists, instead of con- tenting himself with u bare assertion. Mr. GII.BERT HEATHCOTE said, the bill was intended solely tab!. refit the shipping interest, and he would oppose it. All that the aps cultural interest asked was to be let alone.

Lord WORSLEY was aware that a strong feeling against the bill pie- %tiled throughout Lincolnshire, and he had beets urged to vote against it by his constituents ; but he could not comply with their request. He considered the opposition to the bill more hurtful to the agricultural interest than the bill itself— If the people of England found that interest opposing every measure (1.64 kind, and, not content with the existing protection it enjoyed, which lie belierti the farmers were satisfied with, obstinately resisting measures of justice towards other interests, they would at length call out for a repeal of the Coro•laws. Ile might absent himself on the present occasion, but he considered it ti duty tee owed to his country to attend and vote, though, he repeated, by doing. was likely to offend a great body of his constituents. He could not help dila: ing that much of the opposition to the measure might be termed t!ictues, which was all of it attributable to the farmers being misinformed and iguana of the real nature of the measure.

Sir JOHN TYRRELL and Sir EDWARD KNATCHBULL briefly 01)p the bill. Mr. BROTHERTON supported it. Mr. Pot LETT THOMSON said, that the Marquis of' Chandos. was is the habit of putting himself forward as the organ of the agneultu interest, but he could not recognize him in that character; for the!! were Members of the House in every way as much entitled to the respect of the agriculturists as the noble Marquis, who werelookedtg to quite as much, and who did not condemn the bill as hostile to their interests. He would not believe, till he saw it in the division, that th

woes

country untleicen would unite to defeat a m [sure beneficial to other, and which could not possibly injure them or those for whom they were interested, and which would have no more effect on land in England than on land in New Zeeland. lie hoped that Sir Robert Peel would support a measure of a similar character to one introduced by Mr. Hos. kisson, when one of Sir Robert's colleagues. Sir ROBERT PEEL Said, that Mr. Huskisson's measure proved n failure ; and it was rather an odd reason for supporting a to w measure for the same purpose, that a similar one had been unsuccessful. It was alleged that the bill would benefit the commercial interest ; but from all quarters he had received information that the dissatisfaction, discontent, and suspicions it would create, must far counted alance any good that might arise front it. The Earl of DARLINGTONetand Sir JAMES GRAHAM had no objec- tion to the principle of the bill, but opposed it on the grew(' that it was impossible to prevent fraud and consequent injury to the agricul- tural interest. Mr. MURRAY (Lord-Advocate) said, that the proper course was to guard against the commission of fraud by careful provisions, not to reject the bill. Mr. VILLIERS remarked upon the thraldom in which the country gentlemen were held by their constituents. Even those who avowed their approbation of the principle of the bill, were afraid to sanction the principle by voting for the second reading. However, the vote of that night was sure to be beneficial. If the second reading were carried, the trade of the country would be slightly benefited : the rejection of the bill might be more useful, as giving a practical illustration of the spirit by which the upholders of the Corn-laws were actuated— All great changes were preceded by some wanton act of the power which

was complained of and attacked. Ile regarded it as the East Retford of the Corn-laws. To reject this measure would be like that preliminary folly which

characterized those whom Heaven marked as its victims. He thought the re- jection of the measure would really arouse that feeling which had lain dormant too lung on the subject of the Corn-laws ; and he therefore should go to the division perfectly at ease, satisfied that nothing but good could follow from it. (Cheers.) Mr. MARK PHILI.IPS and Sir JOAN RAF REID supported the second reading; the latter declaring that he should be the last to vote for a measure which he thought would militate against the agricultural interest.

The House divided—

For the second reading 1)0

Against it 2'20 Majority 70 COPYRIGHT.

The order of the day for going into committee on Mr. Sergeant Talfourd's Copyright Bill having been read, the question that the Speaker leave the Chair was put ; when Mr. WAKI.EY rose to move that the House should go into committee On the bill that day six months. He was at a loss to find argu- ments for a measure which even its author admitted was not intended to benefit the public, but one author out of five hundred. There never was a period when literary men, who wrote for the resent nge, re- ceived such high rewards for their productions as now. But others wrote for posterity ; then let them look to posterity for their reward, and be satisfied— With respect to this bill, he feared that there were some authors at the bottom of it, as ho imagined that, at present, they did uut receive the fame and profit to which their gloat labours entitled them in their own opinions. (Laughter.) The honourable Member for Maidstone had said that Mr. Southey intended at one period to write a History of the Monastic Orders, which would procure a fame equal to that of Gibbon. With respect to the fame, he must be permitted to express his doubts. Mr. Southey, it appeared, bad been deterred from undertaking the work because he could only enjoy the copyright during his life. It was much to be doubted whether Mr Southey

would have ever carried his intention into effect. If the authority of Sir James

Graham were to be relied upon with respect to Mr. Southey, it was very im- probable that he would have prosecuted the work. The right honourable

Baronet on one occasion gave it as his opinion of Mr. Southey, that that gentle.

man had so often changed sides it would be impossible to say what his opinion would be upon any subject at any given time. The right honourable II ironet's opinion upon such a subject was entitled to some weight, as he 11 ol himself changed sides. (Laughter.) Indeed, literary men were peculiarly tickle—as much so as young girls.

