Debates ant( Vrocetbings in Varliainent.

Tim CHARTISTS, AND THEIR PROCEEDINGS. In the House of Lords, on Monday, Lord LANSDOWNE stated that the meeting on Kennington Common had been held by the Chartists, but had been dispersed by the police alone, without the assistance of a single soldier. Lord %tom:max received the assurance with pleasure; and gave his opi- nion that monster exhibitions were essentially illegal. They could not be for discussion, where nobody could be heard; and were mere exhibitions of physical force, where persons might, without dreaming of it, be driven into illegal courses. The Duke of WELLuvo'row thought that no metropolis could suffer so great a grievance as London had suffered in the last few days, from the terror of an announced meeting of two or three hundred thousand persons in one of its suburbs: trade and commerce were paralyzed, and every men was compelled to take measures to defend himself and his property. He hoped that some legislative means would be taken to make the law se explained and understood that these meetings should be limited to numbers that might hear the questions discussed at them; otherwise all the inha bitants must leave their businesses and remain under arms in their owls defence.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY suggested, that, considering the mew_ rences of the last week, means should be taken to lessen the number of foreigners in the country.

In the House of Commons, on Monday, Mr. FEARGDS O'CONNOR pre_ rented one petition, signed, as he alleged, by 5,706,000 persons, and another signed by 30,000 persons which was an appendage to the first, though not a part of it, praying for the enactment of what were called " the six points of the People's Charter,"—namely., annual Parliaments, universal suffrage, vote by ballot, equal electoral districts, no property qualification, and the payment of Members. He moved that the prayer be read by the Clerk.

The petition lay on the floor of the House in five large divisions. The first sheet was detached, and the prayer was read.

Lord Moralsra stated that Sir George Grey was kept from the House by necessary business at the Home Office: whatever his sentiments on the prayer of this petition, he would be most unwilling to appear wanting in respect to any petition signed by large numbers of his fellow subjects.

The messengers of the House then rolled the immense masses of parch- ment-to the Lobby.

On Thursday, Mr. THORNELY brought up a special report from the Committee on Public Petitions; which was read by the Clerk at the table, as follows- " The Committee on Public Petitions, in conformity vrith the instructions of the House of the 26th day of November last ' in all cases to set forth the number of signatures to each petition,' and also having regard to the power at the same time delegated to them • to report their opinion and observations thereupon to the House,' have agreed to the following special report— "That, on the 10th day of April instant., a petition for ' Universal Suffrage, Foc. from inhabitants of the British Isles and subjects of the British Crown' was presented to the House. " Your Committee strongly feel the value of the right of petition ; consider the mei, else of it as one of the most important privileges of the subjects of the realm; sad feel the necessity of preserving the exercise of such privilege from abuse.

"And having also a due regard to the Importance of the very numerously signed peti- tion forming the subject of the present report, they feel bound to represent to the House, that in the matter of signatures there has been, in their opinion, a gross abuse of that privilege.

" The honourable Member for Nottingham stated, on presenting the petition in ques- tion to the House, that 5,706,000 signatures were attached to it. Upon a most careful examination of the number of signatures in the Committee-room, in which examina- tion thirteen law-stationer's clerks were engaged for upwards of seventeen hours, with the person ordinarily employed in counting the signatures appended to petitions under the superintendence of the clerk of your Committee, the number of signatures has been ascertained to be 1,975,496. It la further ovIdent.to your Committee, that on numerous consecutive sheets the signatures are Inc j anti the same handwriting.

" Your Committee have also observed Ape flashes of distinguished individuals at- tached to the petition, who cannot be supposed to have concurred in its prayer, and as little to have subscribed tt : amongst such occur the names of her Majesty in one

place, as Victoria Rex, April 1 ; the Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel, an. Fre. /cc.

"In addition to this species of abuse, your Committee have observed another equally in derogation of the just value of petitions,—namely, the insertion of names which are obviously altogether fictitious, such as 'No Cheese,' Pugnose," Flatnose,' &c. " There are other words and phrases which, though written in the form of signatures, and included In the number reported, your Committee will not hazard offending the House, and the dignity and decency of their own proceedings, by reporting; though It may be added, that they are obviously signatures belonging to no human being."

Mr. FEARGUB O'CoswoR would not undertake to say that the numbers were correct: there might have been practices—

It is an old saying, that those who hide may find ; and perhaps something of the spy system had been resorted to with regard to this great national under- taking. He had letters which showed that the number of real signatures affixed to the petition, in England, Scotland, and Wales, was 4,800,000. As to the computation, he maintained that thirteen clerks could not count 1,900,000 sig- natures in seventeen hours; nor could twenty do it.

Mr. THORNELY insisted that the utmost attention bad been paid to the examination of the petition. The Committee even had it weighed, in con- sequence of a statement by Mr. O'Connor on that head: it was found to be, not 5 tons, but 51 hundredweight.

Lord Jome Russuu. repudiated the insinuation that the proceedings as to the petition might have something to do with a spy system. Perhaps the menacing declarations thrown out in the Convention were a part of the " spy system," introduced into the Convention to promote the ends of the Government? (Laughter.) The Earl of Annsmai. and SURREY remarked that the Chartists had issued an advertisement stating that 500,000 persons had met in Kenning- ton Common on Monday! The highest estimate was 23,000.

Mr. Cairns made a further statement on the part of the Committee, of which he was a member.

He had spent two hours and a half over the population returns, and found that the petition could not have been signed by 5,700,000 persons [adult males]; it was subsequently discovered, however, that it was signed by women in the proportion of 8.2 to every 100 signatures. Mr. O'Connor had said the peti- tion weighed 5 tons; perhaps he made a mistake of tons for hundredweights. Mr. O'Cosiston—" I did not say ' tons.' " Mr. Carers—"I pledge my, honour as a gentleman that the honourable and learned Member said tons.' But whether 'tons' or ' hundredweights,' the peti- tion was brought here in three crazy cabs. Sir, I do not mean to cast any oblo- quy or ridicule upon the petition; but I do mean to cast obloquy upon the honour- able and learned gentleman for making these exaggerated statements." Mr. O'Cortsron—" I rise to order. ("Hear!" and laughter.) I rise to explain the observation to which the honourable Member referred, and to advert to the language he has used. (" Order, order!") Sir, I said—(Mr. O'Connor was in- terrupted by cries of "Order! ") Then I will explain." (" Order! Chair!") The SPEAKER said, if the honourable Member wished to make any explanation as to his personal conduct, he must wait until the Member in possession of the House had concluded his speech, unless the House allowed him to do it now. Mr. CRIPPS—" Sir, I repeat the observation; and I say that no Member of this House ever did more to deprive himself of any title to credence; and I never for ,eyeell can believe him again. How the deluded creatures who have hitherto '' credit to the honourable and learned Member will regard him after this, Trio not know; but after the injuries inflicted upon eight or ten respectable tradesmen at Camberwell, who have been rained by persons, I will not say con- nected with the honourable and learned Member—after this has occurred within the last fortnight. the House ought not to be outraged by the ribald mass of obscenity and impiety contained amongst the signatures to this petition, ex- hibiting expressions which the strumpets in the street would blush to write. The names of particular individuals are affixed over and over again. The Duke of wanington's name appears sixteen or seventeen times; that of the honourable and pliant Member for Lincoln [Colonel Sibthorp] a dozen times--(Laughter) _-the name of the honourable Member for Manchester, and that of the honourable member for the West Riding of Yorkshire, appear I cannot tell how many times. from what I saw myself, and I have a list of all these names in my et. There is another fact: on one of the sheets were written the words We could not get paid for any more.'" (Laughter, and cries of "Hear, hear!") Mr. O'CoNston denied that he had blamed the Committee— with regard to the petition itself, I could not be supposed to be accountable for anything written in it. (" Oh, oh!") Was it possible for me, in the nature of things, to examine the different sheets? I never saw one of them till I saw them rolled up here. (" Oh, oh!") I am now told I had no business to present any petition the character of which I did not know. (Cheers.) If such were the rule, that petition would never have been presented at all. (Cheers.) As to my having forfeited my title to credence—(Loud cheers)—in having presented a pe- tition for which I am not responsible, with all respect to the House and the Com- mittee, I shall have that explained elsewhere." (Shouts of laughter.)

