Illtbato1 anti Princeliingliin tgatliamtnt. I. IRISH MUNICIPAL BILL.

The House of Commons met at twelve o'clock on Monday ; and after a long discussion respecting a quarrel between Colonel Trench and Mr. Wason, which we notice elsewhere, proceeded to con- sider the Lords' amendments on the Irish Municipal Bill. Sir Ro- BERT PF.EL and Colonel SIBTHORPE complained that the amendments were not printed ; but Mr. &LORIMER said that they were almost all old clauses to be restored, and that the new ones should be printed and circulated the next day. The House then restored about eighty clauses, without discussion or alteration, in the course of one hour.

On Tuesday, the House proceeded with the consideration of' the bill. After several clauses had been restored on the motion of Mr. O'LOGHLEN, Mr. SHARMAN CRAWFORD spoke in favour of adding the following towns to those which were to have Corporations—Bandon, Athlone, Wexford, Dundalk, Youghal, Armagh, Carlow, .Tralee, Ennis, Cashel, Kinsale, Portarlington, New Ross, Enniskillen, Cole- raine, and Dungannon : of these, Bandon, the largest, had a population of 12.617, and Dungannon, the smallest, 3,515. He concluded by moving that Bandon be included among the towns which were to have a Mayor and Council. • The SPEAKER inquired whether this motion was seconded ?

Mr. Sergeant JACKSON, after some delay, seconded the motion. If there were to be any additional towns included, he should certainly put in a claim for the very respectable town of Bandon, which he repre- sented.

Sir EARDLEY 1VILAIOT opposed the motion. If they were to add one town, others must be added; and then the bill, which he sincerely hoped would pass, would be rejected by the Lords.

Mr. WALTER (who spoke from the Ministerial benches) expressed his strong conviction that the bill would not restore peace to Ireland

lo his opinion they would be more likely to effect that object by rejeeting such a measure. Nor did he concur with those who maintained that the rejec- tion of Corporations in Ireland was the rejection of the bish people from those rights which were possessed by the people of England. ( Cues of " Oh ! " and loud cries of " Order !" from the Opposition benches.) Before any rights were conferred, those to whom they were imparted ought to be capable of exercising them for the general benefit. Those who had hitherto possessed corprrate rights in Ireland had not used them for the general improve- ment, but exclusively for the good of their own party. He should say, then, that such rights ought not to be conferred on them. And those to whom it wa.s now proposed to give corporate rights, would not use them for the general benefit, but fur the good only of another party. Therefire, in his opinion, both sides ought to be deprived of corporate privileges. The corpoiations in Ireland hail hitherto been made an instrument of abuse, which one party had employed for the oppression of the other. [ The honourable gentleman here paused for several seconds, as if endearouring to collect his thoughts. After a burst of encouraging cheers from the Opposition benches, lee put his hand into his pocket and brought out a sheet qf paper, which lie perused very deliberately, amidst cries of " Read, read! " and shouts of laughter front the Ministerial benches. He at last proceeded.] They would by this pima. suits transfer this instrument of abuse into the hands of another patty, who would equally abuse it. (A laugh.) By these observations, be meant no disrespect to Ireland, or to the Catholics; he meant simply to urge that there was a natural disposition in man to abuse the power with which he was in- trusted." (Ironical cries of " Hear!)

Mr. Walter then expressed his approbation of Lord Stanley's plan for settling the Tithe question ; and remarked upon the failure of Emancipation to give the peace which was expected from that measure to Ireland. He considered that the House ought to attempt some- thing for the relief of the poor, instead of meddling with such subjects as that now before it.

Mr. O'CoNNEt.t. said—" I object, Sir, to the introduction of the Church Bill and the question of Poor-laws on this occasion."

" On the Poor-laws we have already read enough in the Times newspaper. We had discussion after discussion upon them. The Times is the mighty thunderer upon the Poor-laws ; and the honourable gentleman, I believe, really thinks that he is writing a paragraph instead of making a speech. (Laughter.) And then, as to the Church question—as to what he calls the robbery of the poor man—why, the first time that question was stirred in this House, it was by the honourable Member for Tipperary ; there were then only twenty-seven Members who voted for that spoliation, and one of the most prominent of them was the houourah'e Member fur Berkshire. (" Hear ! " and cheers.) I have read his name in the list—the list published in the Times, so that he cannot ' renege' fm on that. I wish to heaven the honourable Member would take himself front this side of the House. I scented him in the past session as the last rose of slimmer,' and yet he still remains amongst us. I wish he would go to the side upon which he votes, and not remain where he ought not to be. (" Order, order ! "from Colonel Peel.) I now leave it to the ho- nourable and gallant Colonel, whether he could think it righoillimself to act in this way ? I leave it to him, as a man and a gentleman, whether he would condescend to pretend to be the one thing and yet to be another? We have then his dissertation upon the Church question. Why does he not in this con- firm with the columns of the paper I have referred to. (" Hear!" and cries of.' Order /") Has that paper observed the slightest decency towaras me? and as an earnest of the wages of its iniquity, has it not done this, and shall. not I now be permitted to retort upon—" Mr. WALTER and Mr. KEARSLEY rose to order.

Mr. Wat.see gave way, and Mr. KEARSLEY, amidst bursts of laughter, spoke as follows-

" Sir," said he' "if his Majesty's servants, for they are Ministers no longer —I say, Sir, if his Majesty's servants can submit—if they are 80 humi- liated as to submit—to the bullying conduct of the honourable gentleman, I shall not submit to it, I wish to know, Sir, is this proper conduct in this House ? I'll divide the House upon it."

Mr. O'CONNELL wished Mr Walter joy of his ally. There could not be two more completely suited to each other. What a constitu- ency that must be which Mr. Kearsley represented ! Mr. O'Connell then proceeded to notice several of Mr. Walter's observations respect- ing the failure of Ematicipation,r. he Church question, and Poor-laws. Mr. Walter's speech, be said, was not prepared for the House of Corn.

Mr. O'Cosneert.—" The Member for Berkshire bits cause to rejoice w Mr. O'Cosurrta.—" I care not for his expressions. As to mine, I only nexion with an instrument of that kind. It has beenNUgt'Stte he su talked of hopping over the kennel • ' and I think it was not inapplicable to the honourable Member for Knaresborough that he has not. I adopt to withdraw, befhte this House, his exceedingly offensive expressions." it. ("" Hear, hear, hear !" and laughter.) Member for Kilkenny, they were intended to apply: to him. himself. Mr. Walter then alluded to the remarks which had been made I understood the honourable Member for Kilkenny to say, that the words used did, appeared to him a most extraordinary one. When he looked about, he saw many by me were brought from the kennel. (" No, no !" from several Members, honoutable Members who, two sessions ago, at on the Opposition side of the in which Mr. O'Connell joined.) Understanding it so, if he did not use the House, and who now sat on the Ministerial side, although the same Ministers word kennel, I withdraw the expression." were now in power who had been then : surely, then, if there were a charge of The SPEAKER stated, that he understood the honourable gentleman to have inconsistency to be raised upon the mere fact of having changed one's seat, that said that the words savoured of the kennel. charge applied to the honourable Members in question as well as to himself. Dr. Ba Limits: remarked, that in the first instance, the honourable Member (Several Members here cried " Votes, votes ! ") There were only two for Knaresborough had used the word " ruffianize." He left it to the House occasions on which he had thought it his duty to vote against Ministers; and on to say whether that was a proper expression to be used. those occasions he hail been guided, as he hoped he should at all times be, by Mr. RICHARDS—" If the word was not applied to me, in the manner I the best consideration he was able to bring to the subject. lion any particular understood it, I withdraw the expression." question new arguments or facts presented themselves which caused him to Mr. N. FITZSIMON—" I think that the honourable Member for Knares- doubt the accuracy of his previous view of the subject, he was always open to borough has no right to enter into a compromise upon this subject. I think conviction, and ready to give his vote accordingly. As to the charges which he el Id be called upon at once to withdraw the offensive expression as bade- the honourable and learned Member hail brought against him, he had only to fensible " say, that he should continue the course he had hitherto pursued, without refe- Mr. O'CONNELL—" I do not feel the compliment that has been paid to me reface to that of the honourable and learned Member, in the same way. that he by the honourable Member for Knaresborough." had hitherto endeavoured to do. He had not obtained his seat in that House Dr. BALDWIN—" But the other Irish Members do feel it. I call upon the in the way represented by the honourable and learned Member ; nor did he honourable Member to explain the expression ' ruffianize.' " continue to sit there for hire or gain wrung firm the most wretched and die. ColonelPEEL—" The honourable Member, I am sure, will withdraw the tressed classes of his countrymen, whose ignorance might render them the dupes expression ; but I appeal to the honourable gentleman opposite, whether the