It was Mr. Talfourd's opinion that authors should have a perpetual copyright, though he restricted himself to asking sixty years, which Sir Edward Sugden said was equal to a perpetuity : but was it a fact that authors were so inadequately remunerated—did they require the boon of a copyright equal to perpetuity ? Sir Walter Scott had re- ceived a quarter of a million for his works, and Mr. Wakley did not begrudge the sum. To he sure, Sir Walter's family were distressed ; but their difficulty arose from Sir Walter's not contenting himself with the profits of authorship, he wanted the profits of bookselling as well— Upon such a subject it would be far better to have some positive and unde- niable evidence than the speeches or opinions of authors, who might entertain every different opinion of their own works from that entertained by publishers or the public. He would quote a few instances for them, which, in all proba- bility, would create astonishment amongst some of the warmest supporters of the bill. Mr. Lockhart, the editor of the Quarterly Review, who was most friendly to the bill, some time since published a sot k at 10s. 6d., which was afterwards bought in cart-loads by Mr. Tegg, the bookseller in Cheapside, for 9d. a volume. (Laughter.) Would the Copyright Bill enable hint to get 96d. ? At the end of twenty-eight years, would those books be more valuable than they were when the bookseller purchased them ? Would any author come forward after the expiration of that period to claim his share in the superabundant profit arising from the 9d. a volume ? There was another work by a distinguished Member of that House—he meant Mr. Bulwer. It was an extremely clever production, and was deserving of great praise; but it so happened that the public did not buy it. He was amazed with the public for their want of taste in the matter, but still they did not buy it ; and he was sure that the framer of the bill would not say that thepublic should be compelled to buy it. The Book he alluded to was entitled 'ff England and the English ;" and he was lure that the honourable gentleman would not say that he was not sufficiently remunerated by the publisher fur his production, for since that time he had published several other %roil:. This boo'a had Iteeu too, shed :our ye., s at

the price of a guinea and halt' for the Om.. volumes.

31r. E. L. Mc LW Eit—" No, two volumes, at one pout d."

31r. WAKLEY—Well, he was obliged for the correction, but it did not ma- terially affect his argument. What had that work been purchased for by 31r. Tegg, who was a most respectable Cousercative gentleman, and had lately been a candidate fur the office of Alderman of the City of London ? There was no

better judge of the proper value which attached to a publication ; and he had

purchased Mr. Bulwer's " England and the English " for one shilling a volume —the work for which Mr. Bulwer had so high a respect as to 1511101A it at one pound. (Loud laughter.) Those were the facts that were calculated to throw light upon the met its of authors in their own estimation, as coinpared with that esteem ii, which they were held by the publishers. Ile did Rat mean to

say that those authors were not deserving of high remuneration. He trusted

they had received it ; and he would venture to say that, so far from the prices of Mr. Tegg discouraging Mr. Balwcr, that honourable gentleman would yet bring forth numerous works, as clever and deserving of support as those which had gone before. There was another honourable gentleman, who sat at the opposite side of the House, mad who had also gone under the hands of Mr. Tegg : the talented author of " Vivian Grey," and several other works,

had suffered from the depreciation of price. He trusted that no word he uttered with reference to those talennal gentlemeu would be taken as conveying any dis. respect or any feeling other than that of admiration for their abilities; but he