[Mr. O'Connor immediately left the House.]

Mr. Jotter ABEL SMITH was present on Kennington Common, and cal- culated that there were not 15,000 present— "That I believe to be an excessive calculation. I have reason to know, that pre- viously to the meeting means were taken to ascertain the whole number of persons which could be present if the Common were entirely covered. The whole apace, closely packed, would not hold more than 90,000; and at no time was there more than a quarter of the space occupied. I have further to state, that I am con- vinced I exaggerate them when I say that the numbers of the procession were un- der 8,000. I will only add, that the honourable and learned Member for Notting- ham, in my presence on Monday evening, stated the numbers present on Kenning- ton Common as exceeding half a million." (Cheers and laughter.) Colonel SIBTHORP rejoiced at what had happened in the House that evening, and told an anecdote- " Oa Monday night, when the honourable and learned Member for Nottingham, addressing me at the door of the House, said, ' I am glad all went off peaceably,' I said, I have only one regret that it did.' Why ? ' he asked. Because,' I replied if you had attempted to come over the bridge, you would have got the damnedest hiding mortal man ever received.'" (Loud cheers and laughter.) The conversation proceeded without much progress, until Mr. &LILLIE COCHRANE asked Lord John Russell whether, after what had passed, he should think it necessaay to waste a whole evening in discussing the Chartist petition?

Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied, that ho should certainly not recede from his word. (Cheers.) Mr. LUSHINGTON called attention to Mr. O'Connor's concluding words, as he apprehended that fatal consequences might ensue. (Much laughter, and cries of " Oh ! ") a Mr. DISRAELI hoped that the Speaker would interpose his authority to prevent any more serious and painful- meeting on Aennington Common than had already taken place. ("Hear, hear! ' and, laughter.) There was some further discussion on this point, the SPEAKER reca- pitulating what had passed. He did sot think that Mr. Cripps had trans' grossed the rules of the House; bathe hoped he -would disolaim any inten- tion to be personally offensive-

" The greatest possible reliance," observed the Speaker, " is placed on what falls from a Member of Parliament; and in proportion to the great weight given to the words of an honourable Member should be his caution that what he states is strictly accurate. The honourable Member for Nottingham, like every other Member, is responsible to the House for the petition he presents containing no dis- respectful language, for its coming from the place whence it purports to emanate, and for the genuineness and propriety of the signatures to it. Of course, the honourable Member might be imposed upon with respect to names appended to the petition, as teing the names of the parties signing it; but there are some points on which he could not be imposed upon if he took that proper precaution which he owed to the House."

Mr. CRIPPS.stated that he had spoken in perfect sincerity— He had not intended any insult to Mr. O'Connor; he entertained no hostile in- tentions; and he would defer to the opinion of the House. He could not withdraw the substance of what he had expressed: he meant to say that he could not place reliance on any statement which the honourable Member might make; but he was extremely sorry if he had used any expression which was not strictly Par- liamentary, and desired to retract any such expression.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL having moved "that Feargus O'Connor, Esq., Member for the town of Nottingham, do attend this House forthwith," it was ordered accordingly. Subsequently, Mr. Gosset, the Assistant Ser- geant-at-Arms, stated that he had served the notice on Mr. O'Connor, at the office of the Northern Star, at twenty minutes to seven o'clock. Mr. O'Connor did not say that he would attend, but asked what would be the consequence if he did not attend? To which Mr. Gosset answered, that it would depend upon the pleasure of the House. On the motion of Sir Games Garr, it was ordered that Mr. O'Connor be taken into custody of the Sergeant-at-Arms. Meanwhile, the House went on with other matters.

Later in the night, Mr. O'Connor appeared in custody, was discharged took his seat, and the SPEAKER stated what had taken place; calling upon Mr. Cripps to repeat what he had before said Mr. CRIPPS complied— He stated that be had felt warmly the slight which had been tad on the Com- mittee, and that he had been induced to express himself more warmly, perhaps, than was consistent with his duties to the House-' that he meant no personal af- front to the Member for Nottingham, and retracted the unparliamentary expres- sions; and that he regretted the trouble which he had occasioned to the House.

Mr. O'Coloton then made his statement— Previously to leaving the House, there were three points upon which he had to address them. First, as regards his duty to the House, he regretted that he should be the means of misleading them in respect to the numbers of sig- natures attached to the petition. In regard to the second, he entirely exculpated the Committee from any blame in the matter. In regard to the third point, affect- ing himself; he felt it must be settled elsewhere: he would not have been satisfied with the retractation of the unparliamentary language of the honourable Member for Cirencester, had he not at the close of his observations also retracted those expressions which one gentleman should not use to another. After what had passed, he should not found any motion upon the petition, but leave the question to be settled between the Government, the Committee, the Petitioners, and the country.

CROWN AND GOVERNMENT SECURITY BIII.

On Monday, the second reading of the Crown and Government Se entity Bill having been moved, Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN presented himself to speak against it.

He assured the Government, that if Ireland's claim for a separate Legislature and self-government, under her ancient constitution of Queen, Lords, and Com- mons of her own nation, were refused this year, they would have to encounter the establishment there of Republican institutions. He would not profess disloyalty to the Queen of England; but if it were treason to profess disloyalty to that House and to the government of Ireland by the Parliament of Great Britain, he avowed that treason. (Hooting, cheers, and laughter.) Nay, more, it should be the study of his life to overthrow the domination of that Parliament in Ireland. (Laughter.) He challenged contradiction to his statement, that no man in the House stood higher in regard to public character than he did. (Roars of laugh- ter.) He denied that he went to France to beg armed succour: if he had done so, he might have got a tolerably large legion of troops. (" Oh, oh!" and great laughter.) He believed that if Irish freedom were won only by foreign bayonets, it would be kept only by them; which was not his desire or intention. His mis- sion was one of admiration and sympathy only: he found in France an intense feeling in return on behalf of Ireland ; and he did not reject that feeling. Though he did not agree in all the points of the Charter, there was hardly a Chartist who .did not sympathize with the cause of the Irish. ("Hear, hear!" from Mr. F. O'Connor.) He trusted they would obtainpolitical power; and he knew they would more easily do so when England was em in her rela- tions with Ireland. He avowed his advice to arm; for he thought that, in pre- sence of a Government prepared to crush opinion by brute force, it was right to arm, as much to preserve order as to gain liberty. So, if it were guilt to coun- sel the election by his countrymen of a National Council representing them fairly, he avowed the guilt. With the body so elected he advised Lord John Russell to open early negotiations for the amicable settlement of the great issues now pend- ing between the countries. (Laughter.) Those insulting sneers had no effect on him—he was prepared for them: moreover, he felt that he should succeed, and be no fit subject at last for ridicule. Mr. O'Brien cautioned the Govern - ment against reliance on packed juries: if but one man failed them, they would lose their prestige; while if they succeeded, thousands would be found who would feel it no disgrace to suffer conviction for their country. The 280,000 signatures to a declaration of confidence in the Lord-Lieutenant were unknown, and had only been obtained by active solicitation. If a con- flict arose, three-fourths of the people would desert the Government. The De Burghs would be wanting; the Duke of Leinster himself would not find a partisan out of his own family; and no man would follow Lord Ormond° in MI- kenny, though he was one of the most amiable men in Ireland. The gentry would be a false hope, for they would be glad to compound for their estates with the dominant party; and even the Orangemen—a body of strength—would not be reliable after Sir William Somerville's bill to take away their tenant right. The police force—a fun) body of 10,000 men—were of the people, as, they were from them, and were entirely national: they would be happy to obtain future reward and renown as the saviours of their country. The army was insignificant. During the rebellion of 1798, 158,000 men found full occupation in holding three Irish counties: what serious obstacle, then, if it came to a struggle' (which God forbid !) would 26,000 men offer to the whole Irish people? But, honestly, he thought the army itself would fail the Government, and refuse to act. His argument then was, that the result of any collision would be at least extremely uncertain; and if England failed, it behoved- her to consider what would be her position with an independent republic on each side of her. If she succeeded, it would only be by a desolation of Ireland which would disgrace her for ever before mankind. Let her therefore concede rights claimed by every title human; and divine. He would use no more reserve in end- ing than in beginnhig—he retorted the charge of treason on the noble Lord. It was treason against his countrymen to crush itp democracy and its efforts to ob- tain the rights which all other countries were obtaining; and if the noble Lord now meant to pursue the part of Guizot and Metternich in regard to Ireland, it was he and his colleagues, and they alone, who were traitors to the country and •. the Queen.