tone in which he hhs conducted this debate is not calculated to call forth angry

expressions." Bandon should be included in the schedule of towns which were to Mr. RICHARDS—" As it appears I must have been under a mistake in the application of the word kennel, I am at once ready to withdraw the expressions have a Mayor and Council. objected to." A brief debate ensued. Sir Joine 110BHOUSE and Mr. G. F. Mr. O'CONNELL—"I was arguing upon three points introduced into his YOUNG opposed the motion. Several Irish Members requested Mr. speech by the honourable Member for Herkshire,—one on the Poor-laws ; the Crawford to withdraw his motion, in order to preserve unanimity other the Church, upon which he has voted against his colleagues; the third among the Liberals. But Mr. CRAWFORD persisted, and the House is the real question before the House; and I was proceeding to comment upon it when I was called to order by the honourable Member for Wigan, who was divided : very disorderly in doing so, and who sat down extremely quietly, as he usually On the motion of Lord JOHN RUSSELL, a Committee was appointed does when he is in the wrong. (Laughter.) I was then next called to order to draw up a statement of the reasons for disagreeing to the amendments by the honourable Member for Knaresborough, who got into that species of of the Lords. language which is so familiar that, until it was proved to him, he did not know Last night, Mr. SPRING RICE appeared at the bar with a statement it was improper." (Laughter and cries of " Order !") of the reasons as drawn up by the Committee. He moved that they Mr. SCARLETT rose to order. He really considered this manner of arguing be read and reported to the House. The Clerk read part of them, a question and this species of conduct were the best excuse that could be offered but too indistinctly to allow more than the substance to be collected. for the repeal of the Union. He appealed to gentlemen sitting on the other The Commons professed a desire to guard against the establishment side, whether it was possible that language of this description could be permitted to be used : when an honourable gentlemen in speaking used language which of any precedent likely to endanger the good understanding between was repudiated by the House, he was immediately told it was language so fami- the two Houses of Parliament, and therefore felt bound to advert to liar to him that he did not know it was improper. He called upon the Speaker : the mode of proceeding adopted by the Lords. The bill returned to he begged for his intr.., asition, and to use his authority at a time when he per- the Commons as amended by the Lords was no longer the same rnea- ceived that honourable Members were becoming disorderly. sure. It was founded on a new principle, bore a new title, and varied '4. Mr. O'CoNNELL—" Behold, a third advocate ! Another cause for congra- completely in its enactments from that sent up by the Commons. It On to the honourable member for Berkshire I I do not believe a fourth must therefore be considered as an original bill. The Commons fully 'I 'sit really he found in rm. House. (Laughter.) The honotirable Member admitted the right of the Lords to alter and modify any legislative for Knaresborough makes use of offensive expressions : I say that I do not re measure any apology for them ; whereupon the honourable Member for Norwich—" measure submitted to them, as well as to originate measures, and eon- qMr. GOIILBURN—" It is not for the purpose of making a commentary that sidered it of the utmost importance that the principle and details of I now rise to order ; but I submit to you, Sir, whether if this species of discus- but, according to the :ion is continued, it is calculated to insure respect to this House. ancient usages and rules of Parliament, it was impossible to consider Mr. O'CONNELL—" I have done with the subject. I thought, indeed, that an original bill, if passed as an amendment, with the necessary atten- a fourth could not be found I forgot the right honourable gentleman; I forgot Lion. The Commons therefore earnestly hoped that the conduct of that in this House a fourth could be found. (Laughter and cries of" Order!") the Lords on this occasion would not be drawn into a precedent ; If any gentleman calls me to order, I shall immediately sit down—to find a fifth but, being earnestly desirous of maintaining a good correspondence is impossible. And now, Sir, I hope I may be allowed to go on." Mr. Sergeant JACKSON here rose to order. with the Lords, the Commons had taken the Lords' amendments into ting to Mr. Sergeant Jachson)—" Oh, oh !"(Loud consideration with a view to found a measure thereon in which bo Mr. O'CoNNELL (poin laughter and cheers.) Houses could concur. A statement of the points of agreement and .. Air. Sergeant JACKSON, having waited for the cheers and laughter to subside, disagreement between the two Houses was then given, and the Corn- Mr. Stid that he took the liberty of submitting to the Speaker, whether such con- mons concluded their "reasons" as follows— duet as this should be persevered in ? ( Cries of" Order I ") If it was, he "In an address presented to his Majesty from both Houses of Parliament, shoidel certainly move that the House should adjourn the debate, a determination was expressed to maintain the Union inviolate, and at the The SPEAKER explained to theHouse, how difficult it was for him to same time to remove every just cause of complaint, and to promote every give a personal application to hasty words, when they perhaps were not well-considered measure of improvement. The scandalous abuses of the Oir- Wended, and wonld not but for his interference be considered as offen- porations of Ireland are admitted by all, and the Commons have considered discussion. the existence of such abuses to be a just ground of complaint. They therefore sire. He implored Members to observe the rules of orderly endeavoured to amend those Corporations. But if their bill to amend is mons: it was composed to be published for the miserable purposes ( f Mr. O'CoNNELL then proceeded. He exposed the error of Mr.

party, in a paper which excited public disgust by, amongst other things, Walter in supposing that the existing corporators of Ireland were the