instanced those cases because, from the high character of those gentlemen at

authors, their names would convey greater weight. Vivian Grey " had been

originally published at I/. I Is. 61. and it had been afterwards bought by Mr. Tegg for $d. per volume. Was it for the put pose of selling them at a high price in sixty or even in thirty years, when pet haps he night he in his " cold grave," as the Member for Manisaine had feeliogly expresse l himself, that 11Ir. Tegg bought them. No; th At gentleman was sufficiently wary in his money calculations, and it nits with a live of a speedy sale he purchased them ; for he knew well, as a mercantile man, that money should have a quick return in order to insure profit. Ile knew that so far from having a view to selling them at a remote period, they should go on the butterman's counter if they were not sold quickly. lie would call their attention to another popular author, who, although not in that House, was sufficiently well known to them all by his literal y clam titer: Theodore I look, editor of the .NA tr Mitnthly Magazine, and he believed also of the .1 I ii Bull—at least so his memorandum stated. One of that gentleman's last scorks had gone to Tegg too. (Lanyhter.) It had been published by him at. 11. Hs. t;d., and Mr. Tegg had purchased it for tsd. a volume. He did not know why the publisher had given Mr. Hook but gar. while he gave others more, but such was the fact. The next on his list was Captain Alarryat: he also had gone to 31r. Tegg ; and one of his works, which be bad published at IL Ils. was purchased by Mr. Tegg for 94. per volume. These were facts which Mr. Tegg would have no objection to cotnniunicate to the House, or any honourable Member 551111wislied to interest himself upon the subject so far as personally to inquire. They were the result of his deliberate judgment. He had a large stake in the trade, a stock worth 170,000/. at these prices. and of course immense premises. There was another instance which should he the last ; it was the case of a political writer—Mr. Fonblanque, of the Examiner —who had published within the twelvemonth a work with a most attractive title, that could scarcely have failed to insure a sale. The work was named " England uroler Seven Administrations :" that also had g me to Tegg. It was published in two volumes at twelve shillings per volume, and purchased by Mr. Tegg at one shilling a volume. A person would 1w led to imagine that Mr. Tegg 's arm should become paral5zed by such daring. But would those gentlemen cease to favour the world with their works? Not so; they would publish on as before, dependiug upon the ability of their writings to procure a sale.

Sir. Musses thought the bill had lost nothing from the irrelevant though amusing speech of Mr. Wakley ; who had made remarks very

suitable to a deputy of Mr. Tegg, but not becoming a Member of Par- liament, whose duty was to legislate on the subject. All that Mr. Wakley had said tended to prove that copyright did not enhance the price of books, and was so far favourable to the bill.

Mr. WoLviatt.re Arrwoou said, that the object of the bill was to put authors on a par with other men—to grant them that protection which was their just right, and to give encouragement for the production of works which might obtain something better than an ephemeral repu. tation. It was a hollow compliment to authors to represent them as indifferent to money, and anxious only for fame— The greatest authors who ever wrote depended upon their writings for their daily bread. This fact was undoubted : it was not for fame, it was not for plaudits, that those works were produced which did honour to this country, and from which we have derived such inestimable benefits; daily subsistence being the stimulating principle in most cases of a similar description. The assertion that public competition was the best criterion of merit in an author, and woulAl-secure him a price for his works in case they were worthy of purchase, was a most futile Inc.l Public competition might, to a certain extent, insure a sale to light or volatile works; but this very fact would have the direct tendency of inflicting a grievous injury upon the literature of the coon. try, by producing a supply of such works as would accord with the prevailing taste of the day. Were they then to protect that description of writing, and give no protection to that III a more durable kind, calculated to confer a lasting benefit upon the nation? Authors only demanded the same rights that pro- tected the labours of every other class in the community. It was said that this bill would injure the rights of publishers, printers, and others: as well might bricklayers object to the rights of property because such a right had a tendency to prevent building houses. There was no right in any class to object to the measure proposed.

Mr. Withal. wrox contended that the bill was an entire fallacy as re- garded authors ; who would not get a farthing more for their works than they did now— There were two great defects in this bill. The first was, that it would raise the price of all books that survived the first short period of their publication ; and the second and more serious and dangerous one to the public was, that it would prevent the diffusion of useful knowledge. There was a large class of books which, if not obtained at a low price, would sink prematurely into obli- vion. Ile maintained that the course which it was proposed to adopt was the very reverse of that which was calculated to secure a reasonable compensation to authors. He felt sure they would ultimately find that it was on the people's encouragement of cheap publications that they must rely for remuneration.

Mr. PRAED spoke for, and Mr. STRUTT against the bill.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS hoped for nothing better for the cause of litera- ture in that House, than that it should be attacked by Mr. Wakley and defended by Mr. Talfourd.

Mr. TALFOURD being loudly called for from all parts of the House, then rose and said— If be had advanced no arguments on a former occasion, he could only say he found very few to reply to in the discussion of that evening. Giving the