Sir GEORGE GREY, who had arrived from the Home Office in time for - this debate, was hailed on rising with loud and continued cheers.

He regretted that Mr. O'Brien, in presenting himself to the House after a long absence, did not disavow the sentiments of disloyalty previously imputed to him, but repeated them before the House of Commons—not with the daring assumed elsewhere, but accompanied with a miserable pretence and lip-service of allegiance to his Queen. " The honourable gentleman has said that in his absence he has been called a traitor; and be may therein have alluded to what I felt it my duty to state to the House the other night. For his absence I am not ac- countable—the cause of that absence he can best explain. (Cheers.) I did not call him a traitor; but I read to the House a portion of the report of a meeting at the Irish Confederation,—namely, the announcement made by Mr. Duffy that he had received a message from the honourable gentleman at Paris, in which he cast to the winds that discouraging reply he received from M. Lamartine, who with public virtue refused to encourage his designs, be they seditious, or traitorous, or loyal as the honourable gentleman pretends, knowing that if he encouraged such designs, he should be violating the law of nations, and giving a good cause of war to England against France. ("Hear, hear!") I ask the honourable gen- tleman whether he is prepared to disavow the truth of that message which Mr. Duffy announced as having been sent from Paris by him; and which was to be the exponent of the sentiment of the French nation, casting aside the language A M. Lamartine? (Cheers.) I ask the honourable gentleman whether he dad say to the Irish Club at Pans, Every new proof of sympathy renders us more able to serve the cause of our country. The satisfaction which we feel arises above all from the fact that we have found that there are at Paris Irishmen who are determined to unite their efforts to those of the Irish people in reconquering the national independence. Though we have been in France but a few days, we have nevertheless seen and heard enough to have the conviction that the French nation is deeply moved by the indignities, and sufferings we have endured. We have seen and heard enough to feel assured, that were Ireland to demand assist- ance, France would be ready to send 50,000 of her bravest citizens to fight with her for liberty.' " Mr. S. O'BRIEN—" Will the right honourable gentleman read the next passage ? " Sir G. GREY continued—"' We offer to the French our sincere thanks for their generous sympathy. That sympathy may be to us, later, a great assistance; but we feel that the liberty of Ireland should be conquered by the energy, the devo- tion, and the courage of her own children.' The honourable gentleman, knowing the sentiments of M. Lamartine, nevertheles writes to Mr. Duffy and says, in effect ' We will if we can, institute a successful rebellion; still, if we should be worsted in the struggle, I promise the assistance of 50,000 Frenchmen.' Mr. O'Brien drew his own inference upon his own words, in saying he had been called a traitor. (Great cheers.) The House drew its own inference too, and proclaimed it in unmistakeable language, by those cheers when Mr. O'Brien exclaimed 'I was called a traitor.'" (Loud cheers.) Sir George denied that Mr O'Brien was the exponent of the loyalty of the Irish The Orangemen of the North were inalienably attached to the constitution of the country; and be utterly disbelieved the assertion made with regard to the Chart- ists, whose leader but a few days since, in that House, had declared himself a friend of the Monarchy. If Mr. O'Brien trusted to foreign assistance, he would

be doomed to miserable disappointment; and an indignant spirit would arise against him and the expression be had pretended to give of his country's feelings.

The Imperial Government desired only to see happiness and constitational liberty in Ireland• and that was best to be secured by the real union of all men against the mischievous objects of Mr. Smith O'Brien and his associates.

Mr. Frautorrs O'Cornroa moved that the bill be read a second time that day six months.

If the puny efforts of a few persons in Ireland to upset the government were snob matter of scorn—if the Orangemen were so loyal, and the army so attached —where was the necessity of the bill before the House? If every man were to be transported who spoke "openly and advisedly," the result would be the sup- pression of all free opinion, and the driving of the people to express themselves freely in clubs and secreesocieties only. In 1839, when- an association of the people was broken up, two men went through the North and into Scotland and established a system of secret associations if the law were stretched to triumph over Mr. O'Brien and his associates, it would but bring the Government into ill

odour and even contempt. .

Mr. GEORGE THOMPSON understood that if a man delivered his opinions upon government in the abstract, and upon the origin of human institu- tions and their purposes and designs, or expressed in the abstract a prefer- ence for a republic over a monarchy, he would be liable under this bill to be arraigned as a felon, and if convicted to be transported: he therefore hoped the words "by open and advised speaking" would be erased. Mr. HUME, Mr. MUNTZ, Mr. BRIGHT, Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL, Mr. SHARMAN Caawroan, and Mr. WAE.LEY, opposed the bill 'on the same ground. The SOLICITOR-GENERAL explained, that the words "open and advised speaking" were intended to exclude any speaking of an ordinary or un- guarded character: but if any additional words would make this plainer, there would be no objection to their insertion. The bill provides, that intending to levy war against the Queen, to constrain her to change her measures or counsels, or to put constraint on either House of Parliament, and the publication of such intent by printing or writing, or by open and advised speaking, or other overt act, should be felony. These things at pre- sent amount to high treason; but a great advantage would be gained by turn- ing these acts into felonies instead of treasons. There was something degrading about " felony," while "treason" was accounted of a more noble and gentle- manlike nature. The offence of throwing the country into confusion was not the less heinous because it was visited with a less penalty. by law. Per- sons were constantly committing crimes from a desire of acquiring distinction. (Much cheering.) Persons threw themselves from the Monument through that desire; and, giving the greatest possible credit to the honourable Member for Limerick for good feeling and sincerity, the Solicitor-General firmly believed that a desire for personal notoriety was one of the chief motives for his and his friends' proceedings. (Renewed cheering.) They were quite indignant when they found that the Lord-Lieutenant had only held them to bail for sedition, and said it was " treason" they meant to commit. Under this bill, that offence which no right- minded person would commit, inducing ignorant and idle persons to join them under the notion that they would obtain advantages which were in the ndture of things impossible, would have the stigma of being a " felon " of a vulgar descrip- tion.