Its political tergiversation. representatives of great Protestant interests ; and then went on to allude Mr. RICHARD& rose to order. He said that Mr. O'Ccnnell had no to his connexion with the Tunes newspaper-- right to connect Mr. Walter with the Times, as he had not proved the The honourable Member for Knaresborough, for the first time in his life, is existence of that connexion. Mr. O'Connell should not be allowed to perfectly correct. ( Cries of" Order ! " from the Opposition ?Umbers.) Well, browbeat and ruffianize in the House. then, he was not perfectly right—(" Hear I" aid laughter)—hat in principle he as right ; and if there is a denial in this House that the individual is not in his second defender." connected with that paper, the moment I have heard that denial I shall never again say a word on the subject. But he is right. Let there be, as there ought Mr. WALTER rose and said he hoped that Mr. O'Connell would to be in this House, a disclaimer of any connexion with an instrument of &lee- not be interrupted, if? he should be allowed to reply. hood, foulness, aud calumny—of one that athods an instance of the most The Seeatten wished that Members would confine themselves to abandoned, and certainly the greatest degradation of talent--of one that has what occurred in the course of debate. lowered literature, and debased the character of poldic writers—that has shown The following altercation then ensued, amidst noise alai confusion them up as marketable commodities—that hal only done this that the higher they rise in public estimation the mole ready are they to he bought, and the almost indescribable. greater must be the price paid for them. (" Hear ! " and cheers.) It there be Mr. O'Cosrsmaa—." I only wish to congratulate th:i honourable Member any human being, not one of this House—recoDect I speak of a man not in this for Berkshire upon his second defender. I think nothing can be more fiattering House—who continues to earn the wages of public prostitution ; if there be such '-a him than the first—except the second ; one, too, so especially remarkable a man as I describe, then I rary he is too despicable for fin tiler notice. I leave him tor his exceeding delicacy and extreme polish, which make him shrink from to pocket a portion of the wages of his pensioned svi item Those who poison the any thing that belongs to the kennel." (Laughter.) waters that even an enemy in a hostile country drinks of, are accounted guilty of Mr. RICHARDS—" I rise to order, Sir. It is not right to bring into this a crime most alihoirent to civilized life ' • but what are we to say of those who House the manners of a blackguard, instead of those of a gentleman.' (Long. poison the first sources of literature, who stigmatize the character of a nation, continued cries of " Order ! ") and debauch the instruments of learning ? theirs is the worst mode of earning The SPEAKER was sure that the House must agree with him in thinking the wages of villany, for theirs is the most abominable of all prostitution,. that expressions had been used on both sides which were not pro er to be used ( Cheers.) They are those who in pie for a question and torn against It ; who in that House. He would conjure the Members, for the sake of that House, hope for one thing t(i-day and hate it to niorrow. De.' this touch the honour- not to indulge in language inconsistent with propriety. able Member for Berkshire ? I hope not. I lially hope that he has no con- dbyggteh: occasion." (" Hear !" and laughter.) lion. I believe at once that the fact is as the honourable Member has stated, Mr. N. Ferzsimeel—" I think that the debate cannot continue. The and then every word I have said is merely in reply to that base instrument honourable Member for Knaresborough has used most offensive expressions. He which has attacked toe so long. But if tny words do apply— I mention no name has made use of a word which I am almost afraid to repeat, but which you, —I say, qui capit ilk fecit. Let him who chooses take them up—if any man Sir, I am sure, must have heard, as every honourable Member near me has wishes to find them, and in the vulgar phrase " the cap fits him,' I cannot help heard it. I must, then, request of the honourable Member for Knaresburough The SPEAKER observed that words bad undoubtedly fallen from the honour- Mr. WALTER commenced some remarks on the inconsistent state- able Member for Knaresborough which ought not to have been used. The merits of Irish Church revenue ; but was reminded by the SPEAKER inference was, that if they were not directly applicable to the honourable that he could only be allowed to explain some matter personal to Member for Kilkenny, they were intended to apply: to him. himself. Mr. Walter then alluded to the remarks which had been made Mr. O'CoNiseLL—" Oh, I do not mind them. respecting his retaining his seat on the Ministerial side of the House-- Mr. RICHARDS—" I hope that upon all occasions I shall bow to the Speaker. He must be permitted to observe, that this charge, coming from the quarter it I understood the honourable Member for Kilkenny to say, that the words used did, appeared to him a most extraordinary one. When he looked about, he saw many by me were brought from the kennel. (" No, no !" from several Members, honoutable Members who, two sessions ago, at on the Opposition side of the in which Mr. O'Connell joined.) Understanding it so, if he did not use the House, and who now sat on the Ministerial side, although the same Ministers word kennel, I withdraw the expression." were now in power who had been then : surely, then, if there were a charge of The SPEAKER stated, that he understood the honourable gentleman to have inconsistency to be raised upon the mere fact of having changed one's seat, that said that the words savoured of the kennel. charge applied to the honourable Members in question as well as to himself. Dr. Ba Limits: remarked, that in the first instance, the honourable Member (Several Members here cried " Votes, votes ! ") There were only two for Knaresborough had used the word " ruffianize." He left it to the House occasions on which he had thought it his duty to vote against Ministers; and on to say whether that was a proper expression to be used. those occasions he hail been guided, as he hoped he should at all times be, by Mr. RICHARDS—" If the word was not applied to me, in the manner I the best consideration he was able to bring to the subject. lion any particular understood it, I withdraw the expression." question new arguments or facts presented themselves which caused him to Mr. N. FITZSIMON—" I think that the honourable Member for Knares- doubt the accuracy of his previous view of the subject, he was always open to borough has no right to enter into a compromise upon this subject. I think conviction, and ready to give his vote accordingly. As to the charges which he el Id be called upon at once to withdraw the offensive expression as bade- the honourable and learned Member hail brought against him, he had only to

of false pretences.

The SPEAKER reminded the House, that the question was, whether for the motion, 8; against it, 148.

every bill should be thoroughly examined;

both

slanged into a measure to abolish a system which has existed for upwards of six centuries, which, in no former period, not even during internal commotion

and civil war, it was ever proposed to abolish,—the Commons do not conceive that an enactment of such an unprecedented nature tan justly be classed among those well-considered measures of improvement which Parliament has pledged Itself to pass."

The question was put, that the reasons be agreed to.

Sir ROBERT PEEL did not wish to provoke a new debate on the question, but protested against being supposed to coincide with the reasons.

Mr. RICE said, that when a similar course was pursued with regard to the English Corporation Bill, it was distinctly understood that the reasons were those of the majority, and that the minority were not, as individuals, bound by them : such must also be the understanding on the present occasion.

The motion was then agreed to; and Mr. Spring Rice, with a con- siderable number of Members, proceeded to the bar of the House of Lords and desired a conference with their Lordships. They then retired.

In the House of Lords, the Earl of SHAFTESBURY moved that the House agree to the conference immediately. This being carried, it was agreed, on the motion of Lord MELBOURNE, that the Committee of Conference on behalf of the Lords, should consist of the Marquis of Lansdowne, Lord Duncannon, the Duke of Cleveland, Lord Alinto, the Bishop of Bristol, Lord Crewe, and Lord Ilatherton.

After the lapse of a few minutes, the Yeoman of the Black Rod announced that the Managers of the Commons were ready for the conference.

The Committee then left the House. They soon returned ; and the Marquis of LANSDOWNE said that the conference had been managed on behalf of the Cesomons by the Chancellor of the Exche- quer, who had made a statement t.f reasons for disagreeing to their Lordships' amendments to the Irish Municipal Bill. He then read the reasons-.

Lord MELBOURNE moved that they should be taken into considera- tion on Friday next.

Lord HADDINGTON said, that he was present in the Committee- room during the conference ; which was not conducted in conformity with the rules and standing orders of the House : the Lords stood, un- covered, instead of sitting, with their hats on, during the ceremony!

The Marquis of LANSDOWNE said, that was true, but it was merely through inadveftence that the customary form had been departed from.

During a great part of the conference, the Lords stood up with their bats off; but in the first instance, when the Commons entered the room, they were seated. He apprehended that no advantage would be taken of the circumstance !

Lord Melbourne's motion was agreed to, and the House adjourned. In the House of Commons, Mr. RICE, from the bar, reported the proceedings at the Conference, to the same effect as above stated.

2. ENGLISH TITHE BILL.

Last night, Lord JOHN RUSSELL moved that the report on this bill be considered.

Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR complained of the postponement of the Irish Church Bill for this bill. When Ministers were in Opposition, last • year, they considered the Appropriation-clause a catapulta, with which when occasion served they might shatter or break down the barriers of the House of Lords ! Now, however, they found it a millstone hung about their own necks. The conduct of Ministers was very incon- sistent; when in Opposition, they talked of nothing but settling the Tithe question—now, that question was treated with as little ceremony as a bill for paving the town of Belfast.