•

honourable Member for Finsbury credit for the amusement which he had afforded the House, he could not perceive that the honourable Member had brought forward any thing in the shape of argument, which was not, in point of fact, in support of the measure. He did not think that the reference to the purchase for five guineas of Milton's Paradise Lost, and his finding in the repository of Mr. Teeg, the bookseller who led the opposition to this bill, stock to the amount of 170,0001., were circumstances calculated to increase that opposition. If they were to get for the public all they could, and reward the author with nothing but cheap editions, he would not answer long for the pros. perity of literature. They were told by the honourable Member for Iiri.lport that they were legislating for the protection of indivillua's, and not for the species ; but when they were legislating for the highest and greatest of that species, they were undoubtedly legislating for the species itself. Did they not legislate for the millions, when they legislated for him who led them on in the path of fame and glory? As well might it be said that in legislating for the glory of the Great Seal, they were legislating, not for the profession, but fur one loan. The truth was, that in this measure they were legislating for all. Sup- pose among the five hundred or five thousand aspirants who were now com- mencing that career which Milton had trod, they could select from that number, by anticipating the voice of posterity, such another genius, what rewards, what public contributions, what honours would be too mighty to confer upon him? What was the proposition now? He was only asking them, when the time should come at which the one in five thousand would be pointed out, that they should not have stripped him of all those rewards and honours which, if they could have anticipated time, they would have conferred on him before. The Member for Finsbury had said that posterity would reward those who wrote for posterity : now he asserted that they did not permit posterity to re. ward them, and it was that they might do so that he called on them to sup- port his bill. Ile only demanded an act of justice, in granting which they would be doing justice to themselves as well as to the great class of authors ; they would be sympathizing with what was great and lasting—above all, with what was just, good, and right, and not allowing themselves to be misled by those low and sordid calculations upon which the opposition to the bill was founded. He stood there for justice—not merely for those who were popular, but for that class of authors who had to struggle against prejudice and other obstacles, and who must create the taste by which they shall be appreciated.

The House divided on the question of going into Committee—Ayes, 119; Noes, 52. The form of entering into Committee was gone through, but nothing was done ; and the Committee is to sit again on Wednesday next.

TRIAL. OF CONTROVERTED ELECTIONS.

This subject occupied the House of Commons for a considerable portion of Thursday evening. Sir ROBERT PEEL moved for leave to bring in a bill " to amend the laws relating to the jurisdiction for the trial of' Controverted Elections." He said that it appeared to be a general wish that every experiment for the improvement of the pre- sent system should be tried and proved unsatisfactory, before the House relinquished a power it had held for centuries, of deciding who were to be the Members of the House. There was, indeed, an almost insur- mountable difficulty in constituting a tribunal independent of the House, arising from the enormous power with which such a tribunal must be invested ; and if an appeal from its decision to the House were allowed, then all the evils complained of in the existing system would again come intoplay. Suppose the decision were referred to is Jury- lor •,' and party feelings would influence Juries as well as House of Cor..mons Committees. By bringing the Jury from a distance, the influence of local prejudices might be obviated, but party prejudices could not be overcome. He would not go so far as to say that, if every attempt to obtain just and satisfactory decisions from tribunals composed of Members of the House proved unsuccessful, he would still resist the removal of the jurisdiction from the House ; but he would previously make every effort to establish a sufficient tri- bunal under the control of Parliament. It would, be thought, lower the House in public opinion, to make the avowal that it had become unfit to exercise a power which for years past had been exercised by Parliament. He believed that the same materials, combined under different influences, and set in motion by different machinery, might easily be made to produce different results. Previously to the passing of the Grenville Act, controverted elections were determined by party majorities or private influence, without re- gard to justice; but Mr. Grenville's Act, which constituted a different tribiLial out of the same materials, worked successfully for many years. There WAS the testimony of Mr. Fox, who in the first instance opposed the bill, and that of other persons of eminence, to the success of the Grenville Act. But be could cite an instance in more recent times, of the manner in which a different arrangement of the same materials produced the best results. It was known that neither the House nor the public placed any confidence in the decisions of Committees on Private Bills. But the present House, on the recommendation of the Speaker, who had paid great attention to the subject, introduced a different system. A Generid Committee of forty-two Members was ap- pointed, which decided whether the Standing Orders had been complied with. The change was found beneficial ; as was proved by Mr. Aber- crombyir evidence before the Select Committee on Private Bills. All parties were satisfied ; there had not been a single charge of partiality against the Committee ; the system of canvassing was entirely aban- doned. Sir Robert then proceeded to explain his own plan for im- proving Election Committees. lie proposed to put an end to the pre- liminary discussion in the House respecting the perfecting of recog- nizances, by referring such questions to the decision of a single person, acting under the authority of the Speaker. By this alteration, much time, uncertainty, expense, and the exhibition of party feeling, would be avoided. A great evil of the present system was, that the selection of members of Committees depended upon choice; and another, that professional men were generally excluded from Committees. Efforts in- deed were commonly made to exclude all persons of experience from Com- mittees ; and during the present session, seven out of eleven members of every Committee were persons who never sat in any previous Parlia- ment. Now, though unwilling to interfere with their profes- sional pursuits and emoluments, he thought that when gentle- men became Members, they should take their fair share of Par- liamentary labour; and this they would be compelled to undergo if a discretionary power in the appointment of Election Committees were substituted for chance. He proposed that the Speaker should appoint