Tho bill was also supported by Sir BENJAMIN HALL, Sir ROBERT IN- GLIB, Mr. ANSTEY, Mr. AGLIONBY, Captain ARCHDALL, and Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND.

Lord NUGENT, Mr. W. P. Woon, Mr. HORSMAM, and the O'Gorman Marrow, would. vote for the bill in its present. amge, thaagh they thought the words-" by open and advised speaking" objectionable.*

Lord Joan RUSSEL9 recapitulated the present atateettnd the proposed

alterations of the law—. , " By the 36th George III. you have the penalties of high tviscin attached to

Ile -more than three "kinds of offences, but to three offene,ee ceresinl , in regard to which alterations are proposed by the present bill. YOU here t penalties of high treason applied to those who intend or compass the sclepos' Jou sof the Sovereign; you have the, penalties, of high treason applied to thosexho intend ok are compassing to levy war against the Sovereign; ianbyou have ,the penal- ties of high treason :applied to those who seek for foreign aid ok seek to bring a foreign foe into this country. Such is the stath of tile law at ily present. With respect to those offences which the honourable gentj man thinks it cruel to punish by transportation, you have now applied the pen es of high -treason. What we now propose is, that those offences be declared felo , and that

persons who are guilty of them be liable to transportation. As the law at present stands, those who commit such offences by publishing any writings may be found guilty, and be amenable to the punishment attached to them. We propose to carry that provision further, by declaring that those who commit the offences specified—namely, of declaring their purpose or intent of deposing the Govern- ment, levying war upon the Sovereign, or inviting a foreign force to invade this country, by open and advised speaking—shall be haute to the punishment appli- cable to felony. I am not now going to defend that particular clause which has been animadverted upon. I have before stated the reasons for that clause, and

my honourable and learned friend the Solicitor-General has most clearly explained its purport; and I will not now argue it, knowing that the words will be again

objected to in the Committee on the bill. The other alteration in the law which we propose to make is, that it be extended to Ireland. I do not think—omitting for the moment reference to any course of argument as to the extending the pe- nalties and punishment to spoken words—that this proposal is one to which any reasonable objection can be made, either as regards diminishing the penalties or extending the act to Ireland." It was to maintain peace and security here and in Ireland—to show that of- fenders could no longer hope to escape a just punishment under the grand name of a martyr to the law of high treason—that this bill had been brought in. Un der it the people's present power of discussion through the press, or through pub- lic meetings, would remain as full as ever before, while yet some reckless persona would be checked in their career of excitement; and those who should incite to rising, as well as those who should rise in arms, would no longer perpetrate their offences with impunity.

The House went to a division. Mr. O'Connor's amendment was nega- tived, by 452 to 35; and the-bill-was read a second time. A discussion arose on the question whether the House should go into Committee immediately. Sir GEORGE GREY, much pressed by Mr. HUME,

was willing that the Committee should be entered upon only pro forma, if the measure were allowed precedence of discussion in a morning sitting next day. Mr. Joan O'Cornizim had a motion on Ireland to bring on

next day:: Ad ,J;te claimed to retain his precedence. Much skirmishing arose on thiS4o'ipt; -"and several divisions were taken, in which the Government's smallest eiejority was 189. Sir GEORGE GREY having pro-

mised to assist in securing "a House" in the afternoon sitting of Tuesday, for the discussion of Mr: John O'Connell's motion, the minority relinquished their tactics, and it was agreed that the bill should be recommitted next morning at a special sitting.

On Tuesday, when the order of the day for going into Committee was moved, Mr. FEARGUS 0'0:arson again vowed unappeasable opposition to the bill; and if it were carried he should become a Republican! Mr. Horseman observed, that the opponents of the bill recognized two courses that might be pursued,—the objectionable words might be erased, or the operation of the bill might be made temporary. Mr. Horsmaa would make the enactment temporary, and would take the sense of the House on that point; but he did not intend any factious opposition to the progress of the bill. Mr. GRATTAN and Mr. HUME again spoke in opposition. The latter, referring to a statement made by Lord Lansdowne in the other House, that the meeting on Kennington Common had been " dispersed " by the police, asked, was this true? Sir GEORGE GREY answered, that the meeting was not forcibly ae, pursed: the leaders of the meeting themselves came to a resolution to ae., perse peaceably. Sir George highly complimented the conduct of the great body of the citizens of London— Their spirit had produced the most salutary effect throughout the country. That morning the telegraph had so informed hun. What had occurred had pro. duced the best possible effect on the great towns of the country, and would un- questionably have its effect throughout Europe. The bill was supported by Colonel &macaw and Mr. Acraoarisr, Sir DE LACY EVANS and Mr. MASTERMAN.

Mr. REYNOLDS hoped Government would postpone this Algerine rasa_ sure until after Easter.

The clauses of the bill were so penal as actually to include the fair sex, any of whom might be transported for an indiscreet speech. The punishments were heavy for what was after all mere talk. The distress of his country should be remembered: a million of people had sunk into their graves from starvation in eighteen months. A sheep-stealer was tried at Galway Assizes: one of his chil- dren had died of want; it was shown in evidence that the mother had fed on her dead child before its father had been driven to crime to bring her food; the child was exhumed, and its skeleton bones proved this: the Judge shed tears, and the Jury shed tears, and the man was discharged. Mr. Reynolds had heretofore stood up for the Government with his countrymen; but he must absent himself from public meetings altogether if this bill passed. Mr. SADLIER, opposing the bill, touched upon the inefficiency of the Irish Poor-law.

Lord Joan RUSSELL thought the debate was straying from the subject. With regard to the Irish Poor-law, however, he considered there were diffi. culties in the introduction of that law to Ireland which would require the constant attention of Government- " Some short time ago, I sent over directions from the Treasury, that in cases where any person is starring. in any union, strict inquiry should be made, in the first place whether it was owing to any want of collection of rates; and, by the reports I have received, I am told that in some of the unions there were persons fully able to pay, but whom the collectors had favoured, and that in some of those unions the people in consequence have starved. I directed that further inquiry should be made, and, in cases where there is such want of food and such want of adequate relief, and where that result is owing not to the indulgence of the col- lectors or the refusal of the parties to pay, but to the total inability of the district to supply the number of distressed persons within that district, that reports should be made, in order that, either by means of the British Association or of the Government, the people, in these instances, might be saved from starving."

On a division, the House resolved to go into Committee, by 321 to 19.

The first clause was agreed to. On the second some discussion arose. Mr. Joint O'Corasrua, objected to it, chiefly on the ground of injustice to the persons now under trial in. Ireland., The ATTORNEY-GENERAL living explained that the bill ,applied oely to offences committed after its becom- ing an eta, Mr. Jolter O'Connarm withdrew his opposition, and the clank was agreed to. The discussion in Committee on clause 3 continued till nearly live o'clook i the usual time for Commencing. publio business in the afternoon. Sir GEORGE GREY, bearing in mind that Mr. John O'Connell's Repeal motion was then to come on, proposed to adjourn the farther consideration of the bill till next day: which was agreed to.,

On Wednesday, the debate was resumed, on the motion to go into Com- mittee.

Mr. GEORGE Teton:non supposed the case of two illiterate reporters charging a person with words he never spoke: he would be committed for felony, no bail would be allowed, and he would be in a worse position than if accused of high treason. No bill of the kind had been hurried on with such rapidity.