Lord Joins RUSSELL said, Sir George Sinclair must have been dreaming away his existence, paying no attention to the events of the last six years. In 1834 and 1835, Ministers had introduced bills to settle the Irish Tithe question, which the Lords threw out, and now again in I836: this year, his hopes of success in that quarter were less sanguine than on the former occasions. The English Tithe Bill had been in- troduced in February last, long before the Irish Tithe Bill; and he did not see why, with their present prospect, it should be postponed for the latter measure which there were better hopes of carrying through both Houses. Perhaps Sir George Sinclair had some speech ready for the Irish question : if that were the case, he would not object to his de- livering it now, for he dared to say it would be just as appropriate to one bill as the other. (Cheers.)

After some conversation between Mr. MACLEAN and Sir Joust CAMPBELL, relative to the delay of the Imprisonment for Debt Bill,

Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, that be proposed to modify the 34th clause of the English Tithe Bill, so as to meet some objections. He should propose,

"That the Commissioners, upon receiving a representation similar to that expressed in a former clause, stating that the sum paid was not a fair compo- SiPiOD for the tithe, should forth'.; jib proceed to ascertain the gross value of tithes, and that they should have the power of raising or diminishing the future sum to be paid for such composition, but not of raising or diminishing it beyond one-fifth of the sum paid during the last seven years."

The bill was then recommitted ; and a clause to the effect just stated was moved to be substituted for the 35th. After some discussion, the motion was carried ; and the report was ordered to be further consi- dered on Monday.

3. Anmisnsmeriost OF JUSTICE.

In the House of Peers, on Monday, Lord Chancellor COTTENHAM moved the second reading of his bill for regulating the administration of justice in the Court of Chancery ; at the same time advising the House to consider in connexion with it the bill respecting the Appel- late Jurisdiction of their Lordships; as both bills, in fact, had refe- rence to what must be taken as one subject. Lord Cottenham then detailed at length the reasons which rendered it necessary to appoint a new judge in the Court of Chancery, and to restrict the Lord Chan- cellor to the hearing of causes appealed to the House of Peers from the inferior courts ; laying especial stress on the great increase of busi- ness in the Equity Courts, the enormous amount of property over which their jurisdiction extended, and the evil consequences of delay in obtaining decision!. His speech was little more than a repetition

of that which he delivered on the introduction of the bill. He eon..

eluded by stating, that the pith of his proposition was to appoint a third Equity Judge to preside in the Court of Chancery alone, leaving

to the Lord Chancellor for the time being the appellate jurisdiction in

the Ho.use.of Lords and Privy Council. The only alterations he pro.. posed iii his bill, were to strike out the provision for the sitting of the Peers as .a court of justice notwithstanding a dissolution, and to enable their Lordships to sit in that capacity during prorogations only, but to authorize the King to summon a Court of Peers when neces- sary by royal proclamation.

Lord LYNDHURST opposed the bill; principally on the grounds, that the office of Lord Chancellor would be degraded by the proposed diminution of its duties and emoluments, and that the person filling it

would lose that necessary acquaintance with the law which every-day employment in an inferior court alone could give, and thus, though a superior judge, would become an inferior lawyer in the eyes of the pro- fession and the country. He also denied that the appeal business of the House of Peers was greater than could be well disposed. oho' Seventy days hard labour in the year would be sufficient to get throagl-

it. There had been a great increase in the Chancery business of the country during the last sixty years ; but then, the strength of the Court of Chancery had also been doubled. Still, however, he was of opinion that there should be an additional Equity Judge. to assist the Lord Chancellor ; but that officer ought not to be withdrawn from his Court.

The only alteration he should suggest in the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Peers was that the Lord Chancellor, when sitting on appeals, should have the aid of two Equity Judges sitting with him.

As regarded the Committee of the Privy Council, he believed that

tribunal gave great satisfaction ; but he should recommend, that an Equity Judge, always the same person, should preside in it instead of

the Lord Chancellor. If that Court were to sit at convenient inter- vals after the close of each term, there would be no difficulty in procur- ing the services of an Equity Judge. Lord Lyndhurst concluded a long speech, of which the above is merely an outline, by reminding the

House, that Lord Langdale, than whom no lawyer understood the subject better, or had attended to it more, was also opposed to the bill. He then moved that it should be reads second time that day six months. Lord LANGDALE said, be rose to address the House under feelings of considerable embarrassment, occasioned by the pointed allusion of Lord Lyndhurst to himself, and by a sense of the many and great diffi- culties which encompassed the subject then under consideration. The

bill introduced by Lord Cottenham related not merely to the adminis- tration of justice in the Court of Chancery and in the House of Lords, but to the administration of justice in the other Courts of the king.

dom, and the legislative power of both Houses of Parliament. The question ought not to be considered in the light of a party question ; but it was not surprising that Lord Lyndhurst, though agreeing with him in that point, bad allowed party feelings to operate upon him, since one of his own measures on the same subject had been treated as that of a partisan. It appeared to Lord Langdale that the source of the evil had not been touched upon by Lord Lyndhurst— He could hardly imagine that his noble and learned friend did not perceive the source of the evil; but the fact was, that it did not fall in with his views to state the peculiar circumstances which created it to their Lordships. It ap- peared to him, after great and long consideration of this subject, now continual for many years, that the great evil which had been already dwelt upon of their being unable to consider any thing that related is the Court of Chancery unless with the admixture of party zeal and spirit, arose from this circumstance, that the highest judicial officer of the Crown was also the highest political other iu the kingdom. He :contended, then, that Lord Lyndhurst had not looked at the subject in its proper light ; although be was perfectly willing to admit that the most eminent authorities could be found who were favourable to his view, that the office of the Chancellor could not be divided with benefit to the country. Part, therefore, of his embarrassment arose from this, that he conceived that the office of Chancellor ought to be divided to an exteut much more considerable than any that had been hitherto proposed. It was only necessary, in consideration of this question, to look at the nature of the duties imposed on the Lord Chancellor, to come to the conclusion that it was impossible for any one man satisfactorily to perform them. The dirties of Chancellor were twofold--partly judicial and partly political. The Judicial duties were again subdivided into two branches—namely, his original arid. his appellate jurisdiction. But in order distinctly to understand his jurisdiction, it was necessary to enter a little into detail. The Chancellor had not only to perform those duties which, from the earliest time, had devolved upon him in that Court, but he was also appointed the visiter of several charities, and had under his protection the management of the estates of idiots, lunatics, and in- fants. These last were the judicial or quasi judicial duties which now apper- tained to the office. Well, then, he was judge of appeals in his own Court, where he decided cases sent up for his decision from the Master of the Rolls and the Vice-Chancellor. And as a judge of appeals in that House, his pre- sence was considered almost necessary, though there were some occasions in

which it had been dispensed with. The Chancellor besides, as Keeper of the Great Seal, the most important political functiddtoto perform—more im- portant than any other officer of the Crown. As Keeper of the Great Seal, he was the King's principal adviser in matters of law. Ile was iiNe person properly charged with the duty of watching the alterations elite'

the law by the bills which passed through Parliament. He was, in fact, the person to whom both Houses of Parliament had to look for the proper super- intendence over those alterations in the law which were submitted from time to time for the consideration of Parliament. If the duty which he had last men- tioned were properly and efficiently discharged, or rather if it were possible for the Chancellor to fulfil all the duties imposed on him, they would not hear those observations on the acts of the Legislature to which they were daily and hourly exposed in all the courts of the country. (" Hear, hear!" from .Lord Lyndhurst.) The Chancellor was also the Minister of the Crown, to %horn belonged the superintendence of the different courts of justice. He.was.the officer to whom a person having occasion to complain of the proceedings in a court of justice ought to have the right of applying, and he was called upon to give his attention to all such subjects. He had given but a very slight sketch of the duties which attached to the office of Chancellor. It would be very easy to add to those which he bad enumerated, various other functions which the law and constitution of the country imposed on the Lord Chancellor. He did say, then, that any man who considered all the duties which now appertained to the office of the Chancellor, must come to the conclusion, that no one man was capable of performing them satisfactorily either to himself or to the country. What was the consequence? Those matters which were of pressing import: awe, and the consideration of which could not be deferred, were attended to, and those matters which were of a different character, were either postponed or neglected. As to a great portion of his political duties, some were not per- formed at all, and others were thrown upon some different public officer. What, then, was the result of the system by which so many duties were im- posed upon one man that it was impossible to perform ? It was this, that all the duties were imperfectly performed. With respect to his judicial duties, there was an inefficient administration of justice in the Court of Chancery ; and with regard to his political functions, the two Houses of Parliament went on blundering in legislation without the assistance which the constitution sup- posed the Chancellor to afford both to the Government and the Legislature in the proposition of new laws and in the alteration of the old.