a General Committee, to be intrusted with the power of nominating

all other Committees for the tr'al of controverted elections. The names of the Members so appointed by the General Committee should be laid on the table ; and if no objection were made to them within a certain period, the appointment should be deemed valid and final. The decision of' those Committees, with the votes of the members, should be recorded and reported to the House; so that they would act under the check of public opinion. He would excuse Ministers from serving on Committees, on their representing that the attendance would inter- fere with the performance of their other duties, and Members of sixty years of age. He would disqualify Members petitioned against, or wbo had voted at the elections questioned. The General Committee might consist of four or six members, and the Election Committee of seven. He would reserve the power of challenge for a good cause such as relationship, He did not think it was necessary to go into' further details.

Mr. O'CONNELL denied that the operation of the Grenville Act proved that a just tribunal could be formed out of the materials the House afforded. There was as much disposition to question the de. visions respecting disputed seats now as before the Grenville Act was passed. With respect to the appointment of the General Committee by the Speaker, it must be recollected that the chair would always he filled by a Member who was of some party. He had seen a person in the chair whom he would not have trusted with the power Sir Robert Peel's scheme would give him. The purest minds were liable to the influence of political views. He adhered to his own plan, of removing the jurisdiction from the House and referring disputed points toJuries. There was one great part of the subject which Sir Robert Peel had entirely overlooked—the complex nature of the questions to be derided. He would put an end to most of these by simplifying the fr.inchise, snaking the registry final, and adopting the vote by ballot.

Sir JOHN CAMPBELL agreed generally with Sir Robert Peel. Mr. Charles Buller's bill was ineffective, and he much preferred Sir Robert Peel's proposal; but be suggested a different mode of proceeding--

The proper course would be merely to repeal the Grenville Act, and to restore to the House the authority which by the constitution belonged to it. There were two things that the House wanted—the power of administering oaths, and the power of awarding costs. Having possessed itself of these two powers by act of Parliament, the House would require nothing more to enable it to deal in a satisfactory and conclusive manner with all questions arising out of disputed elections. having obtained an act for that purpose, he thought the best course for the right honourable baronet to take would be to propose certain resolutions establishing a system of trial which should be uniform for the first Parliament after the passing of the act ; and if, after the experience of a year or two, the system should prove to be satisfactory, it might then be embodied in bill and be made permanent.

Mr. Frrznov KELLY entertained a firm and unalterable conviction, that public justice, as well as public opinion, called for the entire abo. lition of the jurisdiction of that House in all matters relating to the trial of controverted elections. He was much disappointed that Sir Robert Peel, amidst the improvements of the present system he had certainly suggested, had made no allusion to one that was essential— the appointment, namely, of Assessors to guide the Committees on questions of law.

Mr. BERNAL considered it impossible, by any new arrangement of the materials the House could supply, to remedy the mischiefs that prevailed under the present system. He was for removing the juris- diction entirely from the House.

Mr. SHAW LEFEVRE expressed general approbation of the plan. Colonel DAVIES was disappointed by it.

Mr. SPRING RICE thought Sir Robert Peel's proposition not only good as compared with the present system, but valuable on its distinc- tive merits. He could not understand the principle of transferring to any body of men independent of the House the power of deciding upon the election of Members of Parliament. He was of opinion that an Assessor would be frequently required. He would only be the suc- cessor of the Nominee under the Grenville Act ; and he had always considered that a most injudicious alteration of the law which excluded the Nominees from Committees.

Mr. VERNON SMITH was not convinced, by any thing he had hard, that a proper tribunal, independent of the House, could not be consti- tuted by Parliament. There was no analogy between Private Bill and Election Committees; because it was easy to exclude local prejudices, but every Member had political predilections. Mr. Smith asked, um it possible to bring on the second reading of the bill in tune to legislate on the subject before the recess ?

Sir ROBERT PEEL said, the measure would be very simple ; and he should have no difficulty in bringing in the bill in a few days, and tieing the second reading at as early a period as would suit the convenience of its supporters and opponents.

Dr. LUSHINGTON remarked, that the tribunal which Mr. Vernon Smith would propose must depend for its existence on the will of the House, and would represent the majority. How could reliance be placed on its decisions ? He was prepared to accede generally to sir Robert Peel's proposition, but insisted on the necessity an Assessor to state the law to the Committee. Itioef law it•elffrequired simplification ; and he thought that the Government ought to introduce a measure for settling disputed points, which were raised, day after day, usque ad nauseant. He had been petitioned against thirty years ago; and, for his sins, past, present, and to conic, underwent a fourteen days' trial. A certain point was raised in the Committee; and he found that since that time it had been decided eleven times one way, and nine times another.