Mr. OSBORNE suggested, that if the words objected to had been law in 1830, Sir De Lacy Evans and Sir John Hobhouse might have been sent to Norfolk Island; and Mr. Macaulay himself might have been banished for seven years for justifying the Puritans in bringing Charles the First to the block.

Who could take on himself to say that circumstances might not arise when it would become the sacred duty of every man to levy war against the Sovereign? (" Oh, oh!") The case had arisen before; and it was a new doctrhie for those who sat on the Treasury bench to deny that it might occur again. Mr. Osborne recalled the sentiments of Mr. Fox on Mr. Pitt's bill in 1796, when it was pro- posed to insert a clause against open and advised speaking. " Depend upon it," said Mr. Fox, "if men speak less they will feel more; and arms will be left them as the only resource to procure redress for themselves, or exercise vengeance on their oppressors." He even said," If such a bill were passed, resistance to it was a mere question of prudence." If gentlemen on the Treasury bench (continued Mr. Osborne) disowned these sentiments, let them abandon Brooks's and become members of the Pitt Club. He lamented the state of parties in that House. The present was a Government of invalids, just the sort of people who always lasted longest. At one time they leaned for support on this party, then on that. On one side the right honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth served them for a crutch, and on the other the aid of the noble Lord the Member for Lynn was invoked; while the party by whose support and under whose auspices the Whigs attained power were com- pletelthrown overboard. Unless they could check the old woman in the Cabine the Ntoin

he Government of the count be county would placed in the greatest peril

Mr. 0 e alluded to the new Alien Bill, and expressed his alarm. The Alien Act o ;Mr. Pitt was one of the first causes of the war with France. Would not France dew say that we admitted Louis Philippe and his Ministers, but passed an alien act to exclude foreigners who had opinions of their own?

Mr.NO'Conatost maintained the sufficiency of the present law to meet any case of beitieg, publishing, or speaking seditious or treasonable language.

The peoNe op t to influence, and even overawe their representatives, when al l

exercising tRat - egav

ehich the people alone could confer. He regretted that the right honeurabl blen-iher for Tamworth had not been enabled to work out all the reforms and impeatemeins which he contemplated; and even still, many who were among theal,overs Of freedom in this country looked to that eminent person

as the main agent securing their eventual release from the shackles which ig- norant legislation liescjin upon them. Those classes, he would repeat it,

looked much more to the ri t honourable Member for Tamworth than they did

, ..

to the noble Member for London; respecting whom, they naturally inquired, where were the promises that he uttered at the Edinburgh meeting? Mr. PHILIP HOWARD urged Mr. Horsham's suggestion of making the bill temporary. He deprecated any attempt to deprive foreigners of the protection they had always found in England; but he believed the Govern- ment bill on that subject was only a registration bill. Mr. REYNOLDS also hoped for some modification. Though not agreeing in all Mr. Smith O'Brien's sentiments, he admired his manliness. That gentleman and his associates were only straws floating on the surface of the stream; but they served to show what the current was.

Mr. HUME referred to the facts of Muir's case.

malt having gone down from London to Scotland to get up reform meetings,

as arrested, and indicted for wickedly exciting by speeches a spirit of disloyalty against the established Government, and reading aloud at a public meeting a se- ditious and inflammatory writing. The late Lord Grey had declared, that Muir was punished because he advocated Parliamentary reform. Mr. Hume himself had attended and presided over meetings attended by forty thousand of his countrymen, who passed resolutions that they would pay no taxes: but Government never interfered with them. He had himself given to the Attorney-General a copy of the resolution declaring that the people would no longer pay taxes; and the honourable and learned gentleman remarked, " Yon are acting illegally." His reply was, "I know it; try me." Lord Melbourne was asked at that time whether he would allow such meetings to take place; and his answer was, that, after consultation with hie colleagues and the Law-officers of the Crown, he did not think it right to interfere.

Lord Joint RUSSELL vindicated his consistency as an adherent to the principles of Mr. Fox. He believed that great liberty of discussion should be tolerated; and that even inflammatory language—language exciting alienation from our Monarchical con- stitution—should be allowed to proceed to great lengths; for without the allow- ance of some abuses of that kind, free liberty of discussion could not be maintained. But these are extraordinary times: persons now think themselves at liberty to call confederations together and there declare that war ought to be waged against the Sovereign, and the armed troops seduced or bribed. Persons thought it advisable even in that House, to declare how they willproceed and what they will recommend for the success of rebellion. (Cheering.) Traitors are now to be found who sit down quietly in their closets to show how by various infernal machines, by the pouring of cold vitriol and other preparations, the death of their fellow countrymen may be procured. The designs of such persons should be defeated; and he thought the general opinion was that Government had waited too long before interfering, rather than interfered intemperately and hastily. With regard to the eases of Muir and Palmer, Lord John had always considered their condemnation unjustifiable: but there is a great difference between using

l of the nature they were charged with uttering and using language ifIgfenah greedy tends to levying war against the Crown and producing insurrection. That must be the intent, according to the bill now proposed. That must be the design; otherwise the words are harmless, at least they cannot be prosecuted under this bill. Lord John admitted that the proof of words was difficult; but a jury might require, and he had no doubt they would require faller proof with regard to words spoken, though spoken with preparation, than with regard to words published in writing. That, however, was a question for Committee.

Lord John concluded with information on Ministerial intentions—" While we think that all that part of the bill which Wide to mitigate the character of the offence from high treason to felony, and the penalty from death to transportation, and that part which extends the old act to Ireland, should be maintained as we propose it, we are ready, as this other part of the bill with respect to `advised speaking' is new, that that part should have only a temporary operation, and should come again under the consideration of the House."

The House then went into Committee; and Mr. BERNAL read the words in the third clause which had been arrived at on the previous day—" by open and advised speaking." _ . , Mr. HORSMAN expressed his great satisfaction at this concession. Still, he condemned the inconsiderate haste with which a portion of the House was prepared to pass the bill.

He quoted Blackstone, Judge Foster, and Sir Matthew Hale, to show the un- constitutional nature of the step proposed in the bill,—the doing away for the first time with the distinction between words written and, words spoken. The last writer says—" Regular words, unless they are committed to writing, are not an overt act within the statute of Edward III.; and the reason is, because they are easily subject to be mistaken, misapplied, or misrepeated or misunderstood by the hearers": and Blackstone reminds us that they may even signify differently ac- cording to the tone of voice with which they are delivered. Lord John Russell says the words are evidence of the intent or design, and quotes from East that words to "encourage or command" to levy war have the guilt of a misdemeanour. But here the words are not "encourage or command," but "compass or imagine," which Sir M. Hale declares to be of great latitude. It is proposed by words only to prove the design.