Lord Langdale then alluded to the.delays in the Court of Chancery; which he attributed to want of power in the Judge. As to the despatch of appeal business in the House of Peers, a glance at the appeal paper at the close of each session would prove that Lord Lyndhurst was mis- taken in supposing it could be easily got through. With respect to the political duties of the Lord Chancellor, he would observe, that the first duty of every Government was to provide for the due administration of justice; which was the life-blood of a civilized community— The administration of justice was, in its popular sense, of a wider import ; but in its practical application it depended upon the law ; and therefore, when the Government was providing for the due administration of justice, it did not fully answer that ohject without taking care that the law was the best which could be provided. Nor was that object duly answered unless the Government saw that the law was from time to time adapted to the advancement in know- lege—to the fluctuations which took place in human affairs—to the new situa- tion in which the members of society were placed by embarking in different enterprises from those which they had succeeded—and unless it took care vigi tautly to watch the circumstances which from time to lime arose, in order to frame such measures as would give security and protection to the members of the community in Me different relations in which they might be placed by an altered state ofcircumstances. How could this be done otherwise than by obtaining the necessary information from those who were competent to afford it ; mad by obliging the Judges who had the administration of the law to confine theinsel Vei to its administration (for that was their duty), and when they found the law not strictly applicable to the circumstances of the country, to give the necesary infor- mation to the Government, or the particular officer who should have the charge of that department? How clearly was the want of soine superintending autho- rity exemplified in the present state of the law. There had been various coin • missions appointed : there was the Common Law Commission, there was a Com- mission to inquire into the Ecclesiastical Courts, and there was a Commission now sitting on the Criminal Law. These Commissioners had paid the greatest diligence and attention to the subjects submitted to them, and had made a va- riety of most useful and valuable suggestions, which, though they produced some fruits to the country, yet had, to a large extent, lain dormant for the Want of some person who should have the leisure, talent, and authority to see how far the means taken by various Commissioners, appointed for different purposes and propounding different views, might be reconciled and adjusted and carried into operation.

He contended, that for the practical administration of justice, the right to apply for a rehearing, and to appeal from the decision of one Judge to that of another, was necessary. But two Courts of Appeal were not ne- cessary: there should not be (as by Lord Cottenliam's bill there would be) an appeal from the Master of the Rolls to the Court of Chancery, and from that Court to the Lord Chancellor in the House of Peers. Lord Langdale then adverted to the advantage of separating the judi. cial from the political functions of the Chancellor ; and stated his plan for effecting the division— With regard to the division of the political and judicial functions, if there could be any means by which the warm arid eager feelings of the mind could be subdued, it was essential to provide them with reference to such an officer as the Judge of the Court of Chancery. The Chancellor was a man engaged in the administration of a Court which had under its control far the greater part of the property of the country ; and it was such a man who, under the present system, was continually exposed to all the agitation and storms of political contention, who was torn away from the judgment-seat to attend to those things which, above all others, tended to excite strong and violent emotions, and whose tenure of office depended on the changes arid transmuta- tions of party politics. Those who had practised in that court could not help observing scenes which could little tend to raise the present system in their estimatimi. They might have seen a man dissolved in tears, and thus mani- festin„e the generosity of his nature, whilst another was scarcely trying to con- ceal the excited and angry feelings by which his mind was agitated. [Lord Lyndhurst here made au observation to a noble Peer near him, which was understood to be, " I never witnessed that at all events."1 As a remedy for the admitted evils of the present system, lie proposed that the Lord Chancellor should be appointed by letters patent, and constituted sole Judge of the Court of Chancery. The Great Seal should be withheld from him, which would have the effect of exempting him from all political duties., as well as from the necessity of attending to appeals in the House of Lords. Ile should also be relieved from hearing appeals from the Master of the Rolls and the Vice-Chancellor. Thus he would be a Judge with an original jurisdiction. The Great Seal should be delivered to the Lord Keeper, who should exercise all the political functions of the Chancellor. Provision should be then made for the administration of justice in the House of Lords as a Supreme Court of Appeals.

It wits matter of regret that Lord Chancellors had not from time to time applied themselves to remedy the defects growing up in their Courts— At the same time, great excuse was to be allowed them if they had not dons so to the extent they might have done. The office of Lord Chancellor pos- sessed a charm for the mind of the aspirant to its honours, which often misled him from the true course he should pursue in regard to it. The woolsack was the object of the ambition of every student, to whom it would often appear an act of profanation to do any thing which might even threaten to dim the splendour of that high office. lie considered that if the judicial and political duties of the Lord Chancellor were to be still united in the same person, that individual could not, under any possibility, have sufficient time to consider all the cases which would come before him ; and, if they could not get a Chancellor who was equal to the exigencies of his office' it were, perhaps, better to have no such office at all. Whatever was done, therefore, should be done with cau- tion and prudence, in order to secure justice to all parties who fell within the jurisdiction of the Court, and the respect due to the authorities of the country. If he thought that any arrangement such as that he contemplated would be likely to interfere in any respect with the prerogatives of the Crown, he would be the last man in the world to press it ; but it was because he did not think that such could possibly be the case that he urged his views the more zealously on the attention of the House.

He proposed that the Supreme Judge of Appeals should sit in the House of Peers, without any cennexion with the Administration, or political parties in the State--

The division be proposed of the present duties of the Lord Chancellor was this: that the Lord Chancellor should have the Court of Chancery, without the Great Seal ; that there should be a Lord Keeper, in whom Ell the political function, of the Lord Chancellor should be reposed, together with other duties which he believed the Lord Chancellor, by virtue of his office, was expected to attend to, but which he believed no Lord Chancellor had hitherto performed. With respect to appeals, he proposed that there should be a Lord speaker in Judicature, to sit in their Lordships' !louse, who should hear all cases of appeals. having nothing to do with polities, and be assisted in his labours by certain Lords assistants. He was aware that the noble and learned lord opposite thought it advisable that the person who heard appeals should also hear original ques- tions, on the ground that Ids judgment and observation were sharpened by the contests between counsel which took place in the Courts below. In answer to this, however, it appeared to him, that if their Lordships' Judge in Appeal were to bear cases of appeal from the three Chancery Courts, and from the Court of Exchequer Chamber, he would have quite enough to occupy his time without attempting to hear original causes also. The objections which he had to the union of the political and judicial duties of the Lord Chancellor, he had already made known to their Lordships. If they did not create a permanent court and a permanent judge, they would not adopt the only means that could inspire that veneration towards the Court which was desirable.