Lord Howicx recommended the appointment of Assessors-

! He believed that if they were to have three really good and competent Asses- sors to preside over the meetings of the Election Committees, and Owe Mite Assessors were to constitute together a Court of Appeal in matters of lie bum the decisions of the Revising liarristers, they would have the means in a very few years of removing a great number of those questions which led to time pre- sentation of election petitions at all ; and would cut off that source of those proceedings which, in whatever manner determined or tried, Dever coeal be free from the greatest inconvenience. He foresaw great difficulty in the working of that part of Sir Robert Peel's plan which referred to the appointment of the Election Corn-

inidea. There would be constant efforts to escape the labour and lepponsibility imposed upon the members of those Committees ; and he thought that the recommendation of a Committee which sat two years ago, to divide the House into panels, and select the Committees from those panels by ballot, ought to be considered. If permanent Committees were appointed, he feared the system of canvassing would be put in operation. Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN adhered to his own proposition of referring the decisions on disputed elections to three Barristers ; and in a future stage would submit that plan to the House, and move to expunge all the clauses of Sir Robert Peel's Bill. Mr. Gat:LW:RN said, there was this objection to the appointment of an Assessor, Unit be might be inferior in legal knowledge and reputa- tion to some member of the Committee, and then his law might be questioned. As to Lord Hoe iek's plan for selecting members from rotas by ballot, it would continue all the evils of chance selections, whirh it was so desirable to avoid.

Mr. Hume insisted on the necessity of amending the registration .system. Sir ROBERT PEEL, in reply, said that the question of registration was entirely distinct from that before the House. Whatever diffi- culties there were in other parts of the system, they afforded no reason fur delaying to improve election tribunals. Sir Robert repeated Mr. Goulburtes objection to Lord Howick's proposition fur the selection of Committees by ballot. With respect to the appointment of three Assessors—there was this practical difficulty, that they would not at one time be able to discharge the duties required from them, in conse- quence of numerous petitions, while for the greater portion of the ses- sion they would be unemployed. They must also be paid and pro- vided with retiring allowances, and perhaps might be suffered to remain in office after the state of their intellects rendered retirement advise- able. Ile wished Mr. O'Connell would introduce his bill, and have it printed. That wets the only way of effecting any real improvement. For his own part, he did not consider the scheme of referring election disputes to the decision of Judges and Juries us feasible.

Leave was given to bring in the bill.

FOREIGN SLAVE TRADE.

Sir ROBERT INGLIS, on Thursday, moved an address to the Queen, declaring that the horrors of the foreign slave.trade had been recently

aggravated ; and expressing deep regret that Portugal had not fulfilled its engagement with this country by taking effectual measures fur the sup- pression of the traffic. In a long speech, Sir Robert detailed numer- ous Matinees of extraordinary suffering by the captured Negroes. The abolition of the slave•trade by this country increased the amount and the burn's of tie trade in Africans— It had been said that the greatest number of slaves imported from Africa in one year was from tio,000 to si,0410. Ile believed that fur the last few years not less Lb III 100,000 victims had been carried off; indeed, in three years and a half, 130.060 Negroes had been carri, 41 away, showing an average of 31,000 a year. If lie were to concentrate the whole argument against this traffic in one sentence, he would say, that we had converted what was formerly ly a legal traffic into a conttaband traffic ; we hail thus compelled those situ followed it to trust to the speed of their vessels as the only means; of transporting their living calves from one country to another. By Sir William Dolben's Act, a legal proportion of tonnage was ul'otted to each slave; by the Emigrant Act, a cer- tain proportion of tutor rga was required for each emigrant ; and in her Ma- jesty's naval service a propor Sun of space was assigned to each seaman. But in the slave.trade, a ship of I50 tons, within the last few years, had a cargo of 723tlaves on board, making with the crew, 760 persona,—a number sufficient to stork a first rate man of-vv Ir. 'f he mortality on board these vessels in 1791, at the comuleacement of the discussion of the Abolition question. when it was a legal trade, (if it were not comptomising truth to call it WO WA, J per cent. ; which rate of mortality, if continued, would depopulate the globe in a year und seven mouths. But the mortality under the present system had greatly in- creased. In one instance 845 Negroes had died out of 800 in ten days. The mate of one of the ships which had been seized had been asked what proportion of his cargo he expected to convey alive across the Atlantic., and he stated " about half." In another instance, 333 slaves had been conveyed from Cala bar in a vessel of 177 Spanish tons, (equal to about 120 English tuns,) 27 of whom died iu the night before she left the river, 77 before they were taken to Sierra Leone, and IS before condemnation.