Lord Campbell, in his Life of Lord Chancellor Eldon, has told us, that when Lord Eldon introduced the 36th George III. he called it a legislative exposition of the statute of Edward HL Lord Campbell remarks—" It greatly extended the provisions of that famous law, which for many centuries had sufficiently guarded the safety of the throne and the liberties of the people. Instead of the simple enactments against `compassing the King's death,' or actually' levying war against him,' the penalties of high treason were applied to the vague charges of ' imagining' to levy war against him, or ' imagining' to intimidate or overawe both or either Houses of Parliament; such imaginings being expressed by pub- lishing any writing, or by any overt act or deed. The Whig leaders, although with a very slender following, made a noble stand against these encroachments on public liberty." Lord Campbell added—" The object seems to have been to in- clude such cases as those of Lord George Gordon, Hardy, and Home Tooke, so as by this' legislative exposition' to establish the doctrine of constructive treason, which juries and the whole nation had repudiated. Upon a strict construction of the act, I doubt very much whether the proceedings of Mr. Cobden, praised so highly by Sir Robert Peel, might not be brought within it, in a speech of nine hours from an ingenious counsel. It still remains on the statute-book, but may be considered a dead letter. When I, as Attorney-General, prosecuted Frost and

his associates for high treason at Monmouth, in 1840, I proceeded en - ly on a conviction against the bel.ture

the old statute of Edward III.; and I obtainedwithout difficulty. I will venture to say, that every offender who ought to rosecuted for high treason may easily he brought within this statute." Yet, said Mr. Hors- man, the Government proposes to revive that 36th of George III.

The speeches lately made at meetings had but called forth a wholesome feeling among the well-regulated of the community—they may have caused some alarm, but they have caused more disgust. Unrestricted freedom is the best pm• ible police, and no spies are needed when men publish their own designs. What did the events in Austria and Paris prove? Why, that the stren0th of governments and administrations did not depend upon Parliamentary majorities; but upon pub- lic opinion. The danger which he saw at the present moment was to be found in the disregard of that truth. The Government did not sufficiently feel the im- potence of Parliamentary majorities, and the omnipotence of public opinion. Con- sidering the wholesome feeling which existed in the country, he could not under- stand why such a panic should prevail, or why the Government should call upon Parliament to pass a measure which Mr. Pitt in the zenith of his power did not

venture to press, and which Lord Castlereagh in the height of his unpopularity

did not dare to propose. However, as the noble Lord now to give a tem- porary effect to that part of the measure which related to it=sreicipoken, he might not be indisposed to withdraw his opposition to it. ("No, no!" from .Ifens around)

Mr. SAMUEL MARTIN said, he would take the decision of the Committee on the point that the words " open and advised speaking " be struck out.

He went at much length into the legal bearings of the question turning on these words; and gave his professional testimony that no confidence whatever should be put in accounts of conversations heard. Even in the case of short-hand writers, his experience presented cases over and over again wherein persons had been misrepresented by short-hand writers. Judge after judge has made the same complaint; and one -of the ablest of those now on the bench has avowedly ob- jected to short-hand writers' notes of legal proceedings, because of the frequency with which his jury charges have been misreported. If this were the case in the stillness of a law court, what might be expected in the confusion and excitement of a public meeting? With regard also to the discrimination of juries, he enter- tained a high opinion of that tribunal for the determination of matters of fact under ordinary circumstances, but had no reliance on a panic-stricken jury. " Only think of a jury empannelled on Monday last! He thought that the Government were justified in all the precautions they took on that day; but he would as soon have asked for the opinion of a parcel of insane men as have taken the verdict of a jury on Monday last upon words spoken."

He proposed a clause—that if any person, at any assembly of twenty persons or more, should by public and advised speaking suggftt, advocate, or advise the three matters in the third section of the bill, it should be made a misdemeanour: this was already so at common law, but it would be useful to define the offence particularly, for the guidance of parties liable to commit it. He would also agree to a clause prohibiting bail in those particular cases, if there were also a provision that a trial should take place—by special commissions, if necessary—within a month after arrest. Thus, the old common law distinction between words spoken and written would not be broken down. He felt strongly on this point; and would in relation to it ask Lord John Russell to do for his sincere friends what Mr. Pitt had in 1795 done for his opponents. The ATTORNEY-GENERAL and Sir FREDERICK THESIGER replied to Mr. Martin's legal arguments; and Mr. W. P. Woon supplied some cor- rections which he thought each legal speaker needed. Mr. Wood rejoiced at the concession that the measure should be temporary only. He hoped the day was at hand when Parliament would no longer treat the symp- toms only of prevailing disease, but the disease itself; that large remedial mea- sures would be introduced for Ireland; and that the meetings of Chartists, and the wretched and ferocious stuff there spoken would be pat down by extending the franchise, and giving the occupation of choosing Members of Parliament, in- stead of members of a National Convention.

Mr. AGLIONBY'S constitutional objections to the bill grew stronger than at first; but he would be content with stating his reasons for supporting Mr. Horsman's amendment. [Mr. Horsman's amendment Lad never been moved, and was already abandoned.]

Mr. MAURICE O'CoNNELn, Mr. GRATTAN, and Mr. REYNOLDS, declared their little faith in Dublin juries. On one memorable political trial there, a learned gentleman had advised the Attorney-General to include in the indictment a count charging witchcraft, for the jury would still find a ver- dict of guilty. Mr. GROGAN maintained the uprightness of Dublin juries; but offered to the last three gentlemen to support a clause that political trials should take place in England, if they would propose it. On Lord JOKE( Rb8SELL'13 proposal, the House resumed, and progress was reported. 'Sir GEORGE GREY having proposed to proceed again with the bill at twelvg o'cloCk next day, Mr. HUME, Mr. Murrz' and Mr. PEARSON, obNcadltd mph haste. Mr. Bniamr said it should be borne in

mind, that on- ht, when Government had so large a majority on the second reading; tbera really was allouse Of Special Constables—a ma- jority of the House had been conservators of the peace on that day. (Great cheering.) • Mr. MowAre Owed the adjournment of the debate till Monday; and was seconded by Mr. FAGAN, who continued to speak, amidst groans and in- terruptive noises, till six o'clock arrived. The SPEAKER then adjourned the Ifouss under its standing order, without putting any question to the vote.

ALIEN ACT.

In the House of Lords, on Tuesday, the Duke of BEAU roar called at- tention to the number of foreigners at prevent seen walking the streets, and inquired if Government intended to apply to the Legislature for powers to remove aliens?

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, he held in his hand a bill for confer- ring on Ministers ample powers, to be exercised upon their responsibility, for a limited time and in certain cases, to compel the departure of persons coming here not under the accustomed influences of pleasure or business. Crowds of persons are resorting to this country whose motives cannot be ascertained ; and it is the duty of Government to stand armed for every contingency.

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE moved the second reading of this bill on Thursday, with some further explanations. He said it had been found necessary that such a power as that to be conferred by the bill should be lodged somewhere. The Executive would be enabled to exercise discretion in the removal of foreigners from this country; acting not with refer- ence to the conduct of the individuals elsewhere, but with reference to their conduct here. The power would be exercised by the Home Secretary. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH only objected to the bill that it did not ge so far as the last Alien Act.

Aliens were required to present a passport, and make a declaration under the act of 1836; the only penalty if they failed to do so being a fine of 40s. But there would be no means of executing this measure; unless the most stringent provisions were introduced in reference to passports and registration. Under the last Alien Act, the arms of aliens might be seized ; aliens might be directed to land at particular places; passports might be refused; aliens might be committed; magistrates might require production of passports. What the noble Lord pro- posed was but a fractional part of that act. The bill would be utterly inope- rative unless the number of aliens could be ascertained.

Earl GREY admitted that the present measure would not secure a complete register of all foreigners; but be feared that a system of registration coda not be devised which should be complete and yet not interfere with the ordinary affairs of life and the ordinary pursuits of persons who have no criminal intentions. He believed, however, that the bill would give quite sufficient power to protect the country from the abuse of hospitality by foreigners who endeavour to stir up civil strife. The bill was supported by Lord STANLEY and the Duke of RicumoND, though they regretted it was not more efficient; and by Lord DENMAN, who regretted that it should be necessary.