With respect to Lord Cottenham's bill, as it would not be any ob- stacle to further measures of improvement, and would afford present, though very partial relief, be should vote for reading it a second time. Lord ABINGER said, that in the essay just delivered by Lord Lang- dale, there was something more of a love of theory than an attention to practice. Lord Langdale expected more from human institutions than they were capable of affording. Lord Abinger could not concur in the proposition to separate the political from the judicial functions of the Lord Chancellor. It would be impossible for a person holding the office of Chancellor apart from the jurisdiction of the Chancery Court to give the requisite validity and authority to the decisions of the House of Peers. He would not listen to the supposition that a Chancellor, chosen from the best and most talented men of the pro.. fession, would be swayed in his judicial decisions by political predilec- tions. That had not been the case hitherto—even Jeffries was believed to have given honest judgments in his court.

Again, a great many of the deliberations in the Cabinet were not of a political or party nature, but had regard to the public interests in general. Ile begged to know whether the presence in the Cabinet of the man exercising the highest judicial functions in the State, did not give to those deliberations a great addi- tiiiiial importance and respect? Besides, it was absolutely necessary that his Majesty's Ministers should possess amongst them a man of high rank and character, who was capable of being their legal friend and adviser in the Ca- binet. It woiild not be considered constitutional, perhaps, for a Minister of the Crown to receive advice from those who were not connected with his party. The King had on numetous occasions the need of advice and authority in the law. Now he must receive that advice from his Chancellor, and not from anus body else. Therefore his Majesty's Ministers were bound to provide for the King a person in whom he might have confidence, and by whom he knew his own safety and honour were fairly and well consulted. It appeared to him, therefore, that the moment they adopted a measure which would have a tendency to make the Chancellor a mere political officer, they would not only derogate much from the dignity of their Lordships' House as a tribunal for the adminia. tration of justice, but also from the interest and security of the Crown itself. If aey inconvenience existed at all in the union of the political and judicial functions, (hut which he believed was more in imagination than in reality,) still he thought that inconvenience was in no degree sufficient to counterbalance the advantage uf havirg the office of Lord Chancellor as it was now constituted. The Chancellor of tie Exchequer, the President of the Council, and the Privy Seal, were now merely political offices. And why ?— Because their judicial functions had been taken from them, and these offices became objects of desire to noire political parties. If the political were separated from the judicial func- tions oldie Loud Chancellor, they would soon find that the Chancellor would be t.eleeted, not on account of his legal knowledge, but on account of his success as an eloquent political debater, either in this House or in the other. Lord .MELBOURNE briefly supported the Lord Chancellor's bilL He ridiculed the notion that men of eminence at the bar would not accept the office of Lord Chancellor after it had been stripped of its jurisdiction in the Court of Chaticery. After Sir Edward Sugden's acceptance of the Irish Chancellorship, he was sure no lowering in the political atmosphere would deter a lawyer from accepting a precarious office of humour. As to the notion that there was not business enough in their Lordships' House to keep a lawyer in wind—that he would lose all practice, and become inferior to the Judges whose decisions were appealed from to his—it was altogether unsubstantial and meta- physical ; and he did not believe a word of it.

The Duke of WELLINGTON had certainly little knowledge of the Court of Chancery, but he had been for many years engaged in his Majesty's Councils, and he could bear testimony to the advantage of having the Lord Chancellor one of the Cabinet. It would seem that Lord Melbourne bad at least one person in his eye who would take the office of Lord Chancellor, with the duties proposed to be attached to that office by the present bill; but perhaps the noble viscount might find himself mistaken on that point, as he was on so many others.

Lord Corres:mot urged the propriety of letting the bill go into Committee.

Lord LYNDIIURST said, that if the bill, with such alterations as he should think it expedient to make in it, were to go down to the House of Commons, it would not be received there as a Government mea- sure, but as Iris measure ; and then it was easy to anticipate what would follow. He preferred therefore to reject the bill on the second reading.

The Peers then divided : for the second reading, 29; against it, 94; majority against Ministers, 65.

Their Lordships adjourned at half-past eleven.

MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS.

RAILROADS. On Tuesday, the Marquis of LANSDOWNE stated in reply to the Duke of WessiteoroN, that Government was not prepared to subunit any plan relative to railroads, but would give their best at. tention to a plan about to be introduced into the House of Commons. The Duke of WELLINGTON thought that all railroads, the bills for which were now in progress, should be deemed subject to such regula- tions as Parliament might adopt. He should therefore move the inser- tion of a clause in a railroad bill to be discussed on the Thursday fol- lowing, and in all other bills of the same kind to the effect which he had stated.

On Tete :eery, the trek.. of WELLINGTON moved the insertion of the following clause in the Birminghum, Bristol, and Thames Junction Railway Bill-

" Provided always, and be it further enacted, that nothing herein con- taMed shall-extend, or be construed to extend, to the exemption of this or any other railroad from the provisions of any general Act or general Acts for the regulation of railroads, which may be passed with a view to the advantage, protection, and severity of the public, before the expiration of one year front that passing of this Act, if Parliament, shall be sitting at the expiration of such period of one year, or if' Parliament should not be then sitting, before the cud of the then next session."

The Marquis of CLANRICARDE objected to pledge Parliament to interfere with undertakings of this nature. He feared that such inter- ference would have the effect of sending capital abroad, and discou- ngiug useful projects. At all events, the operation of the Duke of Wellington's clause ought to be retrospective. It was unfair to give an advantage to those who merely happened to be a few days earlier than others in getting their bills through Parliament.

Lord MANSFIELD thought the clause was not satisfactory; though he was for giving the public additional protection against monopolies, and secerity for the completion of undertakings for which Acts of Parlia- ment had been obtained.

Lord HavritenToe contended, that notice should have been given to the parties last session of the intention to propose such a clause as this. It was unjust, now that so much expense had been incurred, to pass a law which might have deterred parties from undertaking the projects to %elect) it was to be applied. To proceed without such notice, was unprecedented. Would the Duke apply his provision to canals as well as railways ?

Seventy or eighty years ago, when branch canals werebeginning to be formed In diffi.rent patts of the country, persons opposed them as being monopolies. The road trustees and the mortgagees of tolls opposed them with the greatest violence, and denoutmed them as monopolies. fie would take, for instance, the Mersey Canal, which rail through a great part of Del b) shire, Staffordshire, and Cheshite. It was stated in :motile' place, that a :M. share in that canal now sold for 600/. No doubt, during the war, the profits of that canal were very great. But at the concluoiun of the war, when the capital of the country was necessatily applied to projects of domestic enterprise, some parties suggested a railroad, for the purpose °lemming with that canal. What was the re- sult ? The parties opitosed it, cud then a canal was cut between Liverpool arid Manchester. But that was not all. No sooner had a new canal been cut, than a railroad was also funned, and thus three lines of communication were esta- blished ; and yet this was called a monopoly. By these means, the share, which during the war had become worth I elifOL, had been actually brought down to 600/. The same result would happen with respect to railroads : when they had been established fifteen or twenty years, they would be subject to a like competi- tion, and would cease, as canals had done, to be monopolies.

his advice was, that the house should reject all bills which were not grounded on public utility ; and then they would be safe.

Lord WICKLOW opposed the clause.

The Duke of WELLINGTON contended, in opposition to Lord Haft). atom that there was great danger of some railroads hemming per- manent tnonopolies ; and he did not wish the country to be cut up in all directions in order to get rid of thine monopolies. That was the evil he wished to guard against.

Lord ASHBURTON could not form a positive opinion on one side or the other of this subject. There was a precedent, however, for the limitation of profits, in the Manchester and Liverpool Railway Bill. Be wished for a Committee to hear the arguments on both sides, to sift and report upon the probable operation of the provision then under consideration.