It was raider the Portuguese flag that these atrocities were chiefly perpetrated ; and Sir Robert contended that it was incumbent on Ministers to use their influence in Portugal for the suppression of such Crimes.

Mr. IRVING, Sir HENRY VERNEY, and Captain Peelietd. supported the motion.

Dr. LesitieedoN suggested, that free Coloured persons, whose con- stitutions could withstand the climate on the African coast, should be engaged on board armed steam•vessels to prevent kidnapping.

Lord PALMERSTON admitted that the cruelties of the traffic had been aggravated ; but that was tro reason for repenting of the measures taken by this country to abolish it ; for it was certain that but for the exer- tions of this country, the trade would be much larger than at present, and tine sum of hurtle!' misery increased. He detailed the measures adopted for the suppression of the foreign slave-trade, by treaties with the Continental nations. Portugal was still the great offender. He was engaged in a negotiation with the Goverurnent of that country ; and he was entitled, under a former treaty, to demand assistance in putting down the slave-trade in every part of the globe—

And he did think, that if Portugal should continue to refuse to us that justice, the time must come when it would be incumbent on her Majesty s Go- vernment to appeal to Parliament fur powers to do ourselves, and on our own authority, that which Portugal refried to permit as to do by treaty. (Cheering.) lie trusted we should not be driven to that necessity, painful as it meat be to that House ; and indeed, be had reason to hope, front the coen- inunications which he had recently received, that the Portuguese Government had come to a due sense of its being incumbent on them to redeem their honour by concluding a treaty similar to that which existed between Great Britain and Spain.

He fully agreed in the terms of the address moved by Sir Robert Inglis, and anticipated good effects from the unanimous vote of the House to carry it to the foot of the Throne.

Motion agreed to.

NATIONAL EDUCATION.

The Bishop of DUitlIAM presented a petition to the Peers, on

Monday, from Manchester, in support of a system of national educe- • tion. Dr. Maltby said—

The petition was signed by 24,000 persons, who expressed a verygreat

anxiety for the establishment of an efficient system of national education, from which they conceived the country would derive incalculable benefit. Several gentlemen of Manchester, whose time was exceedingly valuable, had never- theless devoted their attention to this subject. They expressed their opinions strongly with reference to it; and tole of their resolutions was, "that they- would endeavour by every constitutional means to procure for all classes of the community an improved and permaneut system of education." There were several important questions connected with this subject, which would require the most serious consideration. One of these was, whether education should or should not be compulsory? On that point he was not prepared at present to enter, or to give a positive opinion. Another question was, whether boys and girls should be trained in the same schools? Again came the question, at what age the course of education should begin, and at what period it should termi- nate? But the most serious question of all was, what course of religious in- struction was to be adopted—whether the Scriptures were to be read without gloss or comment? It appeared from returns furnished by the Statistical So- ciety of Manchester, that this country was considerably behind other st ttea as regarded the means of affording education extensively to the people. The returns set forth, that the population of Liverpool amounted to 2;16,000 souls of these, 12,000 received education through the ineili ttttt of clarity, while not less than Z30,000 were not receiving arty education really Or nominally-. it appealed from the same document, that in Nassau one in six received educa- tion, in Nea York one in boar, in Switzerland one in live, while iu England the proportion was one in eight. He seas well convinced that their Lordships

would see the great is of this subject as it regarded the morals of the people. He impressed on the minds of their Lordships the necessity of prr!vrtl- ing ample means of poinilar education, as they preferred innocence to crrrne, happiness to misery, peace and good government to coalusion anil lusubor•lina- ti..ri.

MISCELLANEOUS.

TIIE FRENCH AMBABSADOR AT TIIE CORONA rION. In the House of Peers, on Alonday, iu auswer to a question by the Earl, of WO:- culi.seA, Lord AI eiatoultee stated, that her Majesty's Government had in 110 way interfered in the aippointsitent of an Ambassador from France at the approaching Coronation.

REDUCTION OF THE YCOMANRY. Lord WINCHILSEA moved 1.01' re- turns respecting the reduction of the Yeomanry corps. He contended that a party feeling had actuated the Government its the measures taken for cutting down this force ; and that the feeling was particularly visi- ble as regarded the county of Hertford, where the Gilston corps had been retained because it was under the command of a friend of the Government ( Arr. Ward, the Alember for Sheffield.) 'Ile sane feel- ing prevailed •in the arrangements respecting the Hampshire Yeomenry. In another place, Lord John I ussell had Used most offensive hinge:Te- 1 le altogether differed from th It noble lord in the opinion he had expressed, that the Yeomanry cavalry were riot the proper force to he employed in the pleventien or suppression 4.f local (listen Ironies. The known character and moral influence, apart altogether from the military discipline, of those who composed the tt oilr, in many instances inlet posed a most salutary check to the de.tructien of ptopealy and the effusion of blood, which 110 other lleSeritaine of force could supply. Ile hoped the papers fur which he now moved wouil!

leke an intelligible priociple by which the tie.vernment had been guided in proposing the rcrhiction of the Hertford Yeomanly, and at'ter- wards alter ing their tleterminatirin.