Lord Denman, however, must say, that, in his humble opinion, none of these bits

ought to be dealt with in periods of excitement, disturbance, and alarm; but that, in a time of peace, the Government and Parliament ought to consider what was the best mode of governing the country when any outbreak should arise.

Bill read a second time.

THE JESUITS.

On Thursday, Lord REDESDALE called attention to some seditious pas- sages in a Roman Catholic paper published in London ; and then, advert- ing to the influence of the Jesuits in this country, he asked whether they had taken out licences of residence, as they are bound to do under the Emancipation Act. He moved for returns on the subject. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE had inquired at the Home Office, and ibtind, that in fact in no one instance had any such licence been taken out. Lord BEAUMONT observed, that the Conservative views cf the Jesuits would totally disconnect them from popular disturbances in Ireland or England. The journal which had been mentioned is understood to be the property of a Quaker, who has become Roman Catholic. The writing is of a kind intended to obtain the widest circulation; but the journal is condemned by a large portion of the Roman Catholic body in this country, including Dr. Wiseman.

Motion withdrawn.

LORD BROUGHAM ON ITALIAN, FRENCH, AND OTHER POLITICAL

MovEmsterra.

On Tuesday, Lord BROUGHAM, moving for copies of correspondence be- tween our Court and that of Turin on the intervention of the King of Sardinia in Lombardy, gave his opinion on the general state of affairs in Italy and France. Lord Brougham recalled the arrangements of the treaty of Vienna, by which Austria Withguaranteed in the possession of Lombardy—her own already since the time of Charles the Fifth, and the Bing of Sardinia was presented with the Genoese territory—op to that time an independent commonwealth. Genoa had been held by Charles Albert for thirty-five years under that title: what, then, was his conduct ? On a shallow, false, and fraudulent pretence—a pretence of what our Parisian friends would call a "mission" to free enslaved peoples, and succour oppressed nationalities,—preaching insurrection and inciting rebellion, he had marched an army into Lombardy, and levied undeclared war against the Emperor of Austria. On the 22d of March, Austria received his assurance of friend- ship; on the 23d, appeared his manifesto to Lombardy and Venice pro- mising armed aid; and his army marched the same day—a singular instance of good faith in the man! His object was the possession of all the Lombardo- Venetian kingdom. The antecedents of this man seemed less known South than North of the Alps. Was he not the same person who preached sedition in 1820, but whose nerves failed him at a particular moment, and who basely deserted the rebels he seduced, and saved his own worthless life by the sacrifice of theirs? Did he not go to Spain under d'Angonleme to put down the Spanish constitution? If he thinks even to preserve Genoa—where his fears have lately driven him to such concessions—he is miserably mistaken. There was another individual whose feelings Lord Brougham envied little—the bead of the Roman states. Consulting popularity more than the peace of Chris- tandem, he has been the first mover of all the convulsions which now shake -Italy and Europe, and threaten the peace of the world. How will he solve the 'difficulty of a sovereign's acting by responsible advisers, that sovereign himself 'claiming infallibility? Will he communicate his infallibility to his councillors? He had done well to take advice twice or thrice before entering on his mischievous course. He too owes his triple crown to the treaty of Vienna, and yet has joined Charles Albert in the attack on Lombardy. The aggressions of both are open infractions of what is regarded as the statute law of Europe. Lord Brougham alluded to the event; falsely called "the French Revolution," which bad occurred in Paris, a small part of France. He had seen the flummery Addressee sent to the Provisional Government of Paris, and the trumpery con- versations of the obscure clubs there; and he was in no ecstacies at the plain and rough rebuke of al. Lamartine to the Irish deputation,- though it met his approval. If asked whether he had confidence in the Provisional Government, lie should say, In his excellent friends Dupont de l'Eure and Gamier-Pages, perfect and absolute confidence in them—as much as he could have in men under constant constraint of a multitude—in effect, no confidence at all. Doubtless the Provisional Government bad a right to govern France by Paris, and to be governed by the mob; and the French people had a perfect right to submit to it all. He hoped that the calamity to which a weak republic was most liable would be averted—that a military despotism would not arise: still, no one in Paris doubts that any general commanding ten thou- -sand men could now march and pat an end to the present ruling power. However, as Louis the Eighteenth, on his second restoration, in 1815, became known as rinevitable, so now his friends in Paris must look on a republic in France as in- evitable for some time.

All these events led him to -thank God we remained a limited monarchy. The experience of the last few days convinced him of that security. He feared nei- .ther the threats, the treasures, the emissaries, nor the armies of France; for "Non arms, neque thesauri, regni prsesidia sant, verum amid." Such were the men who assembled in support of Government yesterday; each the Orangemen; and such the Catholics of Ireland, excepting a misguided few.

Lord LANSDOWNE consented to produce the papers in question. He felt relieved by Lord Brougham's remarks from the apprehensions that a statement in Le Commerce had raised regarding his Lordship: it was plain that he was not about to emigrate, become a member of the French National Assem- bly, and induce other Peers to follow his example. (Much laughter.) [In the midst of the Alien Act debate, on Thursday, Lord BEAUMONT made a digression, to meet Lord Brougham's speech with a reply. He pointed out the total change of circumstances since the treaty of Vienna; the mode in which Austria strained that treaty, and directly infringed the rights of the Roman States by the seizure of Ferrara; and the universal movement in Italy for independence and nationality; contending that such events completely vindicated the King of Sardinia and the Pope. Lord BROUGHAM made a rejoinder, reasserting his views; and Earl GRANVILLE briefly protested against its being supposed to be the opinion of the Pro- testant Peers of England that the Pope had been influenced by a dis- graceful and inconsiderate love of popularity.]

REPEAL OF THE UNION.

In the House of Commons, on Tuesday, Mr. JOHN O'Cossizsa., after he had presented a number of petitions from all parts of Ireland praying for repeal of the Union, proceeded to move for leave to bring in bill to enable her Majesty to call a Parliament in Ireland. He knew that the strongest motives that could operate on human nature would stand in the way of his success—the love of domination, and the idea of self- interest. Still, he rather attributed that opposition to the noble and creditable principle that the inhabitants of this great country, seeing the prosperity of Eng- land, were fearful of disturbing it, and shamed the risk of any organic change. This feeling was natural, and was national, and as such, so little blameable that he even deplored its non-existence in Ireland: if the Irish aristocracy and gentry felt it more, they would demand as a right their independent legislature. He de- precated also the feeling which had been raised by the excitement now prevalent in Ireland, caused by the wild language there used; language which he painfully deplored. He was there to appeal constitutionally for his country's rights; and he would warn Government of the disastrous effect of a refusal at the very first step of his measure—for he asked merely to have his bill printed and considered, Mr. O'Connell explained the provisions of his bill. It was entitled " A bill for better enabling her Majesty to summon her Parliament in Ireland," because con- stitutional lawyers held that there was nothing in the Act of Union even now dis., aiding the Queen from summoning an Irish Parliament. The clauses of his bill enacted the repeal; settled the only point ever mach disputed between the former Legislatures of the two countries, the question of Regency; fixed the frame and functions of the Irish House of Peers; and allotted 300 Members of a House of Commons to electoral districts of Ireland. The exchequers of the two countries, and their commercial regulations and treaties, might be considered after the bill was upon the table. Mr. O'Connell went into the general topic of the Union; endeavouring to slim that it was unjust in its origin, mjarious in its commercial and financial effects, and unwise in national policy. He concluded his observations under the first head with the remark, that if the English Government would think of doins away with the crying grievances of the country without delay, they would fii4 he could assure them, that in such legislation lay their only chance of weaning the people from Repeal. Under the last head, he enlarged on the perpetual dis- content of his country. Foreign invasion had lately been very much talked of: now he did not mean to spoil his argument by assuming a tone of idle menace; but, suppose Ireland should be invaded by a foreign power, what resistance could be made in the present state of Ireland—with the people weakened by disease and famine, the country impoverished and discontented, and the gentry almost all absentees?