Lord KEN YON thought the operation of the clause should be retro- spective. The Marquis of LANSDOWNE would not oppose the Duke of Wel- lingtotes proposition ; but suggested the onrission of the words "with a view to the advantage, protection, or security of the public," as their insertion might occasion alarm ; because it might be said that the public would he benefited by reducing tolls on railroads so far as to de- prive the shareholders of profit. After some further discussion,—in which the Duke of Rienmen, the Marquis Of LONDONDERRY, Lord WHARNCLIFFE, and Lord ELLEN- BOROUGH joined,—the Duke of 1Vellingtotes clause, altered according to Lord Lansdowne's suggestion, was carried, by a vote of 33 to le.

Dunne POLICE. Lord DUNCANNON, on Tuesday, moved the second reading of the Dublin Police Bill. Lord ELLEN.BOROUGH would not oppose the motion : he had no doubt that the Dublin Police was in a scandalous condition. With the funds at their disposal-40,0001. a year—the Magistrates ought to have provided an effective force.

Scorrisif UNIVERSITIES. Lord MELBOURNE, on Tuesday, moved the second reading of the Scottish Universities Bill ; the principal pro- visions of which he explained

The bill, which was founded on the Report of the Commissioners of Royal 'Visitation, laid before the King and Parliament in 1630, provided for the ap- pointment by his Majesty of a general Board of Visiters over the several Uni- versities of St. Andrew's, Eitinbuigh, Gla-gow, Aberdeen, and the King's and Marischal Colleges in Abeedeen, and also for the appointment of specific Boards of Visiters for each of those institutions. The next clause enacts the mode in which the revision is to take place. The 8th clause would confer upon these visiters the powers at present vested in ins Majesty by virtue of his visite- torial character ; and by the 9th clause it was provided that the Senates Ace. demicus of each University should, within six months after the passing of the set, state to the general Board of Visiters the regulations which they themselves would propose to adopt, thus giving the initiative of reform to the Universi- ties themselves; but in default of such imposition by them, powers were con- ferred upon the Board of %loiters to carry out the recommendations contained in the Report of the Commissioners. The visiters were also empowered to abolish Prof:ssorships, having at the same time special regard to vested interests. Thus, the whole subject would, within a convenient time, be brought under the revision and consideration of Parliament. He hoped, as this important matter was recommended by the Commissioners to whom he had alluded, it would not suffer longer delay than it had already undergone, and he trusted the House would have no objection to adopt this measure with such alterations as to their Lordship might seem necessary. He must admit that the bill would confer great powers on the Government as regarded the appointment of the visiters, but in all such matters of regulation every thing depended on the persons who were to carry them into effect. Ile should not attempt to profess that in making these appointments, it was the intention of ha Majesty's Governaueet to advise the selection of persons who from their character, talents, and eta spectability, would be most fitted to carry the trust reposed is them into fall e:ft., and at the saute time to command the confidence and esteem of the public. Lord ABERDEEN and Lord ROSEBERRY supported the motion, on the understanding that the visiters were to be such persons as Lord Melbourne described.

The Duke of WELLINGTON and the Archbishop of CANTERBURy wished for ample time to consider the measure; and it was read a second time, and ordered to be committed that day fortnight.

MUNICIPAL ACT AMENDMENT BILL. Last night, this bill was read a third time by the Lords, and passed, with some amendments not spe- cified in the reports.

STAFFORD DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL. Witnesses have been exa- mined during the week at the bar of the House of Lords in support of this bill. Very brief accounts of the evidence have been published : it relates entirely to the proceedings at the last election, to which their Lordships confined it. Proof was produced of very extensive bribery by is tailor sent down from London for the purpose by Captain Gronow. _ This man stated that he distributed tickets sealed, one set with the Captain's crest, and another with his coat of arms. The persons who had the first received 31., they who had the second 6/. for their votes. Several hundred voters were bribed in this way. Yesterday, the following evidence was given by Bostock, a shoemaker, in Stafford

Hewas canvassing as agent in the interest of Captain Gronow ; and received a box of tickets limn the Reverend Mr. Gronow. Some of those tickets had impressions in wax of alms, and others were impressed with only a crest. He gave those tickets to two persons, named Watwood and Booth, who were attending the pulling-places. They distributed them to certain voters as they came away, after they had given their votes. There was a diffelence in the tickets disti ibuted to those who gave plumpers from those given to those who gave split votes. The tickets given to split voters represented 2/. or 31., the other tickets represented 6/. The sums paid on those tickets were paid at Mr. Silvester's room.In the year 11832 the price of tickets (that is, of votes) rose in the progress of the election from 21. 10s. toe/. and 8/.

SQUABBLING IN COMMITTE:ES: COLONEL 'FRENCH AND MR. RIGBY WASON. On Monday, when the House of Commons met especially for the consideration of the Lords' amendments in the Irish Municipal Bill, the Sergeant-at-Arms reported that he had Mr. Wason and Co- lonel Trench in custody. Upon the order of the SPEAKER, those

Members took their seats. They were required by the House to de- clare that they would take no further steps in the matter which bad subjected them to the displeasure of the House. Neither Member would speak first ; but a discussion which lasted two hours ensued ; in the course of which the following transpired, from the statements of the two parties. Mr. Watson had moved a resolution in the South Durham Railway Committee nti Friday last, to the effect that no Member should vote who had not heard or read all the evidence. Colonel Trench asked Mr. Wason if he intended to vote ? to which an answer in the

negative was returned. Upon this Colonel Trettels intimated, that Mr. aVason imputed to Members who did vote without hearing the evidence a less delicate sense of honour and propriety than he felt him- self. Mr. Wason said that Colonel Trench WaS saying what be knew to he incorrect. The Colonel denied that be ever had said what be knew to be incorrect. Mr. Watson then left the Committee-room, saying that he should say no more to Colonel Trench there. Subsequently it appeared, that Mr. Wrightson, one of the Committee, bad exacted a promise from Mr. Wason not to take any steps in the matter that night. Mr. WI ightson then informed the Speaker of what had passed ; who, as we mentioned last week, had called upon Colonel Trench to promise not to receive a challenge from Mr. Ramon, and upon his re- fusal had cotnmitted him to custody. It was supposed that Mr. Wason had gone to Calais, expecting Colonel Trench to follow him ; but he was arrested in London on Saturday morning. The House appeared to be agreed, that the person who offered the first personal insult should he the first to apologize: and after a discussion its tiresonte to hear, as it is to read—occupying nearly three columns of the C'hronide—Colonel Tneecit said, that understanding Mr. Wasoies expressions were only used on the supposition that he was personally insulted by his (the (;olonel's) remarks, he would say that he had no intention to insult him. Upon this Mr. WASON said, "Jam content; " and the House then went to business.

On Tuesday, Colonel TRENCII complained to the Speaker, of the exceedingly inconvenient arrangement of the rooms in which persons were confined when placed under the custody of the Sergeant-at- Arms ; and Mr. Wesoe said, that he had been put in confinement by a vote of the House, passed at three o'clock in the morning, in his absence, and without any notice. Such a proceeding was without pre- cedent. The Snexlia said, that he would do all in his power to ren- der the prisuinrooms of the House more comfortable.