Lord 2s11-1.110171iNE would not object to produce the papers ; although their contents, he suspected, would disappoilit lend 1Vinchilsea. It had been considered conducive to the public service to retain the Gil- stun corps of Yeomanry ; and though Lord Willi:Itasca assailed Mi- nisters for acting in this matter on public grounds, it happened, un- luckily, that Government was assailed by its own firm supporters consequence of the measures which were considered advisable in re- ference to the Yeomanry corps.

Lord lialiewoon strongly protested against the reduction of the Yeomunry. Lord POIVE31 A N regretted the extremely impolitic course which Ministers had pursued OR this occasion. The Duke of Cm:ad:- LAND could not believe, notwithstanding all that had been said on the occasion, that the Yeomanry were the best force for suppressing popu- ler disturbances.

The Duke of WeraiseToe inclined to a contrary opinion— The first consideration was, in every case to pint down any diatuthance that might arise, with as little delay as circumstances permitted. He should dlwaya be for putting down disturbance with the least possible loss of life. Ile there- foie thought, that whatever force partook most of a preventive character, must be considered the must eligible. Ile believed that the Yeomanry best answered to that description; and it was to be remembered, that when troops were pre- sent, or supposed to be near the spot, it rarely happened that disturbances arose. This he considered to be a strong argument inn favour of the emplpyment of the Yeomanry.

Lord 1Vinchilsea's motion was agreed to.

ROMAN CATHOLIC °alms. A long discussion took place in the Horse of Lords 0I1 Tutsday, on is motion of Lord SHREWSBURY, for documents to show the opinion of certain Catholic Prelates on the oath imposed on Catholics by the Etnaneipation Act. Lord Shrews- bury's chief object was to defend the Catholics from the imputation of disregarding oaths to heretics. The Bishop of EXETER replied to Lord Shrewsbury ; and Lord S.rovieroo followed the Bishop. There were only four Peers present besides the Ministers. Motion with drawn.

Luso TITHES: Tine APPROPRIATION CLAUSE. On Thursday, Sir THOMAS ACLAND gave notice, that on the motion for going into Committee on the Irish lithe Resolutions, on Alosiday next, he should move as On amendment, that the resolutions of the 7th and Sth of April 18:3,-, be read from the chair, for the purpose of being rescinded. (Loud Tory cheers.)

ELECTION PETITIONS.

On Monday, Sir GEORGE STRU7K1.AND reported from the Hull Com- mittee, that Sir Walter James and Mr. Hutt were, and that Mr. tPii berforce was not, duly elected for Hull.

On Thursday, the Gloucester Committee was appointed.

Liberals-3; Tunics-8;

3Ir. James Power, Mr. Patten, Mr. Easthope, Sir George Rose, Mr. Caveudialh, Mr. Montague Parker, Mr. Cripps, Mr. Kirk, Mr. Philip Miles, Marquis of Granby, Sir W. Ileatheote.

The petitioners are Liberal electors against the return of Mr. Hope.

The Norwich Committee was appointed on the same day.

Liberals-7 ; Tories-4; Mr. Wrightson, Lord Ernest Bruce, Mr. Phillpotto Sir Charles Coate, Mr. BosticId, Mr. Bagot, Mr. David Roche, Mr. Abel Smith.

Mr. Massey Sunay, Mr. Duckworth, Colonel Edwards.

The petitioners are Liberal electors against the Tory sitting Members.

BILLS READ A FIRST TIME IN TILE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

May 7 Iteq al Burghs (seotlaud) Second reading on I tlla 'Ala.. — 9 Registration or !skit Voters, second reading ou d3tlr May.

BILLS READ A SECOND TIME.

May 7 Sewell Ilabkropts Estates.

— 9 Scotch Salmon Fisheries.

SECOND HEADING DEFERRED.

May 7 Factories Regulation. To U,h May.

BILLS PASSED.

May 7 Edinburgh ana Glasg,Av

— 8 Faliguard1131bour.

Ms:Moo Dm:1mM

May 8 Sir EARMEY WII.NIOT's In OW Abolition a Negro Apprenticeship.

To 22d May.. NOME GicEN.

May 8 Financial Statement, by Mr. SraINO Rice, iu tutim.ittee Wa)s and Means, on 18th May.