In conclusion it was time to consider whether they would not have such results in Ireland as he had referred to, rather than misery, destitution, and discontent At present there was not any war, nor any each internal discontent as could make it be said that they yielded to discontent. Let them, then, be wise in time; let them be just and generous in time; and they would obtain a rich reward in the prosperity of Ireland.

Sir WILLIAM SOMERVILLE rose with considerable regret to oppose the motion of" his honourable friend"; for it was always a matter of regret to him when he found himself compelled to oppose any motion which he felt convinced had engaged largely the sympathies of the Irish people. This was not a time to conceal the truth, and he admitted that he himself was a living instance of the feeling to which be had referred. He opposed Repeal be- cause it would be politically and socially detrimental to Ireland. Ireland would immediately sink from being an integral part of the empire to a provincial state. But what would be the effect of such a measure at this moment—that country reeling under the pressure of a two-years famine? Could she at this moment stand alone? What did the Irish Parliament do in 1748, when an enormous multitude perished from want? They passed measures 'onlyfor the more rapid recovery of rents! Until the late famine, the advance of Ireland in prosperity had been most marked and rapid. No one could take a tour without being struck with this. Agriculture was improved, and the farmers had become comfortable, and were growing independent. Sir William corrected a misapprehension of his views of tenant-right, which had arisen in the North of Ireland, and especially among the tenant-farmers of Ulster. He would be the last man to propose any interference with the te- nant-right of the people of Ulster: he admired their independence, and would be sorry to do anything that might be prejudicial to their interests: he thought it would not be difficult in any measure which might receive the sanction of the House to devise some plan for securing the privileges of that invaluable body of men. Ile believed, however, that any one who attempted to legalise the tenants right of Ulster would not be conferring a benefit on the tenant-farmers of that district; but he hoped it would not be thought that he had the slightest intention to undermine that right, or to interfere with the benefits it had conferred on that portion of the country.

Mr. MAURICE O'CoNEELL begged the Honse to pause and consider de- liberately before they rejected this motion. -Sir W. Somerville had depre- cated violence and outrage in Ireland. No man deprecated any such pro- ceedings more than Mr. Maurice O'Connell. He could say., without fear of contradiction, that no man in his humble sphere had exerted himself more than he bad to prevent legitimate agitation breaking out into violent language or anything like anarchy. He prayed the House to consider what was the present condition of Ireland. From his own knowledge it was such as to fill any one who valued the peace of that country with the utmost anxiety. The sentiment now pervading the minds of the people amounted to this —that they would make this their last appeal to the British Legislature; and if it should prove to be made in vain, they would then make a final appeal to the Qaeen; and should that also be equally without any beneficial result, then he begged to inform the House, not by way of threat, bat as a solemn warning, that it was their intention to wait for the most favourable opportunity, when, by one united effort, they might successfully achieve the object of their most ardent wishes—a total separation from this country.

Major BLacKsi.i. opposed the motion; and moved as an amendment, that the Queen be prayed to convene the Imperial Parliament in Dublin, for a certain number of months in each year, for the despatch of Irish husi- ness.

Lord MORPRTH, in the course of a speech of some length, said- " I am far from wishing it to be construed that I assume the present state of Ireland with respect to its laws, with respect to its social regulations, with respect to its economical condition, to be anything like what it should be or what I wish it to be. During the whole period which I have been allowed to pass in public life, from the first words I uttered in this House on seconding a motion for the re- peal of Roman Catholic disabilities, through the whole period of my tenure of office in Ireland, I have never shown myself reluctant to innovate on what I found in existence, or to ameliorate established institutions. I was a party to alterations in the laws respecting the Church, in the laws respecting municipal corpora- tions, in the laws respecting the poor, in the laws respecting grand juries; and, in common with my noble relative the Member for Lynn, I was the originator of a proposition for putting the large lines of railway in Ireland under Government superintendence. But, far from being satisfied with my own handy- work—far from being content with what Government has been able to do, with respect to almost every one of these subjects, I have left an express declaration on record that the alterations which have been already effected must be looked upon as imperfect and incomplete; and consequently, I for one—and I can speak in the name of my colleagues—shall always be ready to approach all or any one of these questions with an honest desire to do whatever is possible consistently with justice and the best interests of Ireland."

Hoping that in time a satisfactory solution of the questions relating to Ireland would be found, he left his noble friend at the head of the Government to state its views and intentions respecting the future course of legislation for Ireland.

On the motion of Mr. REYNOLDS, the debate was adjourned to Thurs- day.

MIN/STERS' MONEY IN IRELAND. On Thursday, Mr. FAGA-N moved that the House go into Committee next Tuesday to consider the act 17 and 18 Charles II. chap. 7, with a view to repeal so much of it as relates to the provision of 'min- isters in cities and corporate towns, and the means of supplying funds from the ecclesiastical revenues of Ireland for that provision. Mr. Fagan said that the areinisters' money" was paid principally, he might say almost entirely, by the roman Catholic community; for there were only eight corporate towns subject to it, slid in those towns the great majority of the inhabitants were Roman Catholics. The substitute which Mr. Fagan proposed was a surplus which he presumed to accrue this year in the hands of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for Ireland. sir WILLIAM SOMERVILLE had seen no plan that would satisfactorily adjust this plan: Mr. Fagan's was not more fortunate than those of his predecessors. The effect of the abolition of the tax might be to make a present of so much money to the rich occupiers of land, whilst it conferred no benefit on the poor; but he had not abandoned the intention of making some alteration in the matter, and would endeavour still to find some substitute for the tax. Mr. GEORGE ALEXANDER HAMILTON proposed an amendment, that a Select Committee be appointed to re- port on the laws respecting " ministers' money," and on what alteration of them might be expedient. By a division of 149 to 73, all the original motion after the word " that " was expunged. Mr. REYNOLDS then proposed to add to Mr. Hamilton's amendment the words " whether any other and what fund can be made available for the present purposes of ministers' money ": and with this addition the amendment was agreed to without division.

POST-OFFICE LETTER-OPENING. On Tuesday, Mr. SMITH O'BRIEN informed the Home Secretary, that a letter of his had evidently been opened before delivery: were any instructions given to the Post-office, generally, to open the letters of ilepealers ? Sir GEORGE GREY gave the most unqualified denial: no such order was either given or in contemplation. If Mr. O'Brien's letter had been opened, Sir George recommended him to apply immediately to the Postmaster-General.

BEWDLEY: Nnw WRIT. On Tuesday, Captain ROSHOUT moved that a new wit issue for Bewdley. Sir Join LIA.Nmits opposed the motion; and moved an amendment, that as the last election had been declared void for bribery and cor- rapt treating, it was necessary to consider the state of the franchise there, with a view to reform; the writ to be suspended in the mean time. Lord CASTLEREAGH, member of the Bewdley Election Committee, stated, there was evidence given of treating, of intimidation, and of getting voters away—of a system not to be justi- fied in or oat of that House; and reform was called for. But he thought the same measure should be dealt to Bewdley that had been given to Harwich. After a discussion, the issue of the writ was carried, by 80 to 38.