BREACH OF THE ORDERS OF THE HOUSE. On Tuesday, in conse- quence, it was supposed, of some remark from the'06. air, Mr. J. A. SMITH, in a very penitent tone of voice, informed the House that he had obtained admission into the House on Saturday morning, and bad e, voted after the question had been put by the Speaker—ur He felt that he was chargeable with a great irregularity, in allowing himself? in the heat and anxiety of the moment, to transgress a rule of the greatest im- portance, and one which ought to be carefully observed by each and all of the members of that House. In excuse of his conduct, he could only plead his great anxiety to record Iris opinion on a subject which he considered to be of the very highest importance. In his cooler moments of reflection, he undoubtedly most deeply regretted the course he had pursued; and be begged to convey to the House, through the chair, the expression of his sincere regret for what had passed. There was another person connected with the business, about whom lie must say he felt still more concerned than for himself, – the individual through whose just' mentality he obtained admission into the House, who was a most re- spectable and excellent person, he believed, and who deeply regretted that through his ingent solicitations he had been induced to transgress one of the rules of the House. He felt that he himself was the only guilty party, and lee did most earnestly hope that the !louse would not visit that individual with punishment for art offence the blame of which rested with him alone. HP threw himself with confidence on the good feeling and indulgence of the House; and he would most gratefully acknowledge their kindness if they would on his account, and his account alone, overlook the offence which that person bedews- mitred. The name of the individual, which he would mention, as he wished,. to speak without disguise, was 1144, ane of the roesivagere of the Ma*.

Mr. AGL10NBY spoke highly of the respectability of the messenger, who was a Cumberland man ; and hoped, as this was his first offence, that he would not be harshly dealt with.

SirGISORGECLERK said, that having been one of the Tellers on Satur. day morning, he considered it his duty, the first time be saw Mr. Smith in his place, to mention the circumstance of his having gained admis- sion and voted after the question had been put. Ile thought that no further punishment should be inflicted on the messenger.

The SPEAKER said, he could not retain in his service a person who had so grossly violated one of the most important rules of the House. Until the circumstance had just been mentioned, he had no knowledge of it.

Mr. AGL1ONEY, Sir JAMES GRAHAM, and Mr. WYNN, interceded for the messenger ; and at length the SpEAKER consented to visit him not with dismissal, but with an admonition.

REGISTRATION OF BIRTHS AND MARRIAGES. The Registration of Births Bill went through a Committee of the House on Monday, with very little discussion. Twerity•nine clauses in the Marriage Bill were also disposed of. The only discussion of any length was on the 18th clause, which renders marriage a civil contract, by dispensing with any religious ceremony, according to the wish of the parties. Mr. POUL- TElt moved to strike out this clause; and was suppoited by Sir Romer INcLis, Mr. LAW, Mr. MILES, and Mr. A. TREVOR. Lord JOHN RUSSELL, Mr. BAINEs, Dr. LuSHINGTON, and Sir JOHN CAMPBELL, opposed the motion ; which was rejected, by 123 to 58.

EsreimasisEo CHURCH RILL. This bill was read a second time last night ; after some opposition from Sir Romer INGLIS. It was ordered to be committed on Thursday week.

VoTEas REGISTRATION BILL. The House went into Committee on this bill on Thursday ; and after a discussion, very briefly and almost unintelligibly reported, proceeded as far as clause 17th ; when, it being past twelve o'clock, Mr. BROTHERTON was called upon by the Tories, and moved the adjournment. A sharp debate occurred ; in the course of which, the motion for adjournment was twice negatived ; and there was some squabbling in the House. The only noticeable point is, that while Sir Jous: HoenousE was speaking, Colonel Sin- THORIM laughed; whereupon Sir JOHN observed, that there was a Latin proverb which might be translated " Nothing is so foolish as a foolish laugh." Colonel SinTiloRpE demanded an explanation ; but seems to have left the House before one could be given. Subse- quently, both Alembers were ordered to attend in their places; and Colonel SIBTIloRPE took his seat. Sir JOHN /-1011110USE did not ap- pear ; but Mr. EATON, on his behalf, said that no personal offence was intended. The order was discharged, and so the matter ended. The altercation on the question of adjourning at twelve o'clock, and the squabble between Sir John Hobliouse and Colonel Sibthorpe, occu- pied the House nearly two hours ; and the adjournment did not take place till within a quarter of two o'clock. The discussion on the bill was resumed last night ; and proceeded with from the leell to the filth clause. There was a sharp debate on clause 50th, which gives the right of voting to charity trustees. Mr. G. F. Young proposed an atiterdnent, that no trustee should be allowed to vote who was not a trustee for property of the amount of :30/. a year, and in actual possession of the rents and profits. Lord STANLEY vehemently opposed the clause, as tending to create faggot. voters, and being in direct violation of the Reform Act. Sir JOHN CAMPBELL said, that on that point Lord Stanley happened to differ with the Lord Chief Justice, and lie had no doubt with every other Judge in England. He defended the clause in a legal argument ; and it was finally carried, by 90 to 40.

GIIARITALLE Titus-Imes BILL. This bill was read a second time last night, and ordered to be committed on Wednesday.

METROPOLITAN IMPROVEMENTS. Alderman WOOD, on Thursday, moved for a Select Committee to consider the best plan of raising money to effect certain necessary improvements in London, Westmin- ster, Southwark, an I the counties of Middlesex and Surry ; and for the purchase of the interests of the proprietors of Waterloo Bridge, so as to throw it open to the public. He calculated that the improve- ments he projected would cost a million sterling ; and he suggested, that a tax of sixpence a ton should be laid on coals, which would raise S1,000/. a year, the interest of the money required— One of his projects was to make a new street from Southwark Bridge to the Bank of England, which would be a great convenience to the East end of the town. Another was, a new street from Waterloo Bridge to the New Road; a third, a new street from Lothbury to the Post-office ; a foulth, a new street from the Post. office to Smithfield ; a fifth, a new street from Holborn to the Strand ; a sixth, a new street through Sauthwark ; a seventh, a new street from St. Paul's to Blackfriars Bridge. ; an eighth, a new street from Oxford Street, southwards; sod a ninth, a new street from Westminster Abbey to Belgrave Square. -

Mr. HUME seconded the motion, but would not sanction an increased duty on coals. Mr. SPRING RICE objected to any applications to the public purse for such undertakings. Alderman W000 said, be intended to make none.

Sir ROBERT PEEL hoped that the House would not fall into the same error on this subject as it bad done on railroads— perhaps the best mode of proceeding with railroads would have been to ap- point commtent persons to survey the whole country, and to report upon the most eligible lines. It was now too late to take that course; but something of the same kind might be done with a view to the contemplated improvetnents of the Metropolis; and before money of any kind were expended, some fore- . sight ought to be used as to the future extension of London. Supposing it were Iaaalfest that the improvements could be accomplished, he trusted that Govern- ment would not put its veto upon a temporary advance from the public purse. Be did not wish the public to sustain any loss, and no portion ot the expense ought to fail upon other parts of the empire ; but a temporary advance, by means of Exchequer Bills, might materially aid in the attainment of the end. Whether that end could be attained, was the first question ; and if Commis- sioners, in the first instance, could be found in whom the public would have confidence fir a rational and comprehensive plan, it would be a subject of much congratulation.

The motion for a Committee was then agreed to.

POST-OFFICE. Mr. SPRING Rice mentioned, on Tuesday, in reply to

Mr. DOME, that the treaty with France as to communication briniest had been concluded, and would be laid on the table in the course of a few days. Steps had also been taken to transfer the Post-office packets to time Admiralty department ; but he could not name the day when the bills for that purpose would be introduced into the House.

PAPER-DUTIES. Mr. SPRING RICE stated, on Monday, in reply to Lord FRANCIS EGERTON, that it was not intended to allow a drawback of duties paid on the stocks of paper on hand at the time when it was proposed to reduce the Paper-duties.

STANIP-DUTIES. Mr. SPRING RICE, on Thursday, postponed the discussion on this bill from Friday to Monday next.

SEPTENNIAL ACT. Mr. liraeLEe, on Thursday, on the suggestion of Mr. SPRING RICE. postponed his motion for the repeal of the Sep- tennial Act : but said, he hoped to bring it to a division before the ses- sion was